Deconstructed Letters of Paulos
Re: Deconstructed Letters of Paulos
Updated list with possible interpolations introduced by Ben C. Smith. viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5259
1: Galatians.
2: 1 Corinthians 1:1-4:21 * With 2:6-16 as possible interpolation
3: 1 Corinthians 5:1-6:11
4: 1 Corinthians 9 *
5: 1 Corinthians 6:12- 8:13, 10- 16:24. With 11:23-28 as a possible interpolation and 14:34-35 as a very probable interpolation.
6: 2 Corinthians 1:1-2:13 and 7:5-16.
7: 2 Corinthians 2:14-6:13 and 7:2-4. With 6:14-7:1 as a possible later interpolation. *
8: 2 Corinthians 8:1-24.
9: 2 Corinthians 9:1-15.
10: 2 Corinthians 10-13. *
11: 1 Thessalonians 2:17-4:2.
12: 1 Thessalonians 1:1-2:16 and 4:3-5:28. With 2:14- 16 as a possible interpolation.
13: Philippians 1:1-3:1. With 2:5-11 as a possible interpolation.
14: Philippians 3:2-4:9
15: Philippians 4:10-20 and also 4:21-23 *
16: Romans 1 and 2:6-16 and 3:21-26 and 5:1-11 and 8 and 12 and 13. With 13:1-7 as a possible interpolation.
Romans 9-11 as a possible later interpolation?
17: Romans 2:1-5 and 2:17-29 and 3:1-20 and 3:27-31 and 4 and 5:12-20 and 6, 7, 14, Romans 15?
Romans 16?
1: Galatians.
2: 1 Corinthians 1:1-4:21 * With 2:6-16 as possible interpolation
3: 1 Corinthians 5:1-6:11
4: 1 Corinthians 9 *
5: 1 Corinthians 6:12- 8:13, 10- 16:24. With 11:23-28 as a possible interpolation and 14:34-35 as a very probable interpolation.
6: 2 Corinthians 1:1-2:13 and 7:5-16.
7: 2 Corinthians 2:14-6:13 and 7:2-4. With 6:14-7:1 as a possible later interpolation. *
8: 2 Corinthians 8:1-24.
9: 2 Corinthians 9:1-15.
10: 2 Corinthians 10-13. *
11: 1 Thessalonians 2:17-4:2.
12: 1 Thessalonians 1:1-2:16 and 4:3-5:28. With 2:14- 16 as a possible interpolation.
13: Philippians 1:1-3:1. With 2:5-11 as a possible interpolation.
14: Philippians 3:2-4:9
15: Philippians 4:10-20 and also 4:21-23 *
16: Romans 1 and 2:6-16 and 3:21-26 and 5:1-11 and 8 and 12 and 13. With 13:1-7 as a possible interpolation.
Romans 9-11 as a possible later interpolation?
17: Romans 2:1-5 and 2:17-29 and 3:1-20 and 3:27-31 and 4 and 5:12-20 and 6, 7, 14, Romans 15?
Romans 16?
Last edited by Jax on Tue Jul 16, 2019 6:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Deconstructed Letters of Paulos
Have you read William O. Walker? Here are some composite images of pages 16-20 of Interpolations in the Pauline Epistles:Jax wrote: ↑Sat Jul 13, 2019 9:04 pm Updated list with possible interpolations introduced by Ben C. Smith. viewtopic.php?f=3&t=5259
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
- Ben C. Smith
- Posts: 8994
- Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
- Location: USA
- Contact:
Re: Deconstructed Letters of Paulos
Thank you Ben. I will read this material.
Lane
Lane
Re: Deconstructed Letters of Paulos
I have Interpolations in the Pauline Letters as a gift from a friend and Paul and his Legacy. I plan to read both before continuing with this thread.
Thanks again Ben.
Lane
Thanks again Ben.
Lane
Re: Deconstructed Letters of Paulos
"Deconstructed" seems to be the wrong term to use for what you are trying to do here, which is more of a "reconstruction" of discrete letters that may have been edited together into their present form.
Most modern historians attempt to "Reconstruct" history from commonly agreed upon "facts."
When a critic tries to interpret commonly agreed upon "facts" using a model (like Marx did), that is called a historical "Construction."
In the world of postmodern lit. crit., the term "deconstruction" refers to canceling out the historian's (or writer's) spin (based on his own POV) to identify historical "facts."
"Facts" are also interpretations, just ones that a community of critics can agree on. DCH
Most modern historians attempt to "Reconstruct" history from commonly agreed upon "facts."
When a critic tries to interpret commonly agreed upon "facts" using a model (like Marx did), that is called a historical "Construction."
In the world of postmodern lit. crit., the term "deconstruction" refers to canceling out the historian's (or writer's) spin (based on his own POV) to identify historical "facts."
"Facts" are also interpretations, just ones that a community of critics can agree on. DCH
Re: Deconstructed Letters of Paulos
Hi Dave, thanks for the input. I am not a historian by training or education so it is to be expected that I will make mistakes like the ones that you mention. I am really just a amateur with an interest in this subject and rely on more expert, better educated, individuals to fill in the gaps in my education.DCHindley wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 7:30 am "Deconstructed" seems to be the wrong term to use for what you are trying to do here, which is more of a "reconstruction" of discrete letters that may have been edited together into their present form.
Most modern historians attempt to "Reconstruct" history from commonly agreed upon "facts."
When a critic tries to interpret commonly agreed upon "facts" using a model (like Marx did), that is called a historical "Construction."
In the world of postmodern lit. crit., the term "deconstruction" refers to canceling out the historian's (or writer's) spin (based on his own POV) to identify historical "facts."
"Facts" are also interpretations, just ones that a community of critics can agree on. DCH
You are correct that my goal is to try to reconstruct what may have been smaller, discrete letters, that seem to have been edited into the longer letters that we have access to now. I also wish to "weed out" glosses and interpolations wherever possible to try to recover the purest form of Paul's original letters (if even possible). My list is not meant as the final word on the subject by any means and is posted here to encourage feedback.
My list isn't even really my list, but rather the opinions of various scholars in the field of Pauline studies, I have simply assembled them here from various sources to have them all in one place to help keep track of them as a whole. Think of it as a score card if you will, one that will change as I learn more about the subject (indeed, I have doubts that it will ever be complete).
Just my attempt to sort things out.
Lane
Re: Deconstructed Letters of Paulos
The widespread presence of interpolations in other ancient literature—Classical, Hellenistic, Jewish and Christian—is virtually certain.
The Pauline letters were assembled, preserved and transmitted by the early Church only as parts of an expanded, abbreviated and edited collection.
The surviving manuscripts of these letters bear witness to numerous alterations, including short additions to the text.
In my judgment, these considerations lead almost inescapably to the conclusion, simply on a priori grounds, that the Pauline letters, as we now have them, are likely to contain non-Pauline interpolations. Indeed, as Munro asserts, 'it strains credulity to assume that interpolation did not take place'.
Interpolations in the Pauline Letters by William O. Walker Jr. Page 43.
The Pauline letters were assembled, preserved and transmitted by the early Church only as parts of an expanded, abbreviated and edited collection.
The surviving manuscripts of these letters bear witness to numerous alterations, including short additions to the text.
In my judgment, these considerations lead almost inescapably to the conclusion, simply on a priori grounds, that the Pauline letters, as we now have them, are likely to contain non-Pauline interpolations. Indeed, as Munro asserts, 'it strains credulity to assume that interpolation did not take place'.
Interpolations in the Pauline Letters by William O. Walker Jr. Page 43.
Re: Deconstructed Letters of Paulos
Using Interpolations in the Pauline Letters by William O. Walker Jr. as a guide (excellent book) I have adjusted the list accordingly.
1: Galatians. Without 2:7-8
2: 1 Corinthians 1:1-4:21. Without 1:2 and 2:6-16 and 4:6c and 4:17
3: 1 Corinthians 5:1-6:11.
4: 1 Corinthians 6:12- 8:13. Without 6:14 and 7:29-31
5: 1 Corinthians 9.
6: 1 Corinthians 10:23-16:24. Without 11:3-16 and 11:23-28 and 12:31b-14:1a and 14:33b-35 and 15:3-11 and 15:21-22 and 15:31b and 15:44b-48 and 15:56
7: 2 Corinthians 1:1-2:13 and 7:5-16.
8: 2 Corinthians 2:14-7:4. Without 6:14-7:1
9: 2 Corinthians 8:1-24.
10: 2 Corinthians 9:1-15.
11: 2 Corinthians 10-13.
12: 1 Thessalonians 2:17-3:13. Without 2:13-16
13: 1 Thessalonians 1:1-2:12 and 4:9-5:28. Without 4:10b-12 and 4:18-5:22 and 5:27
14: Philippians 1:1-3:1. Without 2:5-11
15: Philippians 3:2-4:9.
16: Philippians 4:10-23.
17: Romans 1 and 3:21-26 and 5:1-11 and 8, 12, 13. Without 1:18-2:29 and 5:1 and 5:6-7 and 8:1 and 8:9-11 and 13:1-7
18: Romans 3:1-20 and 3:27-31 and 6, 7, 14, Romans 15? Without 3:12-18 and 6:13 and 6:17 and 6:19 and 7:6 and 7:25b and14:6 and 15:4
Romans 4 as a possible later interpolation?
Romans 9-11 as a possible later interpolation?
Romans 16? Without 16:5 and 16:25-27
1: Galatians. Without 2:7-8
2: 1 Corinthians 1:1-4:21. Without 1:2 and 2:6-16 and 4:6c and 4:17
3: 1 Corinthians 5:1-6:11.
4: 1 Corinthians 6:12- 8:13. Without 6:14 and 7:29-31
5: 1 Corinthians 9.
6: 1 Corinthians 10:23-16:24. Without 11:3-16 and 11:23-28 and 12:31b-14:1a and 14:33b-35 and 15:3-11 and 15:21-22 and 15:31b and 15:44b-48 and 15:56
7: 2 Corinthians 1:1-2:13 and 7:5-16.
8: 2 Corinthians 2:14-7:4. Without 6:14-7:1
9: 2 Corinthians 8:1-24.
10: 2 Corinthians 9:1-15.
11: 2 Corinthians 10-13.
12: 1 Thessalonians 2:17-3:13. Without 2:13-16
13: 1 Thessalonians 1:1-2:12 and 4:9-5:28. Without 4:10b-12 and 4:18-5:22 and 5:27
14: Philippians 1:1-3:1. Without 2:5-11
15: Philippians 3:2-4:9.
16: Philippians 4:10-23.
17: Romans 1 and 3:21-26 and 5:1-11 and 8, 12, 13. Without 1:18-2:29 and 5:1 and 5:6-7 and 8:1 and 8:9-11 and 13:1-7
18: Romans 3:1-20 and 3:27-31 and 6, 7, 14, Romans 15? Without 3:12-18 and 6:13 and 6:17 and 6:19 and 7:6 and 7:25b and14:6 and 15:4
Romans 4 as a possible later interpolation?
Romans 9-11 as a possible later interpolation?
Romans 16? Without 16:5 and 16:25-27