No, I don't think the earliest reference is in Paul (contra Gaston and Gager). But it might come soon after him. I'm thinking of the words of Justin Martyr's fictional interlocutor, Trypho the Jew (or, perhaps, "Judean"--I'm still out on that one). Fictional though he be, I think that Justin's Trypho is a reflection of true-to-life encounters with Jewdeans, and thus the following quote provides evidence that some probably considered this a viable understanding of the significance of Jesus in God's plan. For those not in the know, the two covenant theory is a particular take on Paul's view of the relationship between Christ and the Law, according to which Gentiles are to be saved through Jesus but Jewdeans through Torah, apart from Christ.
Here's how Trypho puts it:
"Let him [Jesus] be recognised as Lord and Christ and God, as the Scriptures declare, by you of the Gentiles, who have from His name been all called Christians; but we who are servants of God that made this same [Christ], do not require to confess or worship him." (Dialogue with Trypho LXIV; ANF01, 229)
For what its worth, Justin's response remains a valid and compelling argument against the view in its contemporary forms. As attractive as the proposition is, it seems inconceivable to me that it would have appealed to Paul any more than to Justin.
-----
Note: Krister Stendhal is often incorrectly identified with two-covenant proponents. He clarified his views, which were admittedly unclear in "Paul and the Introspective Conscience," in a later short book on Romans, Final Account.
2 comments:
"Jewdean." I like it!
Above commenter beat me to it.
Personally, I believe Paul was after something that even he didn't fully know how to convey—for each community.
A dual community that worked together but remained different but not "distinct" or disparate but not "distinct" (as in the "wall of distinction.")
Thank you for the post.
Post a Comment