Re: Right or Wrong?
Gary Collier writes:
>In this regard, I recommend Richard Hayes, _Echoes of Scripture in
>The Letters of Paul_ (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989).
>Whether one agrees with him or not, he states the issue quite pointedly:
> There is no possibility of accepting Paul's message while
> simultaneously rejecting the legitimacy of the scriptural
> interpretation that sustains it. If Paul's way of reading the
> testimony of the Law and the Prophets is wrong, then his gospel
> does constitute a betrayal of Israel and Israel's God, and his
> hermeneutic can only lead us astray. If, on the other hand, his
> material claims are in any sense true, then we must go back and
> learn from him how to read Scripture. (p. 182)
Isn't there a problem with this in that it doesn't logically
follow? There is nothing to stop one getting to the truth
via an invalid argument based on mistaken hypotheses, so
Paul having correct conclusions is no guarantee that his
methods are valid; it could be due to using any old rehtorical
device available to reach a conclusion that he knows by
other means, for example. The nearest one can get to what Hayes
seems to be trying to say is that if Paul's conclusions are
false, then we ought to reject his way of reading scripture:
but of course, that's kind of heading in the opposite
direction to the one Hayes is going in...
(I guess this is rather far from the topic of the list---my
Robert Low email(JANET): RobLow@uk.ac.coventry.cck
smail : Mathematics Department, Coventry University,
Priory Street, Coventry CV1 5FB, England.
Keep an open mind---but not so open your brain falls out.