From: Carl W. Conrad (cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu)
Date: Thu Feb 08 1996 - 19:51:38 EST
On 2/8/96, Kenneth Litwak wrote:
> 2. As the discussion currently raging on Ioudaios indicates, it's difficult to
> say whether WS would have been among the scrolls that the author of Hebrews
> would have felt it appropriate to use to use in framing this text, not
> to mention to use as the basis for the theology of Hebrews. More
> specifically, I can't determine, where, if anywhere, WS was known or held
> as authoritative or useful in the 1st cent. CE Christian church, not to
>mention
> whatever group the author of Hebrews belongs to (since we don't know the
> author, we surely can't argue meaningfully about the author's congregation --
> that is the congregation the author of Hebrews is a member of, as opposed to
> the real readers of the document).
I'm not so much concerned with influence of WS on Hebrews here but on a
tangential issue Ken seems to raise:"where, if anywhere, WS was known or
held as authoritative or useful in the 1st century CE Christian church ..."
I know that I have read in one of the commentaries on Romans (of course,
being at home, I have no resources ready to hand as I write) that the
argument of Romans chapter 2 is based upon Wisdom of Solomon. It may have
been Nygren, but I'm not sure of that. If that can be argued plausibly for
Paul, then I would think the author of Hebrews might also have known the
work as well. Does this link between WS and Rom 2 ring a bell with anyone?
Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018
cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu OR cwc@oui.com
WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:37 EDT