Oh, I should add to my comment about *genuine* Pauline literature. The technique I used in interpreting this chapter also applies to the letters to the Ephesians and the Colossians. Though these are not "genuinely Pauline," IMO they were almost certainly written by pro-Gnostic elements within the Pauline school.
It also, strangely enough, extends to the letter to the Hebrews, which though not written by Paul has some Pauline characteristics.
It does not extend to the "pastoral" letters (which were written by decidedly anti-Gnostic elements within the church), nor, apparently (though I haven't examined this one closely) to the second letter to the Thessalonians. I can't find any evidence one way or another regarding the letter to Philemon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2003-01-22 05:28 am (UTC)It also, strangely enough, extends to the letter to the Hebrews, which though not written by Paul has some Pauline characteristics.
It does not extend to the "pastoral" letters (which were written by decidedly anti-Gnostic elements within the church), nor, apparently (though I haven't examined this one closely) to the second letter to the Thessalonians. I can't find any evidence one way or another regarding the letter to Philemon.