Religion

222 LETTERS IN CANADA 1987 of the Enlightenment, for anyone interested in the large themes of man's fate. It is a book that should be widely read, pondered and discussed, savoured, and then rejected. (ROLF GEORGE) Religion S.G. WILSON Bycoincidence, three of the most interestingbooks that came my way this year were in the area of New Testament studies and so I will concentrate my review on them. They concern themselves with quite different issues and each in its own way provides a fresh and stimulating look at old and familiar problems. The originality of Paul Gooch's Partial Knowledge: Philosophical Studies in Paul (University of Notre Dame Press, 200, US $22.95) lies in the way he brings the eye of a professional philosopher (with theological sympathies ) to bear on a range of passages and issues in the letters of Paul, chiefly 1 Corinthians. This is uncommon. New Testament scholars typically work in ignorance of issues discussed by philosophers of religion and, indeed, of much contemporary theological debate. When they do venture beyond the natural confines of their discipline it is usually in the service of a particular confessional viewpoint or a naive and fairly traditional notion of what Christian theology is. Some theologians have made valiant attempts to absorb and reflect upon the results of critical study of the New Testament (E. Schillebeeckx comes to mind), but this is not common either. Philosophers, even those most interested in the philosophy of religion, have virtually ignored the New Testament, mainly, I suspect, in the not altogether unwarranted conviction that it is largely naive about or indifferent to the philosophical issues which interest them. In this context Gooch's work comes as a breath of fresh air, exhibiting as it does a rare combination of philosophical skill with a well-informed and sympathetic interest in critical issues raised by New Testament scholarship. The first two essays set the stage by facing an immediate objection to his enterprise: Was Paul not so profoundly opposed to 'philosophy' (Col 2:8) and human 'wisdom' (1 Cor 1-4) that philosophical analysis of his views must be seen as an irrelevant or, at best, quixotic, endeavour? Much depends upon the precise meaning of the terms. When Paul says 'beware of philosophy (philosophia)' in Col 2:8 he is usually thought to be opposing a pretentious, spec;ious, form of human speculation peculiar to Colossae and not philosophy as it was more broadly understood in the ancient world. But, argues Gooch, even if a stronger sense is given to Paul's warning it is not necessarily an embarrassment. If Paul is opposing RELIGION 223 grand philosophical systems, whether they are partial or total attempts to comprehend reality, his warning may be timely. Only if Paul was opposing the very procedures of rational inquiry - the pursuit of truth and clarity and the opposition to confusion and falsehood - would Gooch's style of analysis be undercut, and there is little reason to think that this is what Paul meant. This points to what Gooch is trying to do. He does not intend to relate Paul historically to the philosophies of his day nor does he wish to reconstruct from his writings a comprehensive philosophical system. Moreover, many of the issues which dominate discussion of Paul or the philosophy of religion are deliberately passed over. His aim is more modest - to reflect upon a selection of philosophically interesting problems in Paul using the normal tools of philosophical analysis. Itis widely agreed that the two main themes addressed in 1 Cor 1-4 are the factional tendencies and the false, human wisdom espoused in Corinth. How these themes are related and precisely what they refer to has, on the other hand, commonly been a cause of dispute. The dispute arises in part because Paul's discussion is laced with irony and plays subtly with positive and negative senses of the two opposing terms 'wisdom' and 'folly.' Gooch argues that the climactic discussion in 1 Cor 4:6ff takes us to the heart of Paul's concern: that the Corinthians' 'wisdom' consists of an inflated, self-deceiving estimate of their own intellectual powers, and that this estimate is...