Seminar Paper on Tuebingen School and the History of Religions Approach
Submitted to: Rev. Dr. B. Varghese
Class: M.Th.
Submitted by: Stanly Johnson
Department: New Testament
1. Introduction:
Pauline inquiry always grants ways wide open for us and renders ample of scope to reflect and
explore. It is not startling that with in accordance with a profound and complicated a phenomenon as
the manner in which the Apostle Paul has given the form and expression to the very gospel of Jesus
Christ, a great variety of conceptions is to be traced in the history of the Pauline investigation. The
prime architect of a new understanding of the New Testament text was undoubtedly F.C. Baur. He is
a leader par excellence and has been widely identified by some as the father of modern Pauline
studies. A German protestant theologian Baur’s work has had a pivotal impact upon the avenue of the
higher criticism as far as the biblical and related texts are concerned. In this work, an attempt is made
to study the three successive basic conceptions, namely, that of the Tuebingen School, the history of
religions and liberal interpretation.
2. Tuebingen School:
A group of nineteenth-century Protestant theologians whose major focus was the New
Testament and the nature of Christianity as presented in it. F. C. Baur (1792–1860) founded the
school after growing up in the Lutheran orthodox tradition that had flourished at the University of
Tuebingen. The movement’s initial zeal appears to have come from Baur’s Symbolik und Mythologie
der Naturreligion des Altertums (1824–25), written from a perspective shaped by interaction with
Schleiermacher’s ideas. The essence of the school’s efforts, on the other hand, was in the rigorous
application of Hegel’s theories to the development of Christianity, particularly that of the primitive
Church. As conceived by Baur and his colleagues, the thesis and antithesis were Petrine and Pauline
Christianity, presented as contradicting to orientations.1
According to this perspective, the Petrinists believed in justification by faith and the deeds of
the Mosaic Law, but the Pauline group believed in justification by faith alone. According to the
school, similar opposition existed in the area of church polity, as the Petrine party desired to model
church government on the “hierarchical” structure of Judaism, with the high priest at the epicenter,
whereas the followers of St. Paul insisted on a synodal or presbyterian type of rule.2
2.1. F.C. Baur:
Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792-1860) is the one of the most influential and greatest New
Testament scholar of the nineteenth century. From 1826 he was the Professor of New Testament at
Tuebingen, where he formed a group of scholars. He was a follower of G.W. F. Hegel’s philosophy
and believed that early Christianity was a synthesis created out of the conflict of opposing forces. 3 He
developed this theme in his “Investigations concerning the So-called Pastoral Epistles of Paul”,
which appeared in 1835. Later, he wrote another book on Paul named as “Paul Apostle of Jesus
Christ”, which came out in 1845 but was not translated into English until 1873-75. In this book, he
denied the Pauline authorship of all the epistles except Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians and Romans.
1
E. Earle Ellis, Paul and His Recent Interpreters (Grand Rapids Eerdmans, 1961), 18.
John Bowker, The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), 7676.
3
Gerald Bray, Biblical Interpretation: Past & Present (England: IVP, 1996), 321.
2
1
He also denied the apostolic origin and therefore the basic historicity of Acts. In 1847 he published
his last work of New Testament criticism, “Critical Investigations concerning the Canonical
Gospels”.4 He believed that Matthew was the first of the gospels to have been written, because it
reflected the Jewish background of Christianity in a best possible manner. On the other hand, he
believed that John’s gospel reflected the Gnostic and Montanist controversies of the late second
century, and had no historical value.
Ferdinand Christian Baur plays a prominent part in the development of historical research on
the Christian tradition in general, and on the texts of the New Testament in particular.5
2.1.1. F.C. Baur’s Model:
The debate about the relevance of the Apostle Paul in the history of New Testament revelation
began recently with the works of F. C. Baur, the father of the so-called Tuebingen School. Baur
understands his interpretation of Paul to be a concrete, historical–critical achievement. For him,
historical criticism is not just an optional method; instead it is the only suitable way to capture, and to
comprehend, the actual contents of the New Testament texts and the Christian tradition.6 Baur tried to
comprehend the history of Christianity according to Hegel’s philosophical principles. He was also
influenced by them when he sought the core of Paul’s preaching, not in Christology, but in the
Pauline idea of the Spirit and the antithetical motif of Spirit and flesh tied up with it. In this idealistic
concept, Christianity for Baur is the absolute religion and Paul is the one in whose doctrine of
freedom and reconciliation the absolute consciousness of the unity of human with God in the Spirit
has been embodied.7
According to Baur this consciousness in Paul developed in antithesis with the primitive
Christianity that was still bound to the law and to particularistic Judaism. In 1831, Baur published his
seminal essay, “The Christ-party in the Corinthian Church, the Conflict between Petrine and Pauline
Christianity in the Early Church, and the Apostle Peter in Rome.” In it he laid out the foundation for
his understanding of Paul and the history of the early church by applying the evolutionary approach
of Hegel’s philosophy to 1 Cor 1:11–12. Based on this text Baur suggested a fundamental opposition
between Gentile Christianity, represented by Paul and the party of Apollos, with its universal, lawfree, Hellenistically determined gospel, and Jewish Christianity, represented by Cephas and the
“Christ-party,” with its particular, law-orientated, Jewish-bound interpretation of the significance of
Jesus. According to Baur, the “Christ-Party” was a Jewish-Christian faction that followed Peter and
emphasized its own direct relationship to the historical Jesus through the original apostles whom
Christ had appointed.8
First Corinthians 1:11–12 thus provided a basic framework for understanding the conflict
within early Christianity that provided the inner dynamic of Paul’s writings. Paul’s law/gospel
contrast was seen to reflect the opposition within early Christianity between Paul and Gentile
Gerald Bray, Biblical Interpretation: Past & Present…. 322.
Martin Bauspiess, Christof Landmesser and David Lincicum, eds., Ferdinand Christian Baur and the History of Early
Christianity, trans., by Robert F. Brown (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017), 147.
6
Ibid., 148.
7
Herman Ridderbos, Paul - An Outline of His Theology, trans., John Richard De Witt (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1975), 17.
8
I. Howard Marshall, ed. New Testament Interpretation (Carlisle: The Paternoster Press, 1992), 42.
4
5
2
Christianity on the one side, and the Jewish Christianity supported by Peter, James, and the rest of the
Jerusalem apostles on the other.9 To counter the continuous attacks of his Jewish-Christian
opponents, Paul established his concept of justification by faith as the focal point of his theology.
Furthermore, according to Baur, the bitter conflict between Peter and Paul not only dominated the rest
of the New Testament writings, but it also drove the historical development of the early church until
the end of the second century, when it was finally resolved by the emerging unity of the hierarchical
Catholic Church.10
The theory is expanded further in a subsequent book, Ueber die sogenannten Pastoralbriefe
(1835). Baur seeks to demonstrate that the false teachers referenced in the Second Epistle to Timothy
and the Epistle to Titus are the Gnostics, notably the Marcionites, of the second century, and that the
Pastoral Epistles were written in response to Gnosticism around the middle of the second century. He
next examined additional Pauline epistles and the Acts of the Apostles (1845) in the same way.
The height of the Tuebingen School was reached to its height in 1845 with the publication of
Baur’s important work, which was later published in English in 1875 in two volumes as Paul, the
Apostle of Jesus Christ, His Life and Work, His Epistles and His Doctrine. As the capstone of his
work on Paul, Baur now argued that the authentic Paul could only be found where the conflict
between Jewish (Petrine) and Gentile (Pauline) Christianity was evident and where Paul’s doctrine of
a law-free justification by faith was explicitly presented in response. 11 Those writings attributed to
Paul that demonstrate an attempt to mediate this conflict by finding a middle ground were regarded as
a second stage in the development of the early church. Furthermore, any documents that reflected an
authoritarian or ecclesiological attempt to resolve this conflict were considered part of the eventual
Catholic resolution of the Jewish-Gentile Christian conflict around A.D. 200, which came about only
in response to the common threat of Gnosticism.12
Baur came to the conclusion through his historical–critical method and his speculative
interpretation that only the Romans, Galatians, and Corinthian letters could be regarded genuine. The
Pastorals, on the other hand, were clearly inauthentic, late-second-century texts written against
Gnostics and Marcionites. Although frequently contested in terms of authorship and theology, the
Prison Epistles and Philemon were also intended towards Gnostic opponents, being written between
A.D. 120 and 140 as late examples of the Pauline school. 13 First and Second Thessalonians were
written in the generation after Paul (A.D. 70– 75), but were of no particular significance, since they
were of inferior quality theologically. They had no trace of the Pauline doctrine of justification by
faith, or of the conflict between Peter and Paul, and their eschatology conflicted with 1 Cor. 15.
Following his lead, Baur’s students and followers then applied this basic arrangement to the rest of
the NT writings by categorizing them according to their theological “tendency” (Tendenz) as either
Pauline (e.g., Hebrews; 1 Peter), Petrine-Judaizing (e.g., James; Matthew; Revelation), mediating and
conciliatory (e.g., Luke-Acts; Mark), or catholicizing (2 Peter; Jude; John).
9
John Riches. A Century of New Testament Study (Cambridge: The Lutterworth Press, 1993), 3.
Gerald Bray, Biblical Interpretation: Past & Present…. 322.
11
John Riches. A Century of New Testament Study… 3.
12
George Eldon Ladd. The New Testament and Criticism (Michigan: Grand Rapids, 1984), 43.
13
I. Howard Marshall, ed. New Testament Interpretation…. 108.
10
3
Baur's contributions in raising important concerns for future Pauline studies were immeasurable.
As Ellis summarized, Because Baur's reconstruction placed in bold relief the problems facing
historians of the Apostolic age, he largely set the course for future studies. What was the
relationship between Paul and Jesus? What was the influence of Jewish and Hellenistic
thought in the Apostolic church? What are the proper philosophical presuppositions for a
study of Christian origins?14
These are significant topics that are still being debated today.
2.2. Impact of Tuebingan School (F.C. Baur):
Scholars rejected with the Tuebingen School’s assessment of the late date and nature of the
majority of the Pauline letters. Its view of the rest of the New Testament and the second century as a
continuation of a battle between Gentile and Jewish Christianity was similarly unconvincing, because
it was based on the inaccurate identification of Simon the Magician in Pseudo-Clementines with Paul.
Many NT Scholars have also rejected Baur’s historical skepticism and philosophical rationalism,
which as a matter of principle excluded the supernatural from history.15
But in spite of the weakness of his historical and theological judgments, Baur’s consistent
attempt to provide a comprehensive and coherent understanding of the history of the early church on
the basis of historical reasoning alone, did boosted biblical scholarship into the modern world.
Moreover, Baur’s work also set the stage for the debate in the twentieth century over the relationship
between the life and teaching of the historical Jesus and the theology of Paul.16 Within Baur’s own
lifetime some of his own students and members of Tuebingen School began to question whether the
conflict between Pauline and Jewish Christianity had been exaggerated in several ways. In 1857,
Albrecht Ritschl broke with the Tuebingen School by ejecting the idea of long lasting conflict
between Paul and the other apostles. The literary conjectures of the Tuebingen School became
officially discredited as too radical, but its historical theory continues to exert influence to one degree
or another level in New Testament studies. 17
3. History of Religions School
The History of the Religions School was built at the turn of the 20th century on a new
approach to Paul, which was forged by the religionsgeschichtliche Schule (the History of Religions
School). Born in Germany, with the approach was based on the Tuebingen dichotomy between
Palestinian and Hellenistic Christianity and found the origins of more developed Pauline christology
in the mysterious and pagan religions of the Greek world. For parallels with Pauline theology, the
mystery cults of Greece (Eleusian), Egypt (Isis and Osiris), Syria (Adonis), Asia Minor (Cybele), and
Rome (Mithras) were investigated and mined. Mystery-religion themes alleged to have conditioned
Paul’s thinking included a dying-rising redeemer god, the exalted κύριoς, and sacramental
E. Ellis, Paul and His Recent Interpreters….20
Gerald Bray, Biblical Interpretation: Past & Present…. 322.
16
George Eldon Ladd. The New Testament and Critics.… 45.
17
Peter Balla. Challenges to New Testament Theology (Massachusetts: Hendrickson, 1998)165.
14
15
4
redemption, initiation into mystic involvement in the divine, gnosis, and pneumatic experience. Two
pioneers in this field were Wilhelm Bousset and Richard A. Reitzenstein.18
However, the influence of the various religionsgeschichtliche models greatly
diminished in recent decades with the discovery of the Qumran scrolls and wider research in the
Jewish materials of the Inter-Testamental (Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha) and New Testament
(rabbinical traditions) periods. It is no longer feasible to separate Hellenistic and Jewish influences
into two hermetically sealed compartments. Paul’s Jewishness is in the process of being rediscovered.
But a more fundamental issue is the entire logic of the comparative religionist methodology which
presupposes the apostle to have been an inclusivistic, impressionable absorber of alien ideas rather
than the proclaimer of a pure gospel of faith and repentance. As Hunter comments,
They did not stop to consider that their knowledge of these mysteries was really very scanty,
that all this amazing transmogrification of the Gospel must have taken place within twenty
years, that, if Paul derived his message from his environment, he did what no other missionary
has ever done—borrowed his gospel from the people among whom he worked.19
3.1. Concept of Religion:
The traditional emphasis on doctrinal principles, according to the Religionsgeschichtliche
Schule, should be replaced with an emphasis on religion, the religious spirit, and devotion. Theology
is simply one aspect of religion, and it is the logical, philosophical, and systematic aspect. According
to the History of Religions School, the core of religion is non-rational experience. This notion of
religion arose in the works of Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768–1834) and established the pattern for
future theology and philosophy of religion. The school’s goal was to write a history of Christianity as
a religion rather than a history of ideas, dogmas, and doctrines.20
3.2. Characteristics of the Approach:
The rising criticism of the History of the Religions School and its program was particularly
after World War II. We cannot deny the reality that it contributed significantly to our understanding
of biblical books and their history. Questions raised by the school, such as the role of Canaanite
religion, apocalyptic thought, eschatology, pneumatology, gnosis, and Hellenistic Judaism, cultus,
and piety in the formation of Christianity, are still relevant and have gained increased significance as
a result of new discoveries at Ugarit, Khirbat Qumran, and Nag Hammadi.21
3.3. Wilhelm Bousset:
Wilhelm Bousset (1865- 1920) was a German theologian and New Testament scholar. He was
of Huguenot descent and was from Luebeck. His most important work was Kyrios Christos, an effort
to explain the beginnings of devotion to Christ as the result of second-century Hellenistic influences.
Don N. Howell, “Pauline Thought in the History of Interpretation”, In Bibliotheca Sacra Vol.150 (July-September
1993): 303-26.
19
Archibald M Hunter, Interpreting the New Testament 1900-1950 (Philadelphia Westminster, 1951), 70
20
Wendell C. Berry, Changing Religious Worlds, ed., Bryan S. Rennie (Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York
Press, 2001), 165-167,
https://books.google.ae/books?id=OvQXXvXAnocC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepa
ge&q&f=false
21
Ibid., 169.
18
5
It is still the most widely influential academic work on early Christology, even if its conclusions are
not validated by modern scholars.22
Bousset argued that the Jesus of the primitive Palestinian church was the eschatological Son
of Man, largely derived from Daniel 7:13-14. But in the Greek-speaking Christian communities like
Antioch, Jesus was transformed, under the influence of the Hellenistic mystery cults, into the
acclaimed κύριος. He claim that,
“Behind the personal piety of Paul and his theology there stands as a real power and a living
reality the cultic veneration of the κύριος in the community.” 23
Bousset examined the Hermetic literature, Philo, Gnostic texts, and the cults of Isis, Osiris, and
Orphis with great ability, discovering “parallels” with Paul’s Christ-mysticism (εv Xριστώ),
doctrine of the Holy Spirit, Christ-Adam theology, cross and sacrament, and the dying-rising
Redeemer. Without a doubt, the high point of the religionsgeschichtliche appraisal of Paul’s
preaching against the context of the mystery religions lay elsewhere: not in the argument to Paul’s
sacramentology, but in the appeal to his Christology.
Bousset’s interpretation of Paul’s Christology, while being an example of a well-balanced
application of the history of religions approach, is also a typical intellectual output of the period
around the First World War. The rational-ethical Christ figure of liberal theology gave way to a
deeper, more sensitive understanding of religion; terms like Christ-experience, Christ-mysticism, and
Christ-communion appeared everywhere.24
3.4. Richard August Reitzenstein:
Richard August Reitzenstein (1861-1931) was a German classical philologist and scholar
of Ancient Greek religion and Gnosticism. He is described as “one of the most stimulating Gnostic
scholars.” With Wilhelm Bousset, he was one of the major figures of the Religionsgeschichtliche
Schule (history of religions school). As a representative of the religio-historical school, he examined
all religious occurrences in the ancient world through the lens of comparative religion, and tended to
be extreme in his syncretistic interpretations. In 1904 he published his first significant work in the
religious realm the first book in the Corpus Hermeticum, a study on the Poimandres. However, he
overstated the Egyptian impact on it. His most renowned work, Die hellenistischen
Mysterienreligionen, exaggerated the mystery religions relationship to and effect on early
Christianity.25
The writer who was especially responsible for this turn in the history of religions approach to
Paul’s preaching was the classical literary scholar R. Reitzenstein. In the first case, he relied largely
on the so-called Hermetic literature, a disorganized collection of speculative theological nonChristian writings from the second and third century (C.E.) that proclaim themselves as revelations of
Hermes Trismegistos, i.e., the Egyptian deity Thoth. Greek, Egyptian, eastern, and Jewish influences
coexisted here. Hermes, sometimes also called Poimandres or Asklepios, gives secret revelations that
have reference to astrological and magical as well as to religious subjects. The religious ideas are
22
Wilhelm Bousset, Kyrios Christos, trans., John E. Steely (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1970), 2.
Ibid., 210.
24
Herman Ridderbos, Paul - An Outline of His Theology…. 28.
25
Don N. Howell, “Pauline Thought in the History of Interpretation”, In Bibliotheca Sacra Vol. 150….
23
6
dualistic gnostic. The soul, imprisoned in matter, ascends once again to God in the way of gnosis.
Along with this then, according to Reitzenstein, the so-called Anthropos-myth makes its appearance,
the representation of original human in whom the divine pneuma finds its highest manifestation and
who once more shows the scattered particles of light the way to God.26
According to Reitzenstein, this gnostic Hellenism had a strong direct impact on Paul. He finds
clear evidence for this in Paul's technical usage of all kinds of gnostic terms and ideas, examples as,
psychikos and pneumatikos (being or not being in possession of gnosis), gnosis and agnosia,
photizein and doxa, morphousthai and metamorphousthai, nous, in the sense of pneuma, as the divine
effluvium that is, conferred on the elect as charisma. Reitzenstein views Paul not as the first, but as
the greatest Gnostic.27
3.5. Rudolf Bultmann:
Rudolf Karl Bultmann (1884–1976) was a German Lutheran theologian and New Testament
professor at the University of Marburg. He was a major figure in early-twentieth-century biblical
studies, because of his hermeneutical approach to the New Testament; he became a proponent of
dialectical theology. Bultmann is well-known for his belief that historical research of the New
Testament is both futile and unnecessary, given that the early Christian writing was not concerned
with specific locations.28
Bultmann is perhaps the best representative of the religionsgeschichtliche approach to the
New Testament, and because of his depth of research and wide-ranging effect, he deserves special
consideration. Bultmann classified Pauline theology into two categories: “human prior to the
revelation of faith” and “human under faith.” Paul's Christology and theology as a whole are
dominated by anthropological and soteriological concerns in this approach. God's salvific activity
through Christ's death and resurrection are not dependably historical space-time events. Instead, they
appear in the kerygma as it is proclaimed, calling human to a faith decision. Bultmann's works
frequently emphasize the call to true existence, fresh self-understanding, and openness to the future,
revealing the anthropological core of his interpretation.29
Bultmann is deeply indebted to the existentialism of Martin Heidegger “What in Baur was
Hegelian idealism, however, is in Bultmann Heideggerian existentialism”. His motivation to make the
message of the Cross comprehensible and acceptable to modern human, which Bultmann promises
his readers he is accomplishing, is admirable, but the effect is to eliminate the historical grounding of
the redemptive event and shift it into the realm of the merely experienced. After examining
Bultmann’s existential Paul,
Fuller finds that the dual structure of “man before to faith” and “man under faith” “ignores the
context of redemptive history in which Paul sets his theology, as well as the communal and
cosmic aspects of his thought.”30
Herman Ridderbos, Paul - An Outline of His Theology ….30.
Ibid.,
28
P. Joseph Cahill, "The Theological Significance of Rudolf Bultmann", In Theological Studies Vol. 38 (1977): 232-234.
29
Don N. Howell, “Pauline Thought in the History of Interpretation”, Bibliotheca Sacra Vol. 150….313.
30
Reginald H. Fuller, The New Testament in Current Study (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1962), 57.
26
27
7
4. Liberal Interpretation:
Following Baur, another interpretation of the theological meaning of Paul’s gospel preaching
achieved popularity, this also drew its point of departure from what Paul had to say about the Spirit,
but sought to interpret this from Greek anthropology. Though closely related to the History of
Religions approach, since both see the dominance of Greek influence over Paul, the liberal school
focuses on the relationship of Paul to Jesus. Among the most notable representatives of this time are
Holsten, Ludemann, Pfleiderer, and H. J. Holtzmann.
Reformation Theology viewed justification by faith as the centre of Paul’s doctrine. But
Liberal scholars based on Hellenistic thinking found out an ethical line to discover the expression in
the context of Flesh and Spirit. Spirit is the leading rational principle and flesh is the lower sensual
nature which is in subjugation to the spirit and spirit must gain victory over the Flesh. It is in this
context that Paul writes about believers as being “with Christ” and “in Christ”. This communion is
seen of as an ethically oriented mysticism, not as an objective inclusion of Christ’s believers, but as a
spiritual and mystical bond, from which, in a broader religious sense, a life of love and spiritual
freedom would bloom. These ideas position us in the era of the so-called liberal theology.31
4.1. H. J. Holtzmann:
Heinrich Julius Holtzmann was a German Protestant Theologian, who was born in 1832 and
lived upto1910. He taught at Heidelberg and then at Strasbourg. He wrote a classic study of the
synoptic gospels. He opposed the view of William Wrede. He wrote commentaries on Ephesians and
Colossians in 1872. For him the Damascus Event of Paul is of important significance in
understanding his theological position.32 Biblical Scholar Ridderbos calls Holtzmann “the grand
master of liberal theology.”33
For Holtzmann the event at Damascus is of fundamental significance for understanding Paul’s
theological position. He interprets that event as the first subjective experience of what Paul will
shortly proclaim as his objective doctrine of salvation.34
Paul’s subjective experience at Damascus became the objective doctrine of salvation. Even
before his experience at Damascus Paul is said to have become an ethical bankrupt, as it is noticeable
in Romans Ch. 7. But after the Damascus Event, he discovered another way of salvation apart from
the law, that is “to die and raise with Christ.” He perfected the picture of Paul as a balance between
Jewish and Hellenistic elements.35
4.2. William Wrede:
George Friedrich Eduard William Wrede was a German Lutheran Theologian. He lived from
1859 to 1906. He is another major figure in the Liberal School. He is famous for his studies based on
Gospel of Mark.
31
Martin E. Martry, ed. New Testament issues. (New York: Harper Forum Books, 1970) 20.
Gerald Bray, Biblical Interpretation: Past & Present…. 324.
33
Herman Ridderbos, Paul - An Outline of His Theology ….19.
34
Ibid., 21.
35
Gerald Bray, Biblical Interpretation: Past & Present…. 324.
32
8
F.F. Bruce calls Wrede, as the “father of Gospel redaction criticism”, a scholar well ahead of
his time whose influence extends to the present Paul therefore in his theological formulations
created something essentially new (largely due to Hellenistic influence).36
He is of the view that Paul’s theology is fundamentally Christology. Paul’s doctrine is a
doctrine of Christ and his works. Speciality of Paul and his teaching is the redemptive facts such as
the incarnation, the death and the resurrection of Christ. In other words, “Redemptive History” is the
backbone of Pauline Christianity.
In his work on Paul, he argued that without Paul, Christianity would have basically become
just another Jewish sect that would have only little influence in later religious development. As a
result, he concluded that Paul was, “the second founder of Christianity.” He went so far as to separate
Paul from his Jewish background, arguing that Paul was definitely influenced by certain Hellenistic
concepts. As a result, his understanding of the flesh and spirit dualism within Paul parallels that of
many others who understand flesh from a Hellenistic context where matter itself is inherently
corrupted.37
5. Conclusion:
When we attempt to do an analysis of the extensive writings of Baur and other scholars we
can derive into a concrete conclusion that they indeed tried to annihilate all the pre-existing notions
and prejudice which were prevalent and tried to analyse the message and life of Paul from a
distinctive perspective. Though they were analysing it from different purviews we can well grasp the
fact that their supreme intention behind this was to undoubtedly explore and reveal the truths that
were concealed and to study the scripture authoritatively. The models they retorted to were in a way
acting as a supplementary and complemented their study done in that regard. One common
framework of facts cannot be brought in and aligned though but study of the different theologians and
their models facilitate in widely understanding the general overview of the same for which it is highly
beneficial and resourceful as well.
6. Bibliography:
Balla, Peter. Challenges to New Testament Theology. Massachusetts: Hendrickson, 1998.
Bauspiess, Martin, Christof Landmesser and David Lincicum. Eds. Ferdinand Christian Baur and the
History of Early Christianity. Translated by Robert F. Brown. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2017.
Berry, Wendell C. Changing Religious Worlds, edited by Bryan S. Rennie, pp. 165–189. Albany,
N.Y.:
State
University
of
New
York
Press,
2001.
https://books.google.ae/books?id=OvQXXvXAnocC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_s
ummary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false
Bousset, Wilhelm. Kyrios Christos. Translated by John E. Steely. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1970.
Bowker, John. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2003.
36
F.F. Bruce, "The History of New Testament Study," in New Testament Interpretation Essays on Principles and
Methods, ed. Howard Marshall (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), 46.
37
William Wrede, Paul (London: Philip Green, 1907), 179.
9
Bray, Gerald. Biblical Interpretation: Past & Present. England: IVP, 1996.
Bruce, F.F. "The History of New Testament Study," in New Testament Interpretation Essays on
Principles and Methods. Edited by Howard Marshall. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977.
Cahill, P. Joseph. "The Theological Significance of Rudolf Bultmann", In Theological Studies Vol.
38 (1977): 231–274.
Ellis, E. Earle. Paul and His Recent Interpreters. Grand Rapids Eerdmans, 1961.
Fuller, Reginald H. The New Testament in Current Study. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1962.
Howell, Don N. “Pauline Thought in the History of Interpretation”. In Bibliotheca Sacra 150. (JulySeptember 1993): 303-26.
Hunter, Archibald M. Interpreting the New Testament 1900-1950. Philadelphia Westminster, 1951.
Ladd, George Eldon. The New Testament and Criticism. Michigan: Grand Rapids, 1984.
Marshall, I. Howard, ed. New Testament Interpretation. Carlisle: The Paternoster Press, 1992.
Martry, Martin E, ed. New Testament issues. New York: Harper Forum Books, 1970.
Riches, John. A Century of New Testament Study. Cambridge: The Lutterworth Press, 1993.
Ridderbos, Herman. Paul - An Outline of His Theology. Translated by John Richard De Witt.
Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1975.
Wrede, William. Paul. London: Philip Green, 1907.
10