(July 29, 2018 at 3:33 pm)JairCrawford Wrote:(July 29, 2018 at 2:41 pm)Khemikal Wrote: The pauline epistles have recieved so much attention that we have four distinct "paul"s and three categories for the works themselves. Ranging from authentic (meaning, some guy wrote it).. 7..to, not sure who wrote it....2, and finally we arrive at the officially pseudo-epigraphic....4. One stands out in a category all it's own..the category being utter horseshit.
Within just the "authentic" narratives there are two authentic pauls. The second and third, and fourth categories contain redactionary, theological, and legendary paul (it's this this paul that's bolstered further by luke with acts.)
Somewhere, in all of this..is "paul"..both as a man and as a monolithic work of literature. You'll either find satisfaction or you wont..because no matter what category you want to discuss the only source or evidence for any of it will amount to
"magic book says...."
That's interesting. Can you link me to anything? I'd like to take a look at it.
So far almost all of the redaction criticism I've read on has either been on the Gospels (I.e. The Jesus Seminar, two source theory for Synoptics, etc) or even moreso, the Old Testament (documentary hypothesis, supplementary hypothesis, etc.).
Take a class in New Testament criticism offered at the 3K+ 4-year colleges across the United States. Or, buy (or, download) the "Great Courses" series by Professors Bart Ehrman and Timothy Luke Johnson.
