Wrestling with Rationality in Paul: Romans 1-8 in a New Perspective (Society for New Testament Studies Monograph Series, Series Number 82)

This study combines an analysis of the argumentative complexities of Romans 1-8 with the presentation of modern theories of how meaning arises and functions. These theories (especially as represented by Umberto Eco) shed important light on two central questions raised by Paul's method: why does he reason so persistently about matters that depend ultimately on supernatural enlightenment, and why, where he does, are his arguments often so unclear and so hard to reduce to logical consistency? This book seeks to answer both questions. Spanning a variety of disciplines, this 1995 enquiry focuses on one particular Pauline characteristic: the apostle's habit of making matters of faith the object of logical appraisal. A tracing of the elliptical patterns of argument in Romans 1-8 illustrates this habit and, at the same time, displays how Paul's vigorous persistence in it seems often not to be matched by the solidity, or at any rate the lucidity, of his logic. By viewing Paul against the background of semiology, more especially the semiological theory of Umberto Eco, new light is shed on the genesis of Paul's reasoning. The discussion which ensues is marked by an interesting and productive combination of modern linguistics and classical logic. Moreover, the singular potential of today's techniques of 'fuzzy' logical analysis for measuring the intellectual muscle of Paul's argumentation is brought out dramatically by the uniqueness of his semiological situation. His rationality takes on a new face This study combines an analysis of the argumentative complexities of Romans 1-8 with the presentation of modern theories of how meaning arises and functions. These theories (especially as represented by the semiotics of Umberto Eco) shed important light on two central questions raised by Paul's method: why does he reason so persistently about matters which depend ultimately on supernatural enlightenment, and why, where he does, are his arguments often so unclear and so hard to reduce to logical consistency? To both questions new answers emerge. John D. Moores engages with the most significant riddles displayed in the complex argumentation of Romans 1-8. Viewing Paul as he does against the background of semiology (especially the theory of Umberto Eco), his 1995 book combines literary theory and classical logic to put an entirely new complexion on Paul's rationality.

a Discussion Combining Classical Logic And Literary Theory To Put A New Perspective On Paul's Rationality.

'It is very difficult to imagine an imprint that mentions a referent without the mediation of a content.'