Abstract
The debate between AB du Toit and EP Sanders on Paul and Palestinian Judaism: The road ahead The aim of the article is to analyse the underlying structure of the critical reaction of AB du Toit against EP Sanders’s Pauline interpretation. It is shown that Du Toit’s criticism of Sanders rests on his identification of Paul’s opponents and their theology in Romans 4. This is questioned because of the dubious grounds on which his argument rests: the antithesis which is interpreted as polemical and the use of mirror reading. Secondly the underlying structures of their arguments are analysed. From this it becomes clear that there are hermeneutical and methodological differences between them which prevents Du Toit to do justice to Sanders’s interpretation. Lastly it is suggested that a movement away from a strictly ‘theological approach ’ to one which also takes the social context seriously, may be of much help in understanding what the historical Paul was saying.
Highlights
The aim of the article is to analyse the underlying structure of the critical reaction of AB du Toit against EP Sanders’s Pauline interpretation
Du Toit gebruik een perikoop, Rom 4: 13-25, as uitgangspunt om enkele vrae aan Sanders te stel, veral ten opsigte van die probleem van geregtigheid deur die wet of geregtigheid deur die geloof
In term e van die alternatiewe metode wat ek aan die einde wil voorstel, sal dit blyk dat die antiteses nóg polemies of apologeties, nóg verdediging teen suspisie of epeksegeties hoef gelees te word
Summary
Die navorsing van M alherbe en Lyons het aangetoon dat die antiteses in die outobiografiese gedeeltes in G alasiërs (en 1 Tess 2) eerd er gaan om ‘counterpersuasion and dissuasion’ (Lyons 1985: 173) as om apologie of polemiek. In term e van die alternatiewe metode wat ek aan die einde wil voorstel, sal dit blyk dat die antiteses nóg polemies of apologeties, nóg verdediging teen suspisie of epeksegeties hoef gelees te word. Sy argument (kyk Du Toit 1988: 74) si^n ongeveer soos volg daar uit: N adat (vas)gestel is dat dit ’n polem iek is, is die identifisering van die opponente ’n blote formaliteit. Die metode berus op die veronderstelling dat dit wat Paulus sê, deur sy opponente ontken word, en dit wat hy ontken, eintlik hulle standpunt is (vgl Lyons 1985: 81). Die argum ent loop ongeveer soos volg: Die duidelike antiteses in sy briewe vereis dat hulle as apologetiese briewe (polemies) gelees moet word. As Paulus se verdediging gelees word, kan die klagtes en beskuldiginge afgelei word uit die negatief van die ontkennings
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
