Paul, eschatological restoration and intertextuality
The more I read Paul and try to understand how he used scripture, the more convinced I am that his reliance on the Prophetic narrative of exile and restoration needs greater emphasis.
Take 2 Corinthians, for example. Paul's scriptural citations in 2 Corinthians 6:16-18 (namely 2 Sam. 7:14; Ezek. 20:34; Isa. 43:6; 52:11) demonstrate that Paul 'sees the beginning fulfilment of the promised restoration of God's people already taking place in the establishment of the Corinthian church' (Scott J. Hafemann, "The Covenant Relationship," in Central Themes in Biblical Theology: Mapping Unity in Diversity, eds Scott J. Hafemann, Paul R. House [Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007], 60). This sounds convincing, unless these verses constitute a non-Pauline interpolation, of course! But also in 2 Corinthians 3 one finds mention of numerous themes associated with the promised return from exile: new covenant, the gift of the spirit, a new heart. In Christ God's promises are 'yes' (cf. 2 Cor 1:20)
So, when I read, for example, Paul's use of the 'husband' metaphor in 2 Cor. 11:2-3 I am more tempted these days to read a greater eschatological significance into Paul's allusions than previously. To explain:
The mention of the 'YHWH as husband of Israel' metaphor is found in Isaiah 54:5-6, the context of which is that of Israel's re-gathering and restoration after exile. The employment of the metaphor in Isaiah 62:5 concerns, once again, the vindication and salvation of God's people. In fulfilling his promise, God will rejoice over his people 'For as a young man marries a young woman, so shall your builder marry you, and as the bridegroom rejoices over the bride, so shall your God rejoice over you' (62:5). In Jeremiah 3, the metaphor is used in terms of the reunification of the twelve tribes ('the house of Judah shall join the house of Israel', 3:18) and their return from exile to the Land (3:18-19). Exile happened because 'as a faithless wife leaves her husband, so you have been faithless to me, O house of Israel' (3:20). Of course, Hosea is replete with the metaphor. While the nation's sin is like adultery against YHWH, after punishment (2:13) there will be a day when 'I [the Lord] will take you for my wife forever; I will take you for my wife in righteousness and in justice, in steadfast love, and in mercy. I will take you for my wife in faithfulness; and you shall know the LORD' (2:19-20).
This would mean that the eschatological event of God's restoration, and the accompanying marriage of God to his people, is expressed by Paul in terms of the relation between risen Lord and believers, of the marriage between Christ and believers. It is not merely that Paul uses the husband language in a stale and effectively synchronic employment of God language. Rather, the allusion is bent around an eschatological agenda, is shaped by a diachronic force.
Now the crunch: this conclusion assumes 1) Paul knew the context of the prophetic texts which he cites or alludes, and 2) that this context mattered to Paul. While the first is a safe bet, is the second? I think the only way of knowing is judging how any metalepsis illuminates our reading of Paul. But for such allusions as those in 2 Corinthians 11:2-3 it is difficult to say. Can we really know how much of the context of an allusion or citation finds reflection in Paul?
posted by Chris Tilling @ 12:12 AM
7 comments
7 Comments:
Interesting, Chris. What's your take on the collection for Jerusalem? Was it an eschatological pilgrimage? If so, does Paul allude to the collection in 2 Cor when he quotes these scriptures? The texts from Paul that you cite come from 2 Corinthians, which is the only letter in which Paul tries to persuade his readers to contribute to the collection. The collection is perhaps in view in 2 Cor 11:7-11 and 12:14-18.
Was the eschatological pilgrimage highly political and therefore something that it would have been dangerous for Paul to write openly about? If so, we might expect to find Paul making hidden references to it in scriptural quotations.
Paul protects those who helped with the collection (the eschatological pilgrims?) by hiding their identities. In Acts 24:17 he protects his own skin by describing the collection as an act of personal piety, and Luke protects everybody by omitting any real reference to the collection. Did Paul, for reasons of protection, write about the eschatological pilgrimage aspect of the collection only in covert terms?
I haven't thought all this through yet, but I thought I would share some fresh thoughts/questions.
Richard.
Chris,
Why do you say that Ezek 20:34 is cited in 2 Cor 6:16-18? I see no evidence of Ezekiel's wording lying behind the passage from Paul. In fact, I am convinced, as Dietrich-Alex Koch has argued, that Paul *never* uses Ezekiel in any of his letters.
Is the idea that Ezekiel lies back of 2 Corinthians coming from Wright?
Splendid post, Chris!
In 2 Cor 6:16, Paul conflates Lev 26:12 ("and I will walk about") + Ezek 37:27 ("in them...and I will be their God and they will be my people").
The trigger for this conflation was probably the fact that Ezek is alluding to Lev 26 at numerous other points in this context.
And isn't it curious that Paul says "we are the temple of the living God"--and Ezek 37:28 says that God's sanctuary will be "in their midst"? Looks like Paul is reworking Ezek in some very interesting ways.
Michael
{{This would mean that the eschatological event of God's restoration, and the accompanying marriage of God to his people, is expressed by Paul in terms of the relation between risen Lord and believers, of the marriage between Christ and believers.}}
Not that I disagree with the eschatology meaning (in fact I'm trying to figure out how any God-wedding-sinners language could be anything other than eschatological, much less stale!!); but wouldn't this actually be Paul describing the fulfilling of relation between risen Lord and believers (which is actually happening) in terms of this common prophetic metaphor from the OT?
JRP
Hi Richard, to be honest I am not sure what to make of the idea linking the collection with the eschatological pilgrimage. I know of the thesis, but have not really explored it. But I will certainly give it another look, especially as one of the related themes (the glory of Christ), is important to my own work. Thanks for jogging my memory.
Interesting idea with the whole 'protective anonyimity' slant! You have managed to see that in lots of places! Interesting. Just difficult to prove I guess.
Hi John, see Michael's comments below. Not from Wright - in most commentaries I believe.
Thanks for your comments, Michael.
Hi Jason,
Yes, perhaps 'stale' was not the best word. I was using it to emphasise the difference between the readings.
"wouldn't this actually be Paul describing the fulfilling of relation between risen Lord and believers (which is actually happening) in terms of this common prophetic metaphor from the OT?" Perhaps you could explain this point a bit more? I think I am happy with this formulation. Perhaps I have missed something? I have the feleing that you are on to something ...
Hi Chris.
Thanks for this post. I've been wondering how to put together the Old Testament with the New Testament.
My question:
Is Paul really true to what the prophets say? Eschatological restoration in the prophets is Israel returning to the land of Israel. That doesn't seem to be what it is for Paul, since many of the churches to which he writes are not even in Palestine. Does Paul see the land of Israel as spiritual, or what exactly?
Any thoughts?
James,
that is why I am wondering whether Paul, in citing these texts in 2 Corinthians, is alluding to the collection for Jerusalem, which DID involve a journey of God's people to Palestine.
Richard.
Post a Comment
<< Home