Publications by David A Burnett
Scripture, Texts, and Tracings in 1 Corinthians. Edited by Linda Belleville and BJ Oropeza. Lexington Books/Fortress Academic, 2019
In his discussion of the nature of the resurrection body in 1 Cor 15:35–49, Paul employs the meta... more In his discussion of the nature of the resurrection body in 1 Cor 15:35–49, Paul employs the metaphor of God’s sowing of the natural/earthly body and the raising of the spiritual/heavenly body, distinct bodies fit for their respective habitats. In order to demonstrate this, Paul enumerates a list of the creatures who inhabit the earth followed by those who inhabit the heavens, the resurrection body being likened to the later. Scholars have generally understood the background of this list to be found in the creatures from Genesis 1, even though they do not follow the same order. Some suggest the reason for this discrepancy is that the list simply evokes the cosmology of popular Greek philosophy. This article seeks to propose an alternate answer to this problem. The enumeration of terrestrial and celestial creatures here in 1 Cor 15:39–42 follows the same order as the aniconic discourse of Deut 4:15–19. If this is the text to which Paul alludes, he is likely drawing on an exegetical tradition in the Second Temple period. This tradition reads Deut 4:15–19 as part of a wider Deuteronomic scriptural matrix employed to describe the nature of the cosmos, constructed and administered by God, having appointed the celestial bodies as divine or angelic delegates in his cosmic polis (e.g. Philo, Spec. Laws 1.13–19). This reading not only supplies a strong argument for Paul’s particular enumeration of creatures, but also provides a more robust account of the passage in its wider context, connecting the language of the abolishing of the principalities and powers (1 Cor 15:24) with his earlier discussion regarding the judgment of the cosmos and the angels (1 Cor 6:2–3).
Journal for the Study of Paul and His Letters, 2015
In Rom 4:18, Paul cites the “promise” to Abraham in LXX Gen 15:5, “so shall your seed be” (οὕτως... more In Rom 4:18, Paul cites the “promise” to Abraham in LXX Gen 15:5, “so shall your seed be” (οὕτως ἔσται τὸ σπέρμα σου) in relation to what it means to “become the father of many nations” from Gen 17:5. Modern scholars have traditionally understood the relationship Paul sees between these two texts quantitatively, as promising a multitude of descendants made up of Jews and Gentiles. Conversely, some early Jewish interpreters of Gen 15:5 (and related texts such as Gen 22:17; 26:4) such as Philo, Sirach, and the author(s) of the Apocalypse of Abraham understood the promise qualitatively, as speaking not only of multiplication but of transformation into the likeness of the stars and assumption of their power. Reading Paul’s use of Gen 15:5 in light of this qualitative interpretation places him within the context of already well-established deification or angelomorphic traditions in early Judaism that see the destiny of Abraham’s seed as replacing the stars as the divine or angelic inheritors of the nations. This tradition may provide a more fitting explanation of the relationship Paul sees between Gen 17:5 and 15:5 in the wider context of the argument of Rom 4. This reading could illuminate the relationship between a complex nexus of ideas that Paul sees implicit in the one promise to Abraham in Gen 15:5. The promise of becoming as the stars of heaven would encompass the inheritance of the cosmos, becoming a father of many nations, and the resurrection from the dead.
Papers by David A Burnett
Even after Paula Fredriksen’s seminal 2006 article, the etic category of “monotheism,” barring a ... more Even after Paula Fredriksen’s seminal 2006 article, the etic category of “monotheism,” barring a few exceptions, seems to have largely evaded ‘mandatory retirement’ in contemporary scholarship on early Judaism and Christian origins. Strained to acknowledge the need for nuance based on more contemporary historical critical evaluations of the evidence, interpreters have commonly provided qualifications to the term "monotheism." Scholars frequently employ these qualifications, such as "ancient/early Jewish monotheism," attempting to indicate a particular kind of "monotheism" that is other than a flat rejection of the existence of other gods, similar to the conversations in classics concerning "pagan monotheism." In this paper, I propose probing the limits of "monotheism" and directly challenging its appropriateness as an etic category in our discipline by examining three textual examples from Philo of Alexandria, the Wisdom of Solomon, and the Apostle Paul, all of which provide us with conflicting early Jewish postures toward the gods in the context of ancient Mediterranean "paganism." These conflicting postures range from characterizing the pagan gods as virtuous and never destined to undergo correction (Philo, Spec. Laws 1.13–19), an ignoring or downplaying of potentially hostile heavenly forces in light of received platonic notions of the afterlife (Wis 3:7–9), and as far as imagining the gods of the nations as deserving of judgment and death (1 Cor 15:24–28; cf. Ps 82). Though each of these postures seem mutually exclusive, all not only assume the reality and existence of the other gods, but their articulations of their own respective visions of the Jewish faith are contingent on the realia of the god-infested everyday life in the ancient Mediterranean.
Scholars have commonly located the source of Paul’s analogy for the resurrection body in 1 Cor 15... more Scholars have commonly located the source of Paul’s analogy for the resurrection body in 1 Cor 15:39–49 in the enumerated creatures of Genesis 1. Some interpreters have suggested Sir 43:1–10 lies behind the reference to the variegated glory of the celestial bodies mentioned in 1 Cor 15:41. Paul seems to list each of the respective terrestrial creatures and their bodies in a hierarchical order, as he does with the celestial bodies, relating the resurrection body to the later. Rather than the eschatological egalitarianism presumed in some attempts to appropriate Pauline eschatology for theological purposes, this text suggests that Paul envisioned the imminent resurrection of the dead would result in a kind of celestial hierarchicalism, a point often overlooked by interpreters. In this paper, I will argue for an alternative source for the celestial hierarchicalism apparent in the formulation of Paul’s resurrection mythos in 1 Cor 15:41, namely, an apocalyptic reception of Exodus tradition rooted in the hierarchical ascent of the cosmic mountain in Exodus 24 and its later reception. As is the case for other apocalypticists before, contemporary with, and after Paul, this paper will provide further evidence that Paul's own particular construal of Jewish eschatological mythoi, while recognizable, would place him squarely alongside other Jewish contemporaries who operate at the fringes of their own tradition in the wider ancient Mediterranean religious landscape.
Among contemporary scholarly approaches to the questions surrounding how we should understand the... more Among contemporary scholarly approaches to the questions surrounding how we should understand the relationship between Paul and “apocalyptic,” Emma Wasserman’s recent work stands out. In her latest book, Apocalypse as Holy War: Divine Politics and Polemics in the Letters of Paul, Wasserman offers a “critical reframing” of the relevant apocalyptic literature as it relates to what we find in Paul as “myths concerned with politics in the divine world.” This construal is juxtaposed with the “folk-definitions” coming from most interpreters of Christian apocalypticism that understand “apocalypse” or apocalyptic literature as “most fundamentally concerned with a great battle between good and evil.” Wasserman contends that Paul’s politeia in 1 Cor 15:20–28, as in other relevant apocalyptic literature, intends to “suppress the possibility of conflict and competition in the divine world,” suggesting the writers “continue to assume the world functions as a single political hierarchy,” simply undergoing “reorganization.” This thesis is situated in opposition to the more popular “dualistic” portrayals of the relevant literature that carry “notions of a worldwide reckoning,” or envisioning a “radical reversal that upends the existing world order,” which she sees as “inflected with a specifically Christian sense.”
While I am in agreement with Wasserman that Paul’s so-called principalities and powers in 1 Cor 15:24 should be taken as a reference to the gods of the gentiles, in this study, I will offer a critical reconstruction that problematizes the interpretive dichotomy proposed between the “radical reversal of the existing world order,” and more generic “myths concerned with politics in the divine world.” I will argue that Paul’s description of the imminent judgment of the gods of nations in 1 Cor 15:20–28 is rooted in a Jewish apocalyptic interpretation of the narrative of Psalm 82, envisioning the coming death of the gods like human beings, construed as the fall of “rulers,” all set to take place at the “arising” of the divine figure to judge the whole earth, resulting in the inheritance of all the nations. A cognate apocalyptic employment of Psalm 82, the “god” figure there being construed as a divine intermediary, can be found in 11Q13 (11QMelch). This proposal by no means arises out of normative Christian interpretations of apocalyptic, but rather situates Paul squarely amidst Jewish apocalyptic traditions that envisioned the coming death of the gods, resulting in the inheritance of the world.
Scholars have acknowledged the presence of Abrahamic tradition and its early Jewish reception in ... more Scholars have acknowledged the presence of Abrahamic tradition and its early Jewish reception in the Exagoge 68–89 (e.g. Jacobsen, 1983; Lafranchi, 2006). How then does the employment of this tradition function for the author of the Exagoge? I will argue these traditions serve to portray Moses as a divine plenipotentiary figure in fulfillment of the promise to Abraham in early Jewish tradition. Moses’ numbering of the stars draws on the Abrahamic promise in Genesis 15, the stars here appearing as armed ranks before him, thus assuming the role of the God of Israel, the divine potentate and marshal of the celestial armies (cf. Ps 147:4; Job 25:3; Isa 40:26). In the interpretation of Moses’ dream (83–89), he is told he will “rule and govern men.” Early Jewish interpretations of the astral promise made to Abraham highlight a connection between his seed becoming as the stars qualitatively (e.g. Philo, Her. 86–87; QG 4.181) and the rule of nations and men (e.g. LXX Sir 44:21; Apoc. Abr. 20:3–5; cf. Gen. Rab. 44.4, 12). This connection is rooted in the conception of the gods/angels of the nations as celestial bodies (i.e. Deut 4:19; 32:8–9). I will further argue that this conceptualization of Moses as divine plenipotentiary and the function of the astral imagery is a reflection of interpretations of Moses’ ascent of the cosmic mountain through the lens of Second Temple Abrahamic traditions. Thus, the ascent of the cosmic mountain is here understood as the fulfillment of the astral promises made to Abraham, the seed of Abraham becoming as the celestial bodies, experiencing angelomorphic or divine transformation, exalted over the nations of the earth, led by their divine plenipotentiary, portrayed in Abrahamic fashion as the marshal of the celestial armies, i.e. the seed of Abraham.
Despite the trove of scholarly attention paid to this pericope, the Lukan account of the woman wi... more Despite the trove of scholarly attention paid to this pericope, the Lukan account of the woman with the ointment in Luke 7:36–50 continues to draw the attention of modern interpreters. This is likely due to the lack of consensus among scholars on a host of questions—whether traditio-historical, source critical, or interpretive—relating to the provenance of the passage. Of those questions, the present study seeks to address the lack of consensus regarding the provenance of the Lukan account and the nature of its relationship to the similar episodes in the other canonical gospels (Mark 14:3–9; Matt 26:6–13; John 12:1–8). I will argue that the position put forward in 1988 by D. A. S. Ravens, though neglected and at times criticized, is correct and needs to be revived and developed. When the relationship of the Lukan account is considered in its immediate narrative context (7:2–8:3), a unifying theme can be found which underlies the whole of this section, namely, that Luke re-narrates the Markan account with Isaiah 52:7 in mind, seeking to portray Jesus as the anointed Isaianic prophet whose feet have been beautified to preach the good news of the reign of God. Developing Ravens’ initial proposal, I will provide supplementary stylistic and structural evidence for Luke's Isaianic re-narration of the tradition from Mark. I will advance further narrative connections from scenes prior to the anointing episode in 7:36–50, from the episode itself, and from later in the book, all of which serve as evidence for a similar tendency to redact previous Markan material to serve Luke's Isaianic theme.
Regarding the discourse on the nature of the resurrection body in 1 Cor 15:35-49, interpreters ha... more Regarding the discourse on the nature of the resurrection body in 1 Cor 15:35-49, interpreters have traditionally approached Paul’s imagery of sowing “seed” as an analogy drawn from ordinary everyday experience, gleaning from common ancient agricultural knowledge of seeds and their function as a metaphor for the resurrection body. This paper seeks to reassess the Pauline metaphor of the sowing of “seed” for the resurrection body in light of early Jewish interpretations of the Abrahamic promise of star-like “seed” (Gen 15:5; 22:17; 26:4), to qualitatively become as the stars of heaven, assuming a divine or angelic existence.
The much-discussed apocalyptic type scene of 2 Corinthians 12:1-10 features the enigmatic narrati... more The much-discussed apocalyptic type scene of 2 Corinthians 12:1-10 features the enigmatic narration of Paul's ascent to the third heaven, which includes an angel of Satan being sent to torment him. In the immediate context of the so-called "Fool's Speech" (2 Cor 11:21b-12:10), there is a rhetorical move highlighting the apparent opponents appeal to their identity in ascending order as "Hebrews," "Israelites," "seed of Abraham," and "servants of Christ," all to which Paul climatically asserts he is "a better one." This is an ironic proposal as a narration of an apocalyptic ascent to the third heaven is placed in the midst of a listing of weaknesses and the claim that an angel of Satan is sent to torment him. This paper will seek to draw out an implicit connection between Paul's appeal to being the "seed of Abraham" and the ascent narrative by way of juxtaposition of early Jewish apocalyptic and rabbinic traditions concerning the ascent of Abraham which allude to the victorious usurpation of hostile heavenly forces (e.g. Apoc. Abr. 20:3-5; Genesis Rabbah 44:12) with an alternate ascent that results in torment from an angel of Satan. This would result in a Pauline apocalyptic re-appropriation of an existing victorious ascent tradition around the crucified Messiah, which serves as a kind of reorientation of the Corinthians’ ethics, perception of the Christ tradition, and the rehabilitation of the image of Paul as apostle of the crucified Lord.
In the Pauline discussion regarding the nature of the resurrection body in 1 Cor 15:35-49, he emp... more In the Pauline discussion regarding the nature of the resurrection body in 1 Cor 15:35-49, he employs the metaphor of the sowing of the natural (or earthly) body and the raising of the spiritual (or heavenly) body. Both kinds of bodies differ in glory and are fit for different habitats. In order to demonstrate this, in 1 Cor 15:39-42 Paul enumerates a list of the creatures who inhabit the earth followed by those who inhabit the heavens, the resurrection body being likened to the later. Scholars have generally understood the background of this list to be found in the creatures from Genesis 1, even though they do not follow the same order (as recognized by Fitzmyer, Ciampa, Rosner, etc.). Other scholars have put forth reasons for this discrepancy by suggesting that the list evokes the cosmology of popular Greek philosophy (i.e. Martin). This paper seeks to propose an alternate answer to this problem. The list of earthly and heavenly creatures here in 1 Cor 15:39-42 follows the same order of creatures as enumerated in the aniconic discourse of Deut 4:15-19. If this is in fact the text Paul is alluding to, he is more than likely participating in an exegetical tradition in the Second Temple period which reads Deut 4:15-19 as part of a wider Deuteronomic scriptural matrix employed to describe the nature of the cosmos as constructed and administered by God, appointing the celestial bodies as the gods or angels in his cosmic polis as attested in Philo, Spec. Laws 1.13-19. Reading the present text within this scriptural matrix not only supplies a strong argument for this particular enumeration of creatures, but also provides a more robust reading of the passage in its wider context, connecting the language of the abolishing of the principalities and powers in 1 Cor 15:24 with the earlier discussion in 1 Cor 6:2-3 regarding the judgment of the cosmos and the angels.
The “two swords” passage of Luke 22:35-38 has plagued interpreters for centuries. Scholars have a... more The “two swords” passage of Luke 22:35-38 has plagued interpreters for centuries. Scholars have attempted to explain this passage by suggesting that Jesus was either not speaking literally of buying swords, alluding to future persecution of the disciples, preparing them for bandits along the way, preparing them for the time of trial to come when he is gone, etc. Many of these interpretive positions seem to be out of step from Luke’s narrative portrayal of the mission and ethic of Jesus and his disciples. In recent scholarship the dominant approaches to solving the interpretative issues associated with this enigmatic text have tended to focus myopically on the pericope itself apart from a thorough treatment of the passage within its narrative context. This study will provide an explanation of Jesus’ command to buy a sword within the immediate context of the narrative as a prophetic announcement of the disciples’ denial in the same way he announces Peter’s denial in the previous section. This will be demonstrated in two ways: 1) arguing for Luke’s positioning of the unique “two swords” pericope (Lk 22:35-38) within a wider chiastic structure of Lk 22:31-62 and 2) demonstrating that in Luke’s employment of Isaiah 53:12 in the immediate narrative context, he understands the transgressors that Jesus is to be counted with are not the criminals that he is crucified next to, as traditionally understood, but with his disciples who brandish the sword. This reading is consistent with the non-violent martyrological ethic of the Jesus movement in Luke-Acts and has profound implications for early Christian ethics in the context of Roman imperial domination in the first-century as well as for contemporary Christian ethics today.
In Rom 4:18 Paul cites the “promise” to Abraham in the LXX of Gen 15:5 “so shall your seed be (οὕ... more In Rom 4:18 Paul cites the “promise” to Abraham in the LXX of Gen 15:5 “so shall your seed be (οὕτως ἔσται τὸ σπέρμα σου)” in relation to what it means to “become the father of many nations” from Gen 17:5. Modern scholars have traditionally understood the relationship Paul sees between these two texts quantitatively, both promising a vast multitude of descendants made up of Jews and Gentiles. Conversely, some early Jewish interpreters of Gen 15:5 (and related texts like Gen 22:17; 26:4) such as Philo, Sirach, and the author(s) of the Apocalypse of Abraham understood the promise qualitatively: not merely speaking of multiplication, but also of transformation into the likeness of the stars and assumption of their power. Reading Paul’s use of Gen 15:5 in light of this qualitative interpretation would place him within the context of already well-established deification or angelomorphic traditions in Early Judaism that see the destiny of the seed of Abraham as replacing the stars as the gods or angels of the nations. This tradition may provide a more fitting explanation of the relationship Paul sees between Gen 17:5 and 15:5 in the wider context of the argument of Romans 4. This reading could illuminate the relationship between a complex nexus of ideas that Paul sees implicit in the one promise to Abraham in Gen 15:5. The promise of becoming as the stars of heaven would encompass the inheritance of the cosmos, becoming a father of many nations, and the resurrection from the dead.
Thesis by David A Burnett
This thesis seeks to reveal an important functional element in the patriarchal promise that has b... more This thesis seeks to reveal an important functional element in the patriarchal promise that has been neglected or simply gone unnoticed by modern commentators. The Abrahamic promise of star-like seed in Genesis 15:5, as well as its reiterations in Genesis (22:15-18; 26:3-5), were intended to be understood qualitatively as well as quantitatively in their ANE and literary contexts. Not only was Abraham’s seed to be multiplied as the stars of heaven, but also they were to become like them, functioning as the astrally conceived gods or angels of the nations, the "father/s" of the nations. This is demonstrated by framing the text within the literary contexts and narrative structures of Genesis and the wider received Torah as well as the ANE cosmic-political context and cognate conceptual world of the Hebrew Bible. This thesis will become particularly evident when read within the narrative art of Genesis and the demonstration of the subsequent reception of this tradition in the Hebrew Bible.
Uploads
Publications by David A Burnett
Papers by David A Burnett
While I am in agreement with Wasserman that Paul’s so-called principalities and powers in 1 Cor 15:24 should be taken as a reference to the gods of the gentiles, in this study, I will offer a critical reconstruction that problematizes the interpretive dichotomy proposed between the “radical reversal of the existing world order,” and more generic “myths concerned with politics in the divine world.” I will argue that Paul’s description of the imminent judgment of the gods of nations in 1 Cor 15:20–28 is rooted in a Jewish apocalyptic interpretation of the narrative of Psalm 82, envisioning the coming death of the gods like human beings, construed as the fall of “rulers,” all set to take place at the “arising” of the divine figure to judge the whole earth, resulting in the inheritance of all the nations. A cognate apocalyptic employment of Psalm 82, the “god” figure there being construed as a divine intermediary, can be found in 11Q13 (11QMelch). This proposal by no means arises out of normative Christian interpretations of apocalyptic, but rather situates Paul squarely amidst Jewish apocalyptic traditions that envisioned the coming death of the gods, resulting in the inheritance of the world.
Thesis by David A Burnett
While I am in agreement with Wasserman that Paul’s so-called principalities and powers in 1 Cor 15:24 should be taken as a reference to the gods of the gentiles, in this study, I will offer a critical reconstruction that problematizes the interpretive dichotomy proposed between the “radical reversal of the existing world order,” and more generic “myths concerned with politics in the divine world.” I will argue that Paul’s description of the imminent judgment of the gods of nations in 1 Cor 15:20–28 is rooted in a Jewish apocalyptic interpretation of the narrative of Psalm 82, envisioning the coming death of the gods like human beings, construed as the fall of “rulers,” all set to take place at the “arising” of the divine figure to judge the whole earth, resulting in the inheritance of all the nations. A cognate apocalyptic employment of Psalm 82, the “god” figure there being construed as a divine intermediary, can be found in 11Q13 (11QMelch). This proposal by no means arises out of normative Christian interpretations of apocalyptic, but rather situates Paul squarely amidst Jewish apocalyptic traditions that envisioned the coming death of the gods, resulting in the inheritance of the world.