The Hermeneutics of the Apostolic Proclamation: The Center of Paul's Method of Scriptural Interpretation

4. Introducing Prosopological Exegesis

183 Introducing Prosopological Exegesis 4 G After tracing the story of scholarship on Pauline hermeneutics at the outset of this book, I put forward a fresh methodological proposal for the study of Paul’s use of the scriptures. Specifically, I suggested that a void exists in the scholarship on two interrelated fronts. First, surprisingly , there has been little effort to locate Pauline hermeneutics within the context of early Christian exegesis through comparative analysis. Second, the employment of intertextual models to texts in Paul (and the NT more generally) has been almost exclusively focused on the LXX as the pre-text. However a more robust intertextual model acknowledges that any text is informed not just by its pre-text, but also by co-texts (other literary works that use the same pre-text independently) and posttexts (works that receive the pre-text through the text). In this chapter and the next, we will more fully implement this proposal by using early Christian sources as a resource for Pauline hermeneutics, arguing that the apostolic proclamation is at the methodological center of Paul’s interpretation of the scriptures. This chapter is devoted to examining an exegetical technique that enjoyed a definite currency in the early church, prosopological exegesis, but that has not, to the best of my knowledge, been hitherto discussed with regard to Paul or the rest of the NT. In brief, prosopological exegesis explains a text by suggesting that the author of the text identified various persons or characters (prosopa) as speakers or addressees in a pre-text, even though it is not clear from the pre-text itself that such persons are in view. This chapter will introduce prosopological exegesis as it was practiced in antiquity, while the following chapter will show that a careful exploration 184 The Hermeneutics of the Apostolic Proclamation of Paul’s use of this reading technique unearths a new layer of theological depth and richness—especially as it pertains to the fellowship between divine persons—in a number of passages. Prosopological (or Prosopographic) Exegesis in Modern Scholarship Although it has intimations in previous scholarship, both in classical and in theological studies,1 it appears that prosopological exegesis as a distinctive , widespread interpretative strategy for the early church was first brought to the attention of modern scholarship in 1961 by Carl Andresen in his landmark study of the exegetical roots of Trinitarian language.2 The impact of Andresen’s article has primarily been felt in systematic and patristic theology.3 To the best of my knowledge, prosopological exegesis has not been explored with regard to the use of the scriptures by NT authors, apart from the idiosyncratic attempt by Hanson,4 the brief notices in Andresen,5 a short section in Rondeau, and my own suggestion in a paper that was drafted in 2005, but is just now forthcoming.6 As a seminal and provocative study, Andresen’s contribution merits further attention. 1 On the classical front, see esp. Hans Dachs, Die lu,sij evk tou/ prosw,pou: Ein exegetischer und kritischer Grundsatz Aristarchs und seine Neuanwendung auf Ilias und Odyssee (Erlangen: Junge & Sohn, 1913). As an example of earlier theological scholarship that touched on the idea of prosopological exegesis, albeit without using this nomenclature, see Erwin R. Goodenough , The Theology of Justin Martyr: An Investigation into the Conceptions of Early Christian Literature and Its Hellenistic and Judaistic Influences (Jena: Frommann, 1923; repr., Amsterdam: APA-Philo, 2004), 145. 2 Carl Andresen, “Zur Entstehung und Geschichte des trinitarischen Personbegriffes,” ZNW 52 (1961): 1–39. 3 See e.g., Aloys Grillmeier, Christ in Christian Tradition: From the Apostolic Age to Chalcedon (451), 2nd rev. ed., trans. John Bowden (Atlanta: John Knox, 1975), 125–27; Basil Studer, “Zur Entwicklung der patrististichen Trintitätslehre,” TGl 74 (1984): 81–93, esp. 85–86; Hubertus R. Drobner, Person-Exegese und Christologie bei Augustinus: Zur Herkunft der Formel Una Persona (Leiden: Brill, 1986), 5; Michael Slusser, “The Exegetical Roots of Trinitarian Theology,” TS 49 (1988): 461–76; Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, “Concerning the Notion of Person in Theology,” Comm 17 (1990): 439–54, esp. 440–43. 4 Anthony T. Hanson, in a variety of publications, has made overtures toward what I am labeling prosopological exegesis—see the introduction to ch. 5 regarding Hanson’s contribution. 5 See Andresen, “Zur Entstehung,” 20–21, who mentions Acts 2:24-35 and Heb 1:5-13. 6 My interest in prosopological exegesis was first stimulated by a doctoral seminar on patristic exegesis of the Psalter at the University...