Conversion in Luke and Paul: Some Exegetical and Theological Explorations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Durham E-Theses Conversion in Luke and Paul: Some Exegetical and Theological Explorations MORLAN, DAVID,SCOTT How to cite: MORLAN, DAVID,SCOTT (2010) Conversion in Luke and Paul: Some Exegetical and Theological Explorations, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/408/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 Dissertation Abstract: Conversion in Luke and Paul David S. Morlan This dissertation explores the conversion theologies of Luke and Paul. For Luke and Paul conversion played an important role in the early Christian experience and in this dissertation we take a fresh look into how they interpreted this phenomenon. We traverse representative texts in the Lukan and Pauline corpus equipped with three theological questions. What is the change involved in conversion? Why is conversion necessary? Who is responsible for conversion? In our theological and exegetical analysis of Luke 15, Acts 2, Acts 17:16-34, Romans 2 and Romans 9-11 we answer these three theological questions, which then builds a theological profile for both Luke and Paul. These profiles provide fresh insight into the theological relationship between Luke and Paul showing significant similarities as well as sharp contrasts between them. Differences emerge concerning their understanding of repentance as well as in the correlation between conversion and creation: for Luke, conversion is the restored imago dei of the original creation while for Paul it is a fresh act by God of New Creation. Similarities surface between Luke and Paul concerning the centrality of Christology in their conversion theologies. While showing a complex relationship between human and divine agency in conversion, both Luke and Paul understand successful conversion to be impossible without the intervention of an agency outside of the pre-convert. Conversion in Luke and Paul Some Exegetical and Theological Explorations DAVID S. MORLAN Department of Theology and Religion Durham University April 2010 A dissertation submitted in fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE i ABBREVIATIONS iii CHAPTER ONE – SETTING THE QUESTIONS 1 1.1 Recent Theological Comparisons of Paul and Luke 1.2 Conversion 1.3 Setting the Questions 1.4 Methodology and Presuppositions CHAPTER TWO – CONTOURS OF CONVERSION IN PAULINE AND LUKAN SCHOLARSHIP 25 2.1 R. Bultmann 2.2 E. Käsemann 2.3 S. Chester 2.4 A. Segal 2.5 H. Cadbury 2.6 H. Conzelmann 2.7 M. Dibelius 2.8 P. Esler 2.9 D. Ravens/D. Moessner 2.10 I. Marshall/C. Stenschke Part One CHAPTER THREE – LUKE, REPENTANCE AND THE PARABLE OF CONVERSION 61 3.1 Luke’s Jewish Cultural Background 3.1.1 The Use of bw#$ in Jeremiah 3.1.2 The Use of bw#$ in Deuteronomy 3.1.3 Repentance in Jeremiah and Deuteronomy 3.1.4 Repentance among Luke’s Contemporaries 3.1.5 Repentance as Gift: Sirach 17 and Wisdom of Solomon 3.1.6 Wisdom of Solomon 12 3.1.7 Heavenly Agents of Repentance: I Enoch 40:1-10 and Joseph and Aseneth 15:6-8 3.1.8 Joseph and Aseneth 15:6-8 3.1.9 The 18 Benedictions 3.1.10 Rabbinic Literature 3.1.11. Conclusion to Jewish Traditions of Repentance 3.2 Luke’s Greco-Roman Cultural Background 3.2.1 Meta/noia and Metanoe/w as change of thinking 3.2.2 Meta/noia and Metanoe/w as Acts of Emotion 3.2.3 Meta/noia and Metanoe/w as Tools for Forgiveness and Avoidance of Judgment 3.2.4 Meta/noia and Metanoe/w as a Source of Reconciliation 3.2.5 Conclusion to the Greco-Roman Background of Repentance 3.3 The Parable of Conversion 3.3.1 Reading the Prodigal 3.3.2 Meeting the Prodigal 3.3.3 The Prodigal as Paradigmatic 3.3.4 The Prodigal and Luke’s Theology of Repentance CHAPTER FOUR – ACTS 17:16-34 AND GENTILE CONVERSION 96 4.1 Is Acts 17:16-34 a Conversion Story? 4.2 To What Extent is Acts 17:16-34 a Representative Gentile Conversion Account? 4.3 Ingredients of Gentile Conversion in Acts 17:16-34 4.3.1 Athenians Before Conversion: Intellectual Atmosphere 4.3.2 Athenian Seeking and Ignorance 4.4 The Converting Content of Paul’s Speech 4.4.1 Luke and Isaiah 4.4.2 Luke and Hellenism 4.5 The Athenian Conversions CHAPTER FIVE – ACTS 2 AND JEWISH CONVERSION 131 5.1 Acts 2 as Representative Jewish Conversion Text 5.1.1 John and Peter Heal a Man (Acts 3-4) 5.1.2 Ananias and Sapphira (5:1-16) 5.1.3 The Conversion of Saul/Paul (9:1-19) 5.1.4 Anti-conversion Story (5:17-40) 5.2 Jewish Conversions Compared with Acts 2 5.3 Acts 2 as Theology 5.4 Ingredients of Jewish Conversion in Acts 2: Jews Before Conversion 5.4.1 Religious Atmosphere in Jerusalem 5.4.2 Questioning and Combative 5.4.3 Miracle as Catalysis 5.5 The Content of Peter’s Converting Speech 5.5.1 The Spirit and Joel 2:28-32[LXX] 5.5.2 Jewish Guilt and Psalm 15:8-11[LXX]/Psalm 109:1 [LXX] 5.6 Response: Repentance and Baptism CHAPTER SIX – CONCLUSION TO PART ONE 161 Part Two CHAPTER SEVEN – THE POWER OF SIN OVER REPENTANCE: UNDERSTANDING PAUL’S RADICAL THEOLOGY OF CONVERSION 164 7.1 How does One read Rom. 2? 7.2 Who are the Addressees in Romans 2:4-5? 7.3 How does Repentance function in Romans 2? 7.4 The Connection between meta/noia (v. 4) and a0metano/htov (v. 5) 7.5 Paul’s Logic of Negating Repentance 7.6 The Law and Conversion Language 7.7 Repentance and the Power of Sin 7.8 Paul’s Positive Use of Repentance 7.9 Repentance and Romans 2 CHAPTER EIGHT – PAUL’S THEOLOGY OF CONVERSION: ROMANS 9-11 191 8.1 Romans 9-11 and conversion in Recent Scholarship 8.2 Human and Divine Agency in Romans 9-11 8.3 The Repentance of ‘All Israel’? 8.4 The Process of Conversion in Paul’s Theology 8.4.1 Step One: Diagnosis of the Unsaved – Ignorance, Sin and Shame 8.4.2 Step Two: Deconstructing the Way of Salvation through the Law (Rom. 10:4-8) 8.4.3 Step Three: Establishing the Oral Gospel against the Written Law 8.4.4 Step Four: Confessing Jesus as Divine 8.4.5 Step Five: Believing in the Heart CHAPTER NINE – CONCLUSION TO PART TWO 223 CHAPTER TEN – PAUL AND LUKE: COMPARISONS AND CONCLUSIONS 225 PRIMARY SOURCES AND SOURCES CITED 232 PREFACE A sage senior scholar sat me down in his office the day I arrived in Tyndale House, Cambridge to begin the studies that now culminate in this dissertation. In a brief meeting this scholar gave me two stern warnings that have hovered over me like a dark cloud for the past five years. First, he told me that pursuing a PhD could become an essentially selfish thing. My research. My thinking. My writing. My degree. As a result, it carries with it an intrinsic danger of shutting out even my own family for the sake of the prize. Being a young married man, he told me that any achieved degree that leaves in its wake a broken marriage is no achievement at all. Second, he reminded me that while the fruit of this research will reflect the influence of many other scholars, it is my name that will be attached to it and it is I who will have to give account for it. He told me that my concern ought not ultimately to lie with the judgment of an examining board, but with that of God. Thank you, Bruce Winter, for your haunting warnings that encouraged me to preserve and to protect my family and my faith. While I would never advise anyone to write a PhD while planting a church, the community that has emerged in Fellowship Denver has turned out to become a great source of encouragement in this process. Thanks to my ministry partner and Fellowship Denver co-founder, Hunter Beaumont, for his patience and understanding while I’ve worked on our mission in Denver and in the library on my PhD. So many friends have read and critiqued various chapters and versions of this dissertation that I cannot here name them all. However, three deserve special mention. Thanks to Kimiko Egy for her sharp eye in proofreading an earlier manuscript. Thanks to Nick Ellis who read back to me out loud most of this dissertation, which helped to sharpen my argumentation. Also thanks to Professor Craig Blomberg for reading an earlier draft of this dissertation and offering numerous insights and suggestions for improvement. I must also mention my supervisors Professor John Barclay and Dr William Telford.