The Early Reception of Paul the Second Temple Jew

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION Isaac W. Oliver and Gabriele Boccaccini In recent years, a growing number of studies have appeared which focus on the Jewishness of Paul. The very same set of questions which were once addressed to Jesus (for instance, whether he was “Christian” or “Jewish”) are now asked about Paul. No longer seen as the first “Christian” systematic theologian, if not the creator of Christianity, Paul also is reintroduced to his Jewish context and understood within the diverse world of Second Temple Judaism.1 In June 2014, the Third Nangeroni Meeting of the Enoch Seminar, titled “Re-Reading Paul as a Second Temple Jewish Author,” was held at the Waldensian Faculty of Theology in Rome. Scholars of Second Temple Judaism and Pauline studies gathered together to discuss Paul afresh as a Jewish thinker. A select number of the proceedings from that meeting were subsequently edited by Gabriele Boccaccini and Carlos A. Segovia and published in Paul the Jew: Rereading the Apostle as a Figure of Second Temple Judaism (Fortress 2016). During the final session of the Third Nangeroni Meeting, participants discussed how the topic of Paul might be pursued in future venues sponsored by the Enoch Seminar. A number of participants voiced support for Isaac W. Oliver’s proposal of a conference that would center on the reception of Paul. More specifically, the conference would focus on the receptions of Paul during the first two centuries that related to Paul’s Jewishness as well as his views on Judaism with the hope that such an examination might enrich our understanding of the complex, diverse nature of early Christian-Jewish relations. The plan materialized two years later, when the Seventh Nangeroni Meeting, “The Early Reception of Paul the Second Temple Jew,” transpired from June 26, 2016, to June 30, 2016, in the same welcoming halls of the Waldensian School of Theology in Rome.2 1. See Eisenbaum (2009); Rudolph (2011). 2. Thanks go to our colleague Robert Foster for planting the intellectual seeds that gave genesis to the idea for this conference during numerous conversations on the reception of Paul in Acts and Ephesians. Book 1.indb 1 24-04-2018 20:55:22 2 The Early Reception of Paul the Second Temple Jew The Seventh Nangeroni Meeting, therefore, grew out of a previous scholarly encounter that wished to understand Paul as part and parcel of Second Temple Judaism. In this regard, the Seventh Nangeroni Meeting continued the pursuit of the Enoch Seminar to investigate what is called “early Christianity” within its Jewish contours. The conference, however, moved beyond the study of Paul proper (e.g., the so-called undisputed letters) as it sought to appreciate the reception of Paul in its own right and thus gaze at the Jewish matrix of early Christianity through the prism of reception history. As noted above, the conference focused, furthermore, on the reception of Paul the Jew. Studies on the reception of Paul abound but often without sufficient appreciation of the Jewish sources and issues that are critical for understanding the formation of early Christianity. Perhaps this is partly due to long-held assumptions about early Christian-Jewish relations. It is often assumed that the Jesus movement, for the most part, had moved on and beyond certain questions in the generations immediately following the time of Paul. Matters once deemed critical for Jewish-Christian relations, including the role and place of the Torah among followers of Jesus, were of marginal importance or simply irrelevant by the end of the first century. The relationship of the Jesus movement to its Jewish heritage and the Jewish people was no longer a burning question, as “the partings of the ways” became a fait accompli, once the pillars of the first generation of Jewish followers of Jesus, Shimon Kepha (Simon Peter), Yaakov (James) the brother of Jesus, and Yohanan (John) had passed away.3 By now, these points have been sufficiently problematized, and the time seems ripe to approach anew the reception of Paul with a clearer understanding of the Jewish framework that continued to shape the Jesus movement well after 70 CE. Indeed, the study of the reception of Paul’s legacy on early Christian-Jewish relations comes at a time when interest in reception history in general is very much in vogue. Once viewed as a secondary method of inquiry when compared to the more traditional approaches used in historical criticism (e.g., textual, source, form, and redaction criticism), reception history now boasts a vast array of publications. There are now journals, book series, an encyclopedia, and even a handbook devoted to the reception of biblical and extra-biblical literature.4 Numerous books continue to appear, including recent contributions on the reception of Paul by some of the participants of the Seventh Nangeroni Meeting.5 3. This is the case, for example, with Pervo (2010). For earlier studies on the reception of Paul, see, among others, Dassmann (1979); Lindemann (1979, 1999); Rensberger (1981); and de Boer (1980). 4. Journals include Relegere: Studies in Religion and Reception (2011–); Journal of the Bible and Its Reception (2014–). Some of the notable monograph series are Scriptural Traces: Critical Perspectives on the Reception and Influence of the Bible (T&T Clark) and Studies of the Bible and Its Reception (De Gruyter: 2009–). Finally, one finds edited volumes such as Sawyer’s Blackwell’s Companion to the Bible and Culture (2006) and even a handbook by Lieb, Mason, and Roberts (2010). 5. See White (2014); Willits (2011). Book 1.indb 2 24-04-2018 20:55:22 1. Introduction 3 In the fall of 2015, a session at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Biblical Literature in Atlanta reviewed the book edited by Mark Nanos and Magnus Zetterholm, Paul Within Judaism: Restoring the First-century Context to the Apostle (2015).6 The volume essentially promotes what has been dubbed, “the Radical Perspective on Paul,” or as some of its adherents prefer, “Paul within Judaism,” a perspective positing that Paul remained a Torah-observant Jew throughout his life. Some of its advocates even maintain that Paul’s gospel in some ways only directly concerned Gentiles. Once the floor was open for discussion, the question about Paul’s reception in documents such as Ephesians and the Acts of the Apostles was brought to the attention of participants. At a session meant to deal exclusively with the Jewishness of the “historical Paul,” it was felt that such a “radical” argumentation on behalf of Paul’s Jewishness could not ignore some of the first receptions of Paul that may have perceived him otherwise. Perhaps, a study of these first receptions of Paul might provide some kind of measuring stick for assessing or at least comparing our own constructions of Paul—however objective we may imagine them to be. It is hoped, therefore, that the chapters appearing in this volume, which present the fruits of the scholarly collaboration of the Seventh Nangeroni Meeting, will enrich our discussions on such timely matters that are relevant for the study of early Judaism and Christianity in its various subfields. This volume covers a broad spectrum of ancient texts and authors: Ephesians, Colossians, 1 Timothy, the Gospel of Matthew, the Pseudo-Clementines, the Revelation of John, the Acts of the Apostles, Marcion, the pseudo-correspondence between Paul and Seneca, the Letter of James, Justin Martyr, the Letter to the Hebrews, 2 Peter, and 1 Clement. The conference had to limit itself in some way. Therefore, only texts dating from the first two centuries of the Common Era were considered. Part I opens with an investigation on the reception of Paul the Second Temple Jew in the Letter to the Ephesians. If one consensus emerged from the session devoted to this letter it was that the author of Ephesians most assuredly operates within a framework of Jewish assumptions. In his chapter, “The Construction of Gentiles in the Letter to the Ephesians,” Matthew Thiessen shows how the author of Ephesians, like many Jews of the time, divided the world into two camps: Jews and Gentiles. The writer of the letter further depicts the Gentiles in a stereotypical fashion—an ethnic form of discoursing that is also attested in Paul’s own letters. Indeed, the affinity between Ephesians’s and Paul’s epistles leads Thiessen to question whether it is not time to revisit the possibility that Paul wrote more than the seven undisputed letters. The assumption that only seven letters of Paul are genuine, as Thiessen notes pointing to Benjamin White’s recent work on the reception of Paul, relies heavily on the claims made long ago by F. C. Baur. The German intellectual certainly did not carry out his historical-critical inquiry 6. The event took place on November 21, 2015, from 9:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. as a joint session between the units of “Early Jewish Christian Relations” and “Paul within Judaism” (listed as S21–118 in the SBL program book). Book 1.indb 3 24-04-2018 20:55:23 4 The Early Reception of Paul the Second Temple Jew in a manner detached from any theological bias. Indeed, discussions during the conference often revolved on the legacy of Baur and how it has colored our understanding of Paul and the reception of his writings. In any case, Thiessen concludes that if Paul did not write Ephesians, then at least its author found Paul’s ethnic reasoning helpful to speak of the benefits made available through Christ to Gentiles qua Gentiles. In his chapter, “‘You Who Once Were Far Off Have Been Brought Near’: The Ethne-in-Christ according to Ephesians,” William S. Campbell contends that Ephesians was consciously written in the Pauline tradition, and considers Ephesus as a viable original destination of the letter, given its peculiar vocabulary, which makes sense in connection with Ephesus and its popular cult of Artemis. In Ephesians the Gentiles are described as having been brought near but not into Israel. In other words, they become joint-heirs with the Jews, but the ekklesia is not conceived as an alternative to or as replacing Israel. The author of Ephesians is mainly concerned in showing how Gentile followers of Jesus share in the inheritance of Israel in a way that strengthens their identity and not feel deprived of previous cultural attachments such as the cult of Artemis. Eric Noffke in “Ephesians in the Jewish Political Debate of the First Century: Rethinking Paul’s Approach in Facing New Challenges” situates Ephesians historically within the new circumstances that developed during the Flavian era in order to comprehend the discourse of Ephesians on interethnic unity. Ephesians had to solve problems in a new religious and political situation imposed upon Judaism as well as Jesus’s followers, not least because of the destruction of the temple. Part II explores two other Deutero-Pauline Epistles, Colossians and 1 Timothy. In “Colossians’s Grounding Traditionalization of Paul,” Anders Klostergaard Petersen deems Colossians to be an entirely Jewish text in the sense that it conceives its Christ-religion as genuine Judaism and views all other forms as false instantiations. Petersen looks at Colossians through a Weberian lens and detects a social process of traditionalization that departs from the charismatic type of authority attested in the authentic letters of Paul. Nevertheless, Colossians uses Paul as a source of authority with a concern for cultural preservation and social maintenance. “The Shadow and the Substance: Early Reception of Paul the Jew in the Letter to the Colossians” by James Waddell considers Colossians within the philosophical context of Middle Platonism. Waddell opines that the author of Colossians responded to local Jews advocating a Judaizing Platonist philosophy peculiar to the Lycus River or a Platonizing Judaism observed in the synagogues of Colossae. The letter, accordingly, employs the language of a Middle-Platonist form of Pythagoreanism that in the end isolated the Colossians community from Jewish observances by discounting them as mere shadows. In a certain way, Paul himself had already laid the foundation for this kind of distancing, Waddell argues, for even if Paul did not begrudge his fellows Jews for remaining Torah observant, he reoriented the church’s identity, since he did not expect Gentiles to maintain Jewish practices such as circumcision, kashrut, or the Sabbath. Book 1.indb 4 24-04-2018 20:55:23 1. Introduction 5 Kathy Ehrensperger’s “Διδάσκαλος ἐθνῶν—Pauline Trajectories According to 1 Timothy” is devoted exclusively to the study of one of the Pastoral Epistles, 1 Timothy. Ehrensperger examines the depiction of Paul in 1 Timothy as the διδάσκαλος ἐθνῶν, which, she contends, stands in clear succession of Paul’s selfpresentation in the undisputed letters as the ἀπόστολος ἔθνων. By remembering Paul as the διδάσκαλος ἐθνῶν, 1 Timothy can develop a number of issues that Paul addressed to the ἔθνη in Christ. Similarly to the undisputed Pauline letters, the guidance provided in 1 Timothy is clearly envisaged as rooted in Jewish traditions in as much as these are applied to ἔθνη. The advice provided, in other words, is specific rather than universally addressed to all who are in Christ. With this framework in mind, Ehrensperger discusses those passages in 1 Timothy that deal with widows. She argues that the concern for widows in 1 Timothy is seen as part of the obligation to “remember the poor” in analogy to contemporary Jewish practice based on traditional notions of social justice (‫)צדקה‬, which are applied to the ἐκκλησίαι ἐθνῶν. Reception, as we noted, may also include rejection. Part III, “The Rejection of Paul? Searching for Paul’s Opponents,” accordingly, is devoted to the investigation of those who were possibly critical of the teachings of Paul or his followers on Judaism. For some two decades now, David Sim has mounted a coherent argument that the Gospel of Matthew should be read as an anti-Pauline text. In this latest piece, “Jew against Jew: The Reception of Paul in Matthew’s Christian-Jewish Community,” Sim not only surmises and updates his previous findings on the topic but also responds to some of the arguments raised by his critics. With respect to the reception of Paul the Jew, Sim observes that it matters little whether Paul remained a Torah-observant Jew, as the Radical New Perspective on Paul now firmly argues, since both Christian Jews and nonChristian Jews perceived Paul to have broken with Jewish tradition. Sim rejects the argument that no reception of the Pauline tradition existed in the Matthean community, arguing that Paul remained a figure of contention in the late first century. Paul’s “Law-free” gospel was not well received by Matthew’s ChristianJewish audience. This negative reception of Paul can be perceived in the Gospel of Matthew itself. In his chapter, “Paul among His Enemies? Exploring Potential Theological Traits in the Pseudo-Clementines,” Giovanni B. Bazzana questions the longheld assumption that the Pseudo-Clementines contains materials opposed to Paul, maintained since F. C. Baur who neatly configured the PseudoClementine literature within his Hegelian understanding of the formation Frühkatholizismus as the synthesizing of “Jewish Christianity” and “Gentile Christianity.” Bazzana even notes potential points of affinity between certain passages in the Pseudo-Clementines and positions on Paul now promoted by the Radical New Perspective. Chapter 10, “John of Patmos and the Apostle Paul: Antimony or Affinity?” written by Joel Willits, revisits the question of the supposed anti-Paulinism in the Revelation of John posited already, once again, by F. C. Baur. Willits suggests that “those who say that they are Jews and are not, but are a synagogue of Satan” Book 1.indb 5 24-04-2018 20:55:23 6 The Early Reception of Paul the Second Temple Jew (Rev. 2:9; 3:9) refers to a rival Jewish association who in the estimation of John of Patmos were too acculturated into the Roman religious, political, economic, and cultural ideology of Asia Minor. This group also caused some kind of social hostility to John of Patmos’s Jewish associations. The conflict reported in Revelation was intra-Jewish, but it seems unlikely that the polemic in Revelation is anti-Pauline. Part IV is devoted entirely to the reception of Paul in the Acts of the Apostles. There is a notable consensus among the four chapters in this part on the assuredly Jewish portrait of Paul in Acts. James H. Charlesworth opens this part with a chapter titled “Why Should Experts Ignore Acts in Pauline Research?” Charlesworth focuses on the historical relevance of Acts as a source for Pauline research while asking whether the Jewish portrait found in Paul’s letters is compromised by the author of Acts. For Charlesworth, Acts “is a mixture of pre-70 Judaism and post-70 Judaism” that should be studied in order to understand “the great Jewish mind that stands first in the line of brilliant Christian theologians.” George P. Carras in “Jewish Sensibilities and the Search for the Jewish Paul—The Lukan Paul Viewed through Josephean Judaism: Interplay with Apion 2:190–219” assesses the reception of the Jewishness of Paul in the Acts of Paul based on Josephus’s summary on the Torah in Against Apion 2. He concludes that Acts depicts Paul as a loyal Jew in ways descriptive of Jewish behavioral expectations and Torah parameters similar to those found in Josephus’s Apion. Isaac W. Oliver in “The Calling of Paul in the Acts of the Apostles” argues that Acts does not present Paul as a “convert” to “Christianity” as some New Testament scholars have maintained. The pericopes describing Paul’s journey to Damascus depict Paul as a chosen vessel that has been called to spread the gospel to the ends of the earth. This understanding fits well with the wider portrayal of Paul in Acts who remains a Torah observant throughout even after he joins the Jesus movement. In his chapter, “Luke’s Portrait of Paul in Acts 21:17–26,” David Rudolph draws attention to a neglected passage that is central for appreciating the way Acts defends Paul’s enduring fidelity to Torah observance. In fact, Rudolph deems this passage to be “the most explicit statement in the New Testament that Paul remained a Torah observant Jew after becoming a follower of Jesus.” It is representative of Luke’s attempt not only to restore an authentic image of Paul to the ekklesia but also to provide a frame of reference for how Paul’s teachings should be interpreted in relation to Jewish law and identity. Part V shifts to a radically different perspective on Paul, namely, Marcion’s reception of Paul and its impact on early Christianity. Chapter 15, “Marcion, Paul, and the Jews,” in this part is by Judith M. Lieu. It provides a useful introduction to some of the critical questions on Marcion’s views regarding Paul and Judaism. Marcion’s thought, no doubt, departs in many ways from the agenda and interests of Paul, but this is true to a certain extent for all interpretations of Paul, as Lieu points out, and should not detract from seriously considering Marcion’s unique reading of Paul. In any case, the Judaism Marcion would have primarily confronted, Lieu observes, would have been the “‘Judaism’ as he identified it in the practice and Book 1.indb 6 24-04-2018 20:55:23 1. Introduction 7 theology of the church.” At the same time, Lieu cautions against accepting the polemical claims of the likes of Tertullian who sought to cast Marcion as an ally of the Jews or even as a Jew. Chapters 16 through 18 in Part V consider various early Christian receptions of Paul that may have been influenced by or responding to Marcion. In Chapter 16, “Paul’s Problematic Relation to Judaism in the Seneca-Paul Original Correspondence (second century CE?),” Ilaria L. E. Ramelli looks at the SenecaPaul letters, a pseudepigraphic correspondence preserved in Latin among Seneca’s works. Ramelli identifies an original strand within this correspondence that was informed by Marcionism. In contrast to other sections of this correspondence, the original layer presents Paul’s relationship to Judaism as a source for potential problems. In addition to enriching our understanding about the reception of Paul the Jew, Ramelli shows how this correspondence has bearing on our understanding of the formation of the Pauline corpus as well. The Letter of James most likely interacted with Pauline ideas, and David Nienhuis addresses this letter’s reception of Paul in his chapter “Reading James, Re-reading Paul.” Working under the dominant scholarly position that James is a pseudepigraphon, Nienhuis highlights many of the verbal connections between James and the writings of Paul. He proposes that James was composed out of an “early second-century canon-consciousness” that included a collection of Pauline materials closely resembling the Pauline corpus we have today. From a historical point of view, the thoroughly Jewish texture of James could be explained as an attempt to counter the Marcionite problem. In any case, reading James with Marcionite Paulinism in mind certainly makes good sense of many of the themes treated in the letter. Justin Martyr certainly knew of Marcion and even wrote a now-lost treatise refuting his teachings. On the other hand, Justin never mentions Paul by name nor cites his writings. This silence has been interpreted in various ways (e.g., as unease with or embarrassment over Paul). Ben White, however, in “Gentile Judaizing in the Dialogue with Trypho: A Test Case for Justin’s Reception of Paul,” draws attention to a considerable cluster of shared words and short phrases between the Dialogue with Trypho, chapter 47 and Romans and Galatians. He posits that Justin has reworked the Pauline tradition in this pericope, siding with Paul’s opponents in Galatians, rather than with Paul, by conceding a space for Judaizing impulses among Gentile Christ-believers. This concession can be explained as a response to the Marcionite threat that sought to divide Christianity entirely from Judaism. Part VI concludes with examinations of various early Christian receptions of Paul the Second Temple Jew. If the author of the Letter to the Hebrews wished for the letter to be read as a Pauline epistle, we might have before us an interesting reception of Paul as a Jewish thinker, given the particular treatment in this document of various themes related to Judaism (the sacrificial system, priesthood, etc.). Yet Gabriella Gelardini highlights some of the difficulties in viewing the Letter to the Hebrews as a pseudepigraphon in her chapter, “‘As If by Paul?’ Some Remarks on the Textual Strategy of Anonymity in Hebrews.” Gelardini considers Book 1.indb 7 24-04-2018 20:55:23 8 The Early Reception of Paul the Second Temple Jew instead whether the author of Hebrew might have adopted anonymity as a deliberate literary strategy. David J. Downs analyzes the ethnic construction of Christian identity in “The Scripturalization of Letters from ‘Our Beloved Brother’ Paul in 2 Peter.” More specifically, he looks at the phrasing in 2 Pet. 3:15, where “Peter” speaks of Paul as “our beloved brother Paul.” Could this designation mean that Paul was viewed in this letter as a Jewish compatriot of Peter, since both apostles were ethnically Jewish? Downs thinks that the designation of Paul as a “beloved brother” is not meant to affirm Paul’s Jewish identity. On the other hand, it does not function merely as a generic, de-ethnicized descriptor for a fellow follower of Jesus. Instead, Paul is depicted here as a member of the ἀδελφότης τῶν Χριστιανῶν. The last chapter in this volume concludes with a presentation of the reception of Paul in 1 Clement. By attending to the political rhetoric of 1 Clement, Harry O. Maier’s, “Paul, the Greek Old Testament, and the Promotion of the Flavian Order in 1 Clement,” illustrates how the letter has combined Pauline and Jewish traditions in order to promote a spirit of concord, an ideal that was being universally celebrated under the Flavian order. As a whole, the volume does not make any claim of exhaustivity here, even with regard to this timeframe.7 Not all early Christians were interested in questions concerning Paul’s views on Judaism or Torah observance. And even early Christian texts that do deal with such themes hardly do so univocally. A “reception” of Paul the Jew need not imply an acceptance of Paul’s Jewishness. One could hardly imagine, for example, a contrast more profound between the very Jewish portrait of Paul one discovers in the Acts of the Apostles and the Marcionite Paul who champions a divinity above and beyond the God of the Jewish scriptures. So while this volume is by no means exhaustive in its coverage of the early reception(s) of Paul, it is hoped that it provides a variety of samplings that sufficiently illustrate the possibilities and problems related to the study of the reception of Paul’s Jewishness, stimulating further research on the topic. The Rome meeting was the result of the contribution of many institutions and universities who supported the participants financially. We would like to acknowledge in particular the contribution of the Michigan Center for Early Christian Studies and the Alessandro Nangeroni International Endowment. The partnership they have formed with the Department of Near Eastern Studies and the Frankel Center for Judaic Studies of the University of Michigan has secured the continuity of the project and the future of the Enoch Seminar for years to come. Participants of the Seventh Nangeroni Meeting, Rome, Italy; June 26–30, 2016 (names of contributors to this volume are marked with an asterisk): Albert I. Baumgarten (Bar Ilan University, Israel) Giovanni Bazzana (Harvard University, USA)* 7. Limiting circumstances, including time and space, did not allow for the inclusion of chapters dealing with the reception of Paul in the Gospel of Mark as well as Valentinus. Book 1.indb 8 24-04-2018 20:55:23 1. Introduction 9 Gabriele Boccaccini (University of Michigan, USA)* Daniel Boyarin (University of California, Berkeley, USA) William S. Campbell (University of Wales Trinity Saint David, UK)* George P. Carras (Washington and Lee University, USA)* James C. Charlesworth (Princeton Theological Seminary, USA)* Cavan W. Concannon (University of Southern California, USA) David J. Downs (Fuller Theological Seminary, USA)* Kathy Ehrensperger (Abraham Geiger College, University of Potsdam, Germany)* Robert B. Foster (Madonna University, USA) Gabriella Gelardini (University of Basel, Switzerland)* Anders Klostergaard Petersen (Aarhus University, Denmark)* Judith Lieu (Cambridge University, UK)* Harry O. Maier (Vancouver School of Theology, Canada)* Eric F. Mason (Judson University, USA) Simon Claude Mimouni (École pratique des hautes études, France) David Nienhuis (Seattle Pacific University, USA)* Eric Noffke (Waldensian School of Theology, Italy)* Isaac W. Oliver (Bradley University, USA)* Ilaria L. E. Ramelli (Catholic University of the Sacred Heart, Milan, Italy)* Yann Redalié (Waldensian School of Theology, Italy) David Rudolph (The King’s University, USA)* David Sim (Australian Catholic University, Australia)* Matthew Thiessen (McMaster University, Canada)* James Waddell (Ecumenical Theological Seminary, USA)* Benjamin White (Clemson University, USA)* Joel Willits (North Park University, USA)* Ziony Zevit (American Jewish University, USA) Acknowledgment We would like to thank the publisher T&T Clark and the editor in chief of the series, Lester L. Grabbe, for accepting the book for publication. It consolidated a partnership with the Enoch Seminar initiated with the publication of Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch: International Studies (eds. Gabriele Boccaccini and Jason M Zurawski 2014) and The Seleucid and Hasmonean Periods and the Apocalyptic Worldview (eds. Lester L. Grabbe and Gabriele Boccaccini 2016). A special thanks goes also to all those who have made possible our meeting in Rome: the chair Isaac W. Oliver with the collaboration of Gabriele Boccaccini and Eric Noffke, the Waldensian School of Theology (which hosted the event), all the members of the board of directors of the Enoch Seminar, Robert Foster for his valuable input, and the secretary of the conference, Joshua Scott, for his precious work of coordination and organization. Book 1.indb 9 24-04-2018 20:55:23 10 The Early Reception of Paul the Second Temple Jew References Allison Jr., D. C., et al., eds (2009–), Studies of the Bible and Its Reception, Berlin: De Gruyter. Boccaccini, G., and C. A. Segovia, eds (2016), Paul the Jew: Rereading the Apostle as a Figure of Second Temple Judaism, Minneapolis: Fortress Press. Boccaccini, G., and J. M. Zurawski, eds (2014), Interpreting 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch: International Studies, Library of Second Temple Studies 87; London: T&T Clark. de Boer, M. C. (1980), “Images of Paul in the Post-Apostolic Period,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 42: 359–80. Dassmann, E. (1979), Der Stacehl im Fleisch: Paulus in der frühchristlichen Literatur bis Irenaeus, Münster: Aschendorff. Durbin S., et al., eds (2011–), Relegere: Religion and Reception, Dunedin, New Zealand: Relegere Academic Press. Eisenbaum, P. (2009), Paul Was Not a Christian: The Original Message of a Misunderstood Apostle, New York: HarperOne. Grabbe, L. L., and G. Boccaccini, eds (2016), The Seleucid and Hasmonean Periods and the Apocalyptic Worldview, Library of Second Temple Studies 88, London: T&T Clark. Lieb, M., E. Mason, and J. Robert, eds (2010), The Oxford Handbook of the Reception History of the Bible, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lindemann, A. (1979), Paulus im ältesten Christentum: Das Bild des Apostels und die Rezeption der paulinischen Theologie in der frühchristlichen Literatur bis Marcion, Beiträge zur historischen Theologie 58, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. Lindemann, A. (1999), Paulus, Apostel und Lehrer der Kirche: Studien zu Paulus und zum frühen Paulusverständnis, Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck. MacDonald, N., and C. Ocker, eds (2014–), Journal of the Bible and Its Reception, Berlin: De Gruyter. Mein, A., C. V. Camp, and M. A. Collins, eds (2013–), Scriptural Traces: Critical Perspectives on the Reception and Influence of the Bible, London: T&T Clark. Nanos, M., and M. Zetterholm, eds (2015), Paul within Judaism: Restoring the FirstCentury Context to the Apostle, Minneapolis: Fortress. Pervo, R. I. (2010), The Making of Paul: Constructions of the Apostle in Early Christianity, Minneapolis: Fortress. Rensberger, D. K. (1981), “As the Apostle Teaches: The Development of the Use of Paul’s Letters in Second-Century Christianity,” Ph.D. diss., Yale University. Rudolph, D. J. (2011), A Jew to Jews: Jewish Contours of Pauline Flexibility in I Corinthians 9:19-23, Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 2/304, Tübingen: Moher Siebeck. Sawyer, J. F. A. (2006), The Blackwell Companion to the Bible and Culture, Oxford: Blackwell. White, B. L. (2014), Remembering Paul: Ancient and Modern Contests Over the Image of the Apostle, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Willits, J. (2011), “Paul and Jewish Christians in the Second Century,” in M. F. Bird and J. R. Dodson (eds.), Paul and the Second Century, Library of New Testament Studies 412, 140–67, London: T&T Clark. Book 1.indb 10 24-04-2018 20:55:23