Nielsen’s Nook

Nielsen’s Nook
Nielsen’s Nook
Contemplative, reflective, and irenic we pray.
Print Print

Grant Osborne on Interpreting Paul, Part 3

Will Nielsen
July 6th, 2007
Tags: • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Out of the brief second section of Osborne’s article on interpreting Paul there are nuggets of insights into Paul’s world. The letters of the Apostle Paul generally follow the traditional bounds of “Hellenistic letters”; however, Paul “felt less bound” to these structures, mixing several forms to accomplish his literary task.1

Osborne incorporates nine types of Hellenistic letters into his catalog of letters with which Paul was likely familiar: 2

  1. Letters of friendship (cf. 2 Cor 1:16; 5:3; Phil 1:7–8)
  2. Family letters
  3. Letters of praise and blame (1 Cor 11; Rev 2–3)
  4. Exhortatory or paraenetic letters (1 Thess 1-5; the Pastorals)
  5. Letters of mediation or recommendation (Phil 2:19-30, Philemon)
  6. Juridical or forensic letters (1 Cor 9:3-12; 2 Cor 1:8-2:13)
  7. Private or documentary letters
  8. Official letters
  9. Literary letters
1 Grant R. Osborne, “Hermeneutics/Interpreting Paul,” in Dictionary of Paul and His Letters, ed. Gerald F. Hawthorne, Ralph P. Martin, and Daniel G. Reid (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 391.
2 ibid.

2 Responses to “Grant Osborne on Interpreting Paul, Part 3”

I for one would be interested in seeing some original sources and secondary literature on these supposed Hellenistic letter types. Were they really all that rigid anyway? Is it more that whatever scholar popularized the idea of distinct letter types was hammering most Hellenistic letters into ill-fitting categories in the first place? If so, it would be no surprise that Osborne would not find Paul’s writings fitting into any of the categories.

But perhaps there were stringent letter types with particular features that most Hellenists felt bound to use. If that is so, it makes sense that Paul’s letters would be different - the Church and Apostleship were both new things, and would require new writing styles that would not fit in the old letter-type wineskins.

Left by Eric H. on July 21st, 2007

Eric,

Here’s the bibliography at the end of the article. I hope this helps.

Bibliography. K.-O. Apel, Hermeneutik und Ideologiekritik (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp, 1971); D. E. Aune, The New Testament in Its Literary Environment (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1987); S. S. Bartchy, “Philemon, Epistle to,” ABD V.305–10; R. Barthes, “From Work to Text,” in Textual Strategies: Perspectives in Post-Structuralist Criticism, ed. J. V. Harari (Ithaca: Cornell University, 1979) 73–81; J. C. Beker, The Triumph of God: The Essence of Paul’s Thought (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990); R. A. Culpepper, Anatomy of the Fourth Gospel: A Study in Literary Design (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983); A. Deissmann, Light from the Ancient East (London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1909); J. Derrida, “Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human Sciences,” in Writing and Difference, ed. A. Bass (Chicago: University of Chicago, 1978) 79–153; G. D. Fee, “Philippians 2:5–11: Hymn or Exalted Pauline Prose?,” BBR 2 (1992) 29–46; S. E. Fish, Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of Interpretive Communities (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1980); R. M. Fowler, “Who is ‘the Reader’ in Reader Response Criticism?” Semeia 31 (1985) 5–23; H.-G. Gadamer, Truth and Method (2d ed.; New York: Crossroad, 1982); J. G. Gager, Kingdom and Community: The Social World of Early Christianity (Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1975); G. Gutierrez, A Theology of Liberation: History, Politics, and Salvation (New York: Orbis, 1973); J. Habermas, Knowledge and Human Interests (2d ed.; London: Heinemann, 1978); C. J. A. Hickling, “Centre and Periphery in Paul’s Thought,” in Studia Biblica III. Papers on Paul and Other NT Authors, ed. E. A. Livingstone (Sheffield: Academic, 1978) 199–214; E. D. Hirsch, Validity in Interpretation (New Haven: Yale University, 1967); R. F. Hock, The Social Context of Paul’s Ministry: Tentmaking and Apostleship (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980); W. Iser, The Act of Reading: A Theory of Aesthetic Response (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University, 1978); E. E. Johnson, Expository Hermeneutics: An Introduction (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990); W. C. Kaiser, Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Principles for Preaching and Teaching (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981); E. Käsemann, New Testament Questions of Today (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979); H. C. Kee, Knowing the Truth: A Sociological Approach to New Testament Interpretation (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989); G. A. Kennedy, New Testament Interpretation through Rhetorical Criticism (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina, 1984); R. N. Longenecker, New Testament Social Ethics for Today (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984); B. L. Mack, Rhetoric and the New Testament (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990); R. P. Martin, Reconciliation: A Study of Paul’s Theology (rev. ed.; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990); W. A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale University, 1983); E. A. Nida and C. R. Taber, The Theory and Practice of Translation (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1974); P. T. O’Brien, Introductory Thanksgivings in the Letters of Paul (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977); G. R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral: A Comprehensive Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1991); N. R. Petersen, Rediscovering Paul: Philemon and the Sociology of Paul’s Narrative World (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1985); J. Resseguie, “Reader-Response Criticism and the Synoptic Gospels,” JAAR 52 (1984) 307–24; P. Ricoeur, The Rule of Metaphor (Toronto: University of Toronto, 1977); R. R. Ruether, “Feminist Interpretation: A Method of Correlation,” in Feminist Interpretation of the Bible, ed. L. M. Russell (New York: Blackwell, 1985) 111–24; E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977); J. R. Searle, Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts (Cambridge: University Press, 1979); idem, Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language (Cambridge: University Press, 1969); S. K. Stowers, Letter-Writing in Greco-Roman Antiquity (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1986); S. TeSelle McFague, Models Of God: Theology for an Ecological, Nuclear Age (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987); A. C. Thiselton, New Horizons in Hermeneutics (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992); K. J. Vanhoozer, Biblical Narrative in the Philosophy of Paul Ricoeur: A Study in Hermeneutics and Theology (Cambridge: University Press, 1990); idem, “The Semantics of Biblical Literature: Truth and Scripture’s Diverse Literary Forms,” in Hermeneutics, Authority, and Canon, ed. D. A. Carson and J. D. Woodbridge (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986); D. V. Way, The Lordship of Christ: Ernst Käsemann’s Interpretation of Paul’s Theology (Oxford: Clarendon, 1991).

Left by Will Nielsen on July 22nd, 2007

Something to say?

View blog authority