The Life, Times and Letters of Paul

Florida Gulf Coast University Renaissance Center

Winter 2019

Part I

Personal Note and Introduction

Why important? An author who was a historical figure that we can identify and
follow his biographical development over time. In a sense, Paul’s personal
development, reflected in the development of his practical theology (his purpose:
to get his followers to accept Jesus, to change their lives, and to achieve the
salvation which is available to all as a gift of God), continues today as the
Christian Church develops in understanding of the meaning of the Gospels. This
is not without controversy: many will say that the Church is not developing and/or
that personal communication between Jesus and a born again person is enough;
some will argue against the communal side of Paul’s ecclesiology etc.

It is hard for us to imagine today what is was like for Paul—preaching and
founding Christian churches were none existed and where communication and
travel was almost non-existent. Paul is making, doing church as he goes along.

 Readings
 Objectives, Point of View
 Methodology: Historical Critical Method
 Letters and Acts: How are they read together?
 First and Second Letter to the Thessalonians

Possible Readings
All of Paul’s letters are contained in the New Testament (the “Christian Bible”)
and there are no substantial differences (other than in translation) among them.
Modern scripture scholars tend to choose the RSV, the Oxford Annotated, the
NSRV or the New American as better “translations.” A “study” bible is
recommended for footnotes, cross comparisons, literary allusions.
Murphy-O’Connor, Jerome, Paul, A Critical Life, (Oxford, NY,
1996) or the abridged, Paul: His Story, (Oxford, NY, 2004).
Borg, Marcus and Crossan, John Dominic, The First Paul,
(HarperCollins, NY, 2009).
Ehrman, Bart D, The Triumph of Christianity (Chapter Two), (Simon
and Schuster, NY, 2018).
There are hundreds of books about Paul—textual analysis, theological analysis,
historical analysis, prescriptive (morality, institutional Church structure, etc.) It
is important to understand the author’s objective, for Paul is controversial and

1
 his “letters” provide ample opportunity for conflicting interpretations and
prescriptive messages.

My Point of View: Paul was an extraordinarily talented and driven Jew, raised
in Jewish diaspora with Greek and Jewish influences. In his early adult life, he
experienced a conversion event in which he came to believe that Jesus of
Nazareth was the Messiah. He used his talents to evangelize, was comfortable
with both Gentiles and women (unlike many of his Jewish contemporaries) and
built his communities with their help. In doing so, he founded Gentile Christianity
as opposed to furthering a Christian sect within Judaism. As a founder, he had
no roadmap or template, and tried and discarded many techniques, ideas, and
belief systems—and so there is radical development in Paul’s ideas: church
community structure, social structures, and beliefs. Paul, the man, developed
over his lifetime and so did his views on Christianity (and its relationship to
Judaism. This becomes clear if you reorder the letters as to the date they were
written, consider context, and devalue the importance of “lesser” Pauline
materials. (Thus, over time various aspects of Pauline theology can be
emphasized—and a “new Paul” emerges with a new message—the
Borg/Crossan thesis.)

Did Paul Invent Christianity?

--what does this mean? Is the questioner making a statement by asking
the question?
--theologians from the beginning have argued that Jesus did not found a
Church. Jesus was:
Good Jew, practiced Judaism
Call for personal acceptance of Jesus as the definitive relation of
God on earth—with radical conversion in baptism (born again?)
But he surrounded himself with disciples and apostles, he lived, prayed,
ate, died in community,

--So how about Paul?

A Jew, Pharisee (very observant Jew)—lifestyle of an educated
male involved adherence to Torah (law), study of the Torah, life and
discussion in community of men
Paul’s missionary technique: he did travel with “assistants”—what
does that mean? Early sponsorship and suspicions of sponsoring
communities. Dangers of the road. Not large groups. But he founded
house churches and communities.
Soon Paul’s theology developed into one that salvation was
possible only in community—a negative judgment about human nature?
Reformation Christians began to rediscover Paul and use his
theology to justify “personal religion”—the personal relationship
(spirituality) between a person and God. (Rejecting the institutionalization,
politicization and materiality of what Christianity had become.)

2
 Conclusion: Paul’s letters provide the basis for both views of
Christianity and my view is that there is room for both—but the extent to
which an individual is Christian, in my view, is how he/she lives his/her life
in relation to personal piety and charity/justice.

By a careful reading of the Letters of Paul, we can find a man with whom it is
possible to identify—with his flaws, complexities, development—paralleled
in our own lives—who expresses a faith journey like our own.

Methodology
Use of the Letters of Paul, the Acts of the Apostles and other external
sources (contemporaneous with Paul or at least ancient) to try to understand who
Paul was—to piece together a “modern” psychological biography which focuses
on what happened to and around the protagonist and what that means for
protagonist development.
Acts of the Apostles; Luke 2?, gospel or history? Companion of Paul—or
perhaps he had access to written materials from a companion?
After we have developed a profile of Paul, we will look at the letters, in the
order in which they were written, to determine how Paul’s character, philosophy,
methods and communities developed over time.
“Iterative” concept (form a picture in your mind as to WHO Paul might be,
read the letter, revise the picture etc); don’t be afraid to interpolate your views of
humanity—recognizing that human actions and reactions are conditioned by
personal physical challenges and the conditions of societies in which people live.
There are no “apocryphal” or “non-canonical” letters of Paul—but there is
a “gospel”, apparently written by a female author from about the 2 nd century
which provides some biographical detail about Paul, including accounts of his
miracles.

Historical-critical Method of Reading Scripture: Reading the Pauline Letters

in the Order is which they were likely written, with some Greco-Roman-Judaic
historical background, and with some knowledge of which letters were likely
written by Paul, which were written in his name (and probably during his lifetime)
by his disciples, and which were written later in tribute to him is an example of
this technique.
Historical-critical attempts to contextualize with all tools known to modern
literature (computer comparisons of sentence structure and word usage, external
historical references, social histories etc)
Other techniques: Inspiration, soteriological, propositional, thematic
interpretation, various techniques borrowed from literature pedagogy.
Gospel or history? Letters are special: they are responses to questions
and problems raised by specific communities—and as a consequence
represent “practical theology” which focuses on the human condition and
how theology can explain and improve human condition. It appears that
the communities copied Paul’s letters and distributed them to other
communities.

3
 Pauline theology is important within Christianity—it is quoted often, used
as a sword or a shield (to justify conduct)—so it is important to know when
Paul wrote the letter (or if it was added later and attributed to him). During
this period and for the next hundred or more years, the Church was
developing with at least three different strains (Gentile Christianity, Judaic
Christianity, Greek Philosophical Christianity)—and, given the importance
of Paul, many ideas were attributed to him.

Letters—Are the Letters a Special Case on the history/gospel continuum?

Most bibles contain 13 “Pauline letters”—8 are attributed to Paul; 5 others
are attributed to Pauline disciples. (Hebrews is not attributed to Paul or the
Pauline school.) The “authentic” Pauline letters (according to most modern
Scripture scholars) are 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 and 2
Corinthians, Philemon, Romans, and 1Timothy. As noted below, many of the
letters are conflations of more than one—so effectively we have more than 13—
perhaps 15-17. (For example, most scholars detect 5 not 2 Corinthian letters.)
Deutero-Pauline: the word used to describe the letters which were
“inspired” by Paul, but perhaps not written by him. Others attribute more letters
to Paul himself. The Deutero Pauline letters are 2 Thessalonians, Colossians,
Ephesians, Titus, and 2 Timothy. (JMOC attributes 2 Thess and 2 Tim as
authentic Pauline, but suspects 1 Tim is not.)
Use of Secretaries and Pseudonyms

Letter Writing in the 1st Century

Derivation of historical information from contemporaneous Roman sources
(from Cicero, for example, we have hundreds of letters.)
Paper: how it was made, folio concept: possible reason for order of Paul’s
letters in the NT
Use of secretary (shorthand--amanuensis) (schools), proof of authorship.
copies, method of sending. Oldest copy of Paul’s letters (a codex) is the Beatty
Papyrus (Dublin and U Mich) written about 200 CE—52 papyrus pages, folded to
make 104 pages, each with 24 lines, no spacing or punctuation; written in Greek
—seven pages are missing as are 1 and 2 Tim and Titus—but Hebrews is
included after Romans.
Structure:
Greeting (which identifies those to whom the letter is sent and those who
are sending the letter); Thanksgiving; Body; Final Blessing, Greetings, Peace
Wish and Postscript
Address, close—use of address and close to determine names, members
of community, value of members
Virtually all the Pauline letters contain a thanksgiving section after the
address—finding a thanksgiving in the middle of a letter suggests that two letters
have been combined. (See 2 Thess for example)—Some consider the lack of a
thanksgiving in 1 Tim and Titus as an indication that Paul did not write them
(although there is one in 2 Tim).

4
 The absence of a greeting in a Pauline letter suggests Paul is really upset
(see Gal)
With this in mind, many argue there are really 5 Cor letters (not 2) and 3
Thes (not 2)
The contemporary argument: consider all of the Pauline letters in the order in
which they appear to have been written (given what we can know or deduce
about the historical life of Paul and his theological development) whether
attributed to Paul or his disciples—leaving for later discussion apparent
inconsistencies that might be attributable to disciple drafting.

Placement in Canon: Not in the order in which likely written; (those

addressed to community were placed before those addressed to persons;
longest letters were placed first)

Letters vs. Acts

Acts 9 forward is life of Paul; Acts is Luke 2—written by the same person
who wrote the Gospel of Luke (based upon both thematic material and a
computer analysis of vocabulary and sentence structure)
Letters written from 50-67; Acts was likely written in 90s (Gospels from
about 50 to perhaps 100-105).
Luke was perhaps a traveling companion of Paul for some time.
Compare with disciples and apostles and Jesus—physician, the “we source”—
although he would have been quite young. (or that Luke knew a Pauline
companion.) Luke’s language and sentence structure is the most elegant of the
synoptic gospels. His theology parallels Paul’s in many ways—which could
suggest a tie-in with the Ephesians’ community—as we will see later.
Some conflicts: Luke tended to exaggerate the “badness” of Paul pre-
conversion to emphasis the drama of his conversion; also tends to minimize the
conflict between James/Peter and Paul. (Note: Luke’s account of the conflict
may be accurate; this comment merely suggests that if we compare the conflict
in the Letters vs. Acts, Acts contains a “lower level” conflict.)
Where conflict on “facts”, most biblical scholars treat letters as controlling,
if in Acts only, use the historical critical “detective” methods (embarrassment,
multiple sources, internal consistency-coherence) to determine historicity.

Paul’s Letters to the Thessalonians

Historical-Critical Context

Thessalonica
Founded by Alexander, 316 bc (orBCE)
Roman provincial capital after 167 bc, important shipyard
Important stop on the trade route, near Philippi
Capital of Macedonia
Merchant class—compare to Corinth and Ephesus

5
 Note on early Christians: some critics of the authenticity of
Christianity argue that the earliest followers were illiterate peasants—and there
were some of those—but it seems plausible that the earliest followers of Jesus
and Paul were what we would call middle class today—with some education,
some knowledge of the world beyond their villages, small businesspeople—
artisans, one step up from poverty and slavery, Greek in outlook—and perhaps
with a feeling that they were the ones most put upon by the Roman aristocracy.

Roman and Egyptian cult religions; no apparent Jewish community

Paul’s church was working class (artisans) in contrast to others
House church in tenements, not villas
Paul’s theology centers on those who work hard
Prevailing Messianic myth about the future return of a murdered
boy to free the lowly

What do we know about the historical setting?

Roman rule, relatively peaceful, emphasis on commerce
Slavery and artisans as lower class workers
Macedonia was province of Rome, a “working” province that
produced goods, wealth and was also a commercial center

The people of Paul’s Churches

Merchant class later, but this was an early evangelical effort
Slaves, artisans who worked hard (7 days, 12 hrs)

When/where were the Letters written?

Letter A, spring 50; Letter B, summer 50, 2 Thes, autumn/winter of
50 (even though 2 Thes is often considered Deutero-Pauline,it was written during
his lifetime and probably by his friends with his help
(JMOC argues 2 Thes was in fact written by Paul and not
st
by others “at the end of the 1 century)
Probably the earliest letters, the earliest writing in the New
Testament
Gospel of Mark?
Probably written in Corinth, perhaps at the home of Prisca and
Aquila, after Paul had moved from Thessalonica.

Place in the life of Paul and the Pauline letters

Second journey, first solo journey
Probably 48-50 with Philippians and Thessalonians
After split with Barnabas and alliance with Timothy
Galatia, Philippi, Thessalonica, Athens, Corinth
Before Jerusalem Council (and the apparent decision on
evangelizing the Jews and Gentiles with different approaches)
Acts says Paul spent 3 weeks and was chased out by the Jews—
but probably an inaccurate historical account. Paul probably spent

6
 much more time there; there was no Jewish community, so when
Paul fled, it was probably because the municipal authorities were
displeased with his teachings (the emphasis of the gospel message
on the poor) and his projections (the perousia).
Later in Corinth, Paul began to recognize that his house churches
would not necessarily continue on as he had taught; they needed
constant reminding; his time in Corinth may have led him to believe
that Corinth would be an excellent “base church” from which to
monitor the house churches

Why?
No apparent delegation with questions
Perhaps he was aware of problems or he may have just
anticipated based upon what had happened in Philippi and Galatia

Form of the Letters

Address, Thanksgiving, Apostolic Defense (presentation of
credentials), Ethical Exhortation, Prayer, Logistics, Conclusion

Relationship to Acts of the Apostles

Letters A and B?
Letter B is 1:1-2:12 and 4:3-5:28
Letter A is the rest
Tone, second address, some stylistic differences
Position in the bible

Co-Authors: Sylvanus and Timothy

Addressee—community, no specific person

Paul is obviously very pleased with this community and spends the first
half of the letter expressing praise and pleasure
Apparently he had been thrown out of Philippi (2:2)

Apostolic defense in Ltr B, 2:1-12. Paul is defending his apostolic

credentials by noting that his teachings, with the intervention of the Holy
Spirit have produced salutary effects upon the community. Paul notes that
he has worked among them (toiled….)

Anti-Semitism (anti-Jewish) 2:15—Christ killers

Logistics: Reference to failure in Athens, sends Timothy 3:1-2

Ethical Exhortations
1:1-5 Practical theology, not just preaching

7
 Chapter 4: contains two themes in exhortation
--sexuality—what does this mean? Is Paul the origin of what some
call the repressive sexual attitude of the Christian Church?
Paul, Pharisee/Jew, patriarchal, pro-creation, modesty—or is there
a narrower purpose?
--the immanence of the parousia—and its implications

Jews routinely believed that pagans used their cultic sessions as

opportunities for sexual orgies. (Romans, in turn, believed that
Christians consumed babies and young children who had been
sacrificed—the liturgical emphasis on sacrifice provided the fodder
for these beliefs.)
Reference to wives: some translations are “bodies” not “wives”;
consanguineous marriages (to protect estates); akatharsia, porneia
—two Greek words that have normally been translated as sexual
immorality—but actual according to JMOC, they are more probably
related to Judaic notions of being “unclean”—that is, not righteous,
not having performed the correct rituals to prepare oneself for
worship/sacrifice.
The Great Tension: Realized eschatology and practical theology:
while anticipating the Parousia (second coming), one needs to
address the ethical needs of community life/morality.

The Idealized Christian State: For Paul, sanctification in the Spirit,

moves one to a state where The Law is not necessary as one
moves from ego-centeredness to concern for others.

Remember: Paul is much more concerned about what people do

than how they think.

Creed?
1:9b-10
Perhaps the earliest creed of the Christian community

How about those who die before the second coming?

A pastoral re-assurance for those who remain
Prayers
Logistics
Conclusion

2 Thes
Written by Paul?
Note 2 Thes 3:17—“by my own hand”
To the same community, many of the same themes.

8
 Paul is obviously struggling with the notion of the apparent incongruity of
the “Realized Reign of God” and the “Future Reign of God”—after the
perousia. (Theologians sometimes refer to this as realized eschatology
and realizable eschatology.)

Form
Same three authors, follows Letter A and Letter B very closely
(some critics say too closely, obviously a forgery!!)

Status of the Parousia—False Prophets

It appears that a “false prophet” has told the Thes (in a letter purportedly
written by Paul himself that the parousia has occurred—and that the Thes
have been left out. Paul tries to provide a note on how to detect false
prophets

This is an issue which the early Church struggled with (see the Letters of
John). Some suggest that we are still struggling with the issue.

Contemporary Caveats (developed in connection with cults):

 If what is taught is manifestly inconsistent with the gospels
taken as a whole (or of the life of Jesus taken as a whole).
 If the teaching is entirely inconsistent with past practice,
popular teaching, or common sense.
 If the teaching cannot withstand open-air debate in
community.
 If the teaching is likely to do physical or mental harm to
individuals.

Part 2

Quick review:
--Paul is someone that we know enough about that we can identify with
him
--Paul’s belief systems, personality changed over his life—and his
theology developed—development and salvation history
--Role of Law (Torah) in the Gospels (Jesus) and Paul

 Historical Setting
 Pharisees
 Paul: Biographical
 Letter to the Galatians
Galatians is the tipping off point—within this letter we have virtually all of
Paul’s theology and ecclesiology.

Some Background on the Times:

9
 Tarsus one of the three most important scholarly (Greek rhetoric) centers
(also Alexandria and Athens),
a trading center (east-west, Rome all the way to India), grains, flax, coarse
cloth, felt (tents),
many were Roman citizens, a tax-free city
Paul’s parents were perhaps enslaved to a Roman citizen and being clever were
subsequently freed and given Roman citizenship, from which Paul would have
been able to claim citizenship later..

Galilee: rebellious reputation: is there a tie in with the Northern Kingdom?

(Assyrians conquered the Northern Kingdom before the pre-Babylonian exile, E
(Elohim, the name given to God by the Northern Kingdom) v. J. (Jahweh, the
name given to God by the Southern Kingdom—Judea), source in the OT,
pejoratives v. Jesus as a “Galilean”) [It is thought that Judeans “blamed” the fall
of Israel to the Babylonians on the fact that the northern Jews were inter-
marrying with the Assyrians—and adopting their gods—a breach of the
covenant.)
Paul was a Diaspora Jew, tied to Palestine; St Jerome says his parents
lived in Gischala (Galilee), present day Gish, about 35 miles northwest of
Nazareth

Roman deportations: Murphy-O’Connor lists four, including one about 4

BCE after a conquest (capital of the N Kingdom was destroyed by Romans,
inhabitants sold into slavery, ransom, confiscation—then a rebuilding); many
went to Tarsus, Cilicia—Pedias—via a great slave market in Cyprus. If his
parents were enslaved, they would likely have been freed after 7 years at about
age 40—Paul perhaps an adolescent at that time.

Messianism and Sectarianism It is easy to be careless in the use of the

word “Jew”—at the time of Jesus and Paul, Jew meant many things--
sectarianism: Masiah (Hebrew word for “to anoint”—brief history of concept: 1.
holy and set apart: Aaron—chief priests, 2. divinely sanctioned monarchy: David
—kings, 3. questions raised about the merger of the holy and the political:
prophetic period—pre-Babylonian exile—an enlightened king/priest who would
lead a just people)
From about 200 BCE, Wisdom and Apocalyptic literature began to
speculate about Messiah—political, priestly etc. Some of this material was
considered too late to be in the Hebrew Bible and the Jews treat it as
Apocryphal….not in Jewish canon. But, at any rate, by the beginning of the first
century CE, there was substantial discussion and debate about messianism in
Israel.
Socio-psychologists have formed theories about nations that were
conquered/enslaved for generations without any reasonable hope of being freed
from the external oppression: these people tend to retreat into theories of the
apocalypse (the end times when justice will reign)messianism?

10
 Macedonian-Greeks under Alexander, Alexander’s descendant generals,
and Romans had conquered and ruled Israel for many years. Israel experienced
only a brief period of nationhood after the Babylonian captivity until the conquest
of Alexander. So Israel had been in “captivity” without self-determination for a
long period.

At least four major sectarian groups have been identified as “active” in this
period: The Sadducees (the wealthy class that collaborated with the Romans in
the governance of Israel as a Roman province, intermarried with the Romans,
and dominated the High Priesthood of the Temple); the Essenes (a group of
middle-aged men—probably widowers or unmarried sons, who retreated into the
desert in protest against the usurpation of the high priesthood and developed a
new philosophy of Judaism and who were celibate); the Zealots (Galilean
Terrorists?—actually the Zealots were probably mostly countryside bandits
harassing the Roman rulers while a subset, the “Zicarii” were knife-wielding
assassins in Jerusalem and other larger towns), and the Pharisees (a relatively
small group of men whose origin seems to be about the time of the Maccabees,
who were politically active rabbi-like men). Paul declares himself to be a
Pharisee. (This material about specific sectarian ideas and beliefs is derived
from Jacob Neusner, a great, but controversial Scripture scholar.)

Pharisees:
Law: Torah and Halakah (oral tradition) dictate a full lifestyle, not just
rituals for sacrifice in the Temple—which became the norm for Christianity
Paul never criticizes the principles of the Pharisees, only the practice
Paul describes himself as one of the best—rose to the top of the class,
probably required both diligent study and a certain degree of fanaticism—over a
period of 15-20 years—probably supported by his parents or other patrons of
scholarship. (Note later concern about the Jerusalem collection 1 Cor 9:11—
Paul recognizes that a community needed to support scholars as well as the poor
—a contemporary issue in Israel.)
There is an ongoing academic debate within Judaism as to whether the
Pharisees became the first “tannaitic” rabbis. The earliest evidence for this is the
Mishnah (probably written at the beginning of the 3 rd century, in Babylon, in
exile). If so, the Pharisees were in a sense the godfathers of both Modern (after
the Second Temple) Judaism and Christianity.

Paul—the Man, based upon scriptural evidence

Both Acts and the Letters provide significant details. Most know the story of the
early persecution of Christian Jews by Paul, his radical conversion on the Road
to Damascus, his retreat in Arabia (when he experienced visions and an
epiphany), his presentation of himself to the Jewish Christian community at
Antioch—which commissioned him as a missionary with Barnabas as a
companion. His first missionary year(s?) were under the auspices of Antioch.

11
But apparently there was a breakup with Antioch (not described in Scripture), and
in his next letter, Paul feels he needs to justify his position as an evangelizer to
his audience. Thus, we gain significant biographical material. At any rate, as a
result of the epiphany, Paul insists that he was commissioned as an
apostle (not just a disciple) by Jesus himself and that his knowledge of the
life of Jesus comes not from the apostles, but from Jesus himself.

Pauline heritage: Phil 3:4-5; 2 Cor 11:21-22; Gal, see below.

Circumcised—this means he was a Jew—although many Semitic
peoples practiced circumcision (for men and women), the Greeks did not.
(Nudity was not a cultural taboo among the Greeks, athletic games were in the
nude—thus a Semite would be “set apart” in a Hellenist society if he were
circumcised.)
As to the law a Pharisee—a member of the largest and most popular
sect of Judaism at this time, which believed in piety and defined righteousness as
conduct inside and outside the temple, probably dating from the Maccabee time.
Born of Hebrews—his parents were Jewish—why would he say this?
Diaspora (the Jewish community living outside Israel—developed over many
centuries as the Jews were repeatedly conquered and exiled—some lost much of
their Jewish cultic status within a generation but adopted new cultic practices,
adopting local customs.)
A Jew of the tribe of Benjamin (which originally had jurisdiction over
Jerusalem). (OT: Saul as first king of the Jews, a Benjaminite)
Speaking Hebrew—although Jews spoke Aramaic, calling oneself a Jew,
probably means Hebrew speaking Acts 22:2
Paul likely spoke Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek—as did his parents.
Paul’s command of Greek was impressive— perhaps the “best” Greek in
the NT, vocabulary, sentence structure, use of rhetoric—all signs of a thorough
Greek education.
Age: from Philemon, v 9, slave Onesimus, suggests age between 63 and
70 in 53 ce when letter was written. From this we can postulate that Paul was
born around 6-7 bce, contemporary of Jesus—perhaps slightly older. JMOC
contains a precise dating and chronology which is somewhat conjectural, but
reasonable. Paul himself provides only one key fact in his letters which help us to
date his life: his escape from Damascus when it was ruled by Aretas IV, the king
of the Nabateans in 38ce. (Aretas died the next year.) So we know that Paul’s
first visit to Jerusalem as a Christian (mentioned in Galatians) occurred in the fall
of 37ce. Acts also provides some dating: a reference to Gallio, whose reign
began in Jul 51ce and ended only a few months later. Also mentioned is the edict
of Claudius. Thus, any reference to Gallio is critical. We can thus show Paul
was in Corinth until the spring of 51ce. .
Trade?: Many Jewish men (particularly Pharisees) never learned a trade.
Paul describes trade (work with hands) as demeaning throughout his letters), but
he apparently worked at sail making or tent making in Corinth. (Contrast with
Jesus: during his ministry, he is never described as having a trade—he

12
apparently lived on the contributions of his disciples and their friends; Paul did
not.)
Education: Quotes Hebrew Bible 90 times, plus many more allusions.
For Paul, scripture lives in the present and can be reinterpreted. As a
Pharisee he looked both at Torah and Tradition of the Fathers.
Uses Greek rhetoric: use of “personal defense method” 2 Cor 10:10
and plays down his skills (when one who is so obviously accomplished plays
down his skills, he is sure of himself--irony) 1 Cor 2:1
Education at this time suggests financial security—parents were probably
middle class or better by the time he was a teen.
Physical Appearance: Carravagio, The Conversion of St Paul—tall,
curly haired, blond, muscled Roman soldier on white horse with polished armor.
However, the Non-Canonical Gospel of Paul: small and short (grounded), low
brows (focused), touching brows (magnanimous), bow-legged (substantial, solid),
hook-nosed. Bearded, dark skinned
Physical Disability? Did Paul have a physical disability? 2 Cor 12:7 (“a
thorn in the flesh was given to me”); Gal 4:15 (“if it had been possible, you would
have torn out your eyes and given them to me”); Gal 5:17 (“bear the marks of
Jesus on my body.”). Some have argued epilepsy or blindness in one eye.
Recent (Borg) theory: Tarsus was known to have been malarial—did Paul have
malaria?—many preach that the “thorn” was a psychological one (opposition in
the churches he founded, failure of the churches to flourish to the extent he might
have wished; failure of the communities to follow his expectations in their
conduct). Few seriously argue today that Paul practiced self-flagellation (which
was inimical to Semitic consciousness). There seems to be a problem in every
community which Paul forms—is this his penalty? His ailment?
Missions: Paul does not divide his ministry into missions. Most biblical
scholars detect four missionary journeys. The first was under the auspices of the
Antioch Christian Jewish community with Barnabas—visiting Turkey, Cyprus and
parts of the Balkan peninsula. Paul made two more journeys (at least) on his
own and with various companions—reaching farther afield each time. These
were interspersed with at least two visits to the Jerusalem Church. His final
journey (probably in chains) was to Rome. There is dispute as to whether he
actually visited France and/or Spain.

Paul’s Letter to the Galatians: What does it tell us about Paul?*

First full statement of Paul’s theology
The clash of two theologies: Jerusalem and Gentile—with the community of
Antioch at the epicenter

Biographical
1:1 an apostle not from human beingsis this a proclamation of his
epiphany conversion? Many think so. He is telling us that he didn’t “learn” the
gospel from the apostles in Jerusalem, and therefore he is entitled to teach
differently. It also establishes his independence of the authority of Jerusalem,

13
and by implication the authority of Antioch, which has become a “satellite” of
Jerusalem.
1.4 first declaration of redemptive theology
1:6-9 only one gospellack of tolerance. Paul is very single-minded. He is not
willing to accept any accommodation with Judaism, and certainly not with the
Roman and Greek paganism of the time.
Personal declaration of his faith journey
1:10 ready to risk human favor for Christtotal commitment to gospel. Paul
probably recognized that his preaching was harsh and difficult. He was not out to
win friends.
1:11 is Paul referring to his personal epiphany or is there more?
1:13 admits persecution of Christians “beyond measure” “to destroy” This is
Paul’s personal admission that he persecuted. It parallels similar statements in
Acts and leads us the question of why? In the 40’s, Christians considered
themselves a sect of Judaism and most did not consider them a threat. Why did
Paul think so? (By the 80’s, most Jews saw the threat.)
1:14 top of his class as a Pharisee/student of Torah. Paul did not do anything
in part. He is proclaiming himself a star student.
1:17 went to Arabia and Damascus after his conversion This is his
confirmation of the chronology in Acts. “Arabia” was an area generally east of
Syria, the land of the Nabateans, who later were “awarded” control of Damascus,
as their capital, by the Romans. This statement helps us to identify an important
point in Paul’s chronology.
1:18 after 3 yrs, went to Jerusalem to meet Cephas for 15 days—first journey
to Jerusalem after his conversion. Cephas is of course Peter. At this time it
appears that Peter and James were in charge of the Jerusalem church. James
was probably at the top. The Problem of James: Ossuary. Mary’s virginity.
There was an Apostle named James. Mt describes Jesus rejection of his family.
Acts describes the election of a successor for Judas. How did James become
the leader of the Jerusalem community—and was he the brother of Jesus?
Tradition has it that James was martyred, possibly around 67, by being hurled
from the walls of Jerusalem.
Back: He is emphasizing the shortness of the visit—only 15 days. He
obviously could not have absorbed the gospel in that time and so it points back to
his statement that Jesus revealed the gospel to him.
1:21 then to Cilicia and Syria. Cilicia is the territory of Tarsus, so perhaps he
returned home. He then engages in a life of ministry.
2:1 14 years later (49?)—the problem—obviously letter was written after the
second visit, but tradition has the Jerusalem Council as being in 51 —
it really does not matter, it was a turning point in Christian histor y. He returns to
Jerusalem with Barnabas and Titus. This is probably as part of a delegation from
Antioch, sent to Jerusalem to resolve some issues within the community—mostly
relating to whether a Gentile had to become a Jew and act like a Jew before he
could become a Christian.

14
2:2 circumspect: consultation to avoid scandal or because he was unsure of
himself? This verse suggests that Paul did not march triumphantly into
Jerusalem. Why?
2:3 he had not required Titus, a Greek, to be circumcised although very close
to him. (This tends to disprove contentions that Paul opposed circumcision to
make his job easier among the Gentiles since adult circumcision was painful,
dangerous, and embarrassing—and to require it would certainly reduce the
number of those who would opt for Christianity.)
2:5-9 Paul’s version of the conference: he wins, is = to Peter, but with a different
missionary goal. He becomes the apostle to the Gentiles, while Peter remains in
Jerusalem—but apparently Peter goes (or is sent) soon thereafter to seek what is
going on in Antioch. Brown: a sizable part of the Jerusalem community did not
agree—and they may have been the “Judaizers” whom Paul refers to in
subsequent letters.
2:11 Paul challenges Peter’s hypocrisy (Judaic dietary, sanitary rules)—
suggests that Paul did not keep the Judaic dietary or cleanliness laws since he
also lived among the Gentiles. (It appears that Jesus and the apostles did not do
so either from the synoptic gospels) (This passage also points to the apparent
hierarchy where James was over Peter since Peter apparently ate with the
Gentiles, which was forbidden by Levitic law, until James arrives and then he
changes his conduct.)
2:15 Justification: what does it mean? Adherence to Torah rules with attendant
good works or acceptance of Jesus
3:1 “stupid Galatians”somewhat lacking in pastoral skills, capable of angry
outbursts; fiery, man who “claimed” his communities.
4:13 He had become ill during a missionary journey and the Galatians nursed
him back to health while he preached to them. This suggests his goal was not
Galatia, but somewhere else.
4 Generous quotation of Scripture and use of rabbinic argumentative style—
which was not Aristotilian. Demonstrates his success at the rabbinical school in
Jerusalem. This passage leads some to think that the letter was really
addressed to the Judaizers (these are Jews, from Antioch, most likely, who held
to the conservative “Jew first” line and were trying to undermine Paul’s influence
with his community in Galatia. They would have understood the OT scripture—
particularly because he omits reference to Sarah and Isaac whereas, it is us
unlikely that the Galatians would not have.
5:11 “large letters” in my own hand Paul is making point that he is personally
doing the writing and that he is serious; presumably in the original manuscript,
Paul’s postscript was larger.
5:17 “bear the marks of Jesus on my body”stigmata, or other physical
ailments derived from his labors? It seems unlikely that Paul would have
exhibited the stigmata this early in his mission, if ever, so generally, it is assumed
he is talking about general aches and pains of intense missionary activity. 1
1
Note we are talking about Paul the man, not Paul’s message. This letter may have been written
in 53 and is therefore recounting some history of Paul’s relationship with the Jerusalem
community. Some think this was the earliest letter, and perhaps the earliest writing in the NT. It
seems that this letter or 1 Thes holds that title—as both were likely written in the winter of 53-54

15
Tentative Conclusions: Greek speaking rhetorician, with study of Torah; his
parents were probably successful business folk who balanced devout Judaism
with a Greek lifestyle that furthered their business interests. (The Greeks were
not anti-Semitic.) Paul was the classic example of a child born of an identifiable
ethnic group, which fled persecution to a very different area when he was a child.
His education and upbringing attempted to retain his ethnic heritage while
providing the education and skills necessary to survive in a new environment.
There were two Pauls: Hellenist and Pharisaic Jew--both contributed to his
Christian adult character. He could live in either world, apparently quite
successfully. He was zealous, one-minded, well-educated and somewhat self-
centered. He was a visionary and driven, but somewhat lacking in administrative
skills: a creator, not a sustainer.

Part 3 Paul’s Theological Development: Implications for Christian History 2

 Attitude Toward Jewish Law (Anti-nomialism)

 Persecution and the Conversion Experience
 Did Paul Know Jesus? (Deliberate Patterning of his Life)
 Paul the Apostle
 Celibacy
 Development in the Letters vs. Development by the Church

Jewish Law.
How does Paul feel about the law (Torah)? As a Pharisaic Jew, Paul
would have great respect for the Torah (the law) and righteousness (following the
law) would be a prime attribute. Also as a Pharisee, Paul would have extended
the law outside the Temple and would have seen Tradition as part of the Law.
Yet, by the end of his career, Paul was anti-nomial, that is, highly suspect of the
law, particularly when it excused full conversion to the way of Jesus of Nazareth..
This attitude is seen by many as the basis for Martin Luther’s challenge to the
authority of Rome. Love over law. The Great Commandment and the pre-
eminence of a well-formed conscience over adherence to hundreds of
rules. This position develops over time in the letters: his experience in Tarsus as
a teen suggests tension (which many scholars detect in his letters), ambiguity—
Torah legalism vs Greek teen rebellion; then as a Pharisee when he adopts a
strict view of the law and even expands the concept of the law. In his early
letters, he seems tolerant of the law—permitting Gentiles and Jews to mingle in
community, and then in his later letters when he sees law as potentially

from Ephesus, probably within a few weeks of each other. (See Jerome Murphy-O’Connor and
Joseph Fitzmyer, in New Jerome Biblical Commentary, for details on the two views of which
came first.)
2
Remember: in order to detect development of theology within the Pauline Letters, it is important
to “reorder” the letters to the order in which they were likely written and to distinguish between
letters written by Paul or under his tutelage and those attributed to him after his death.

16
damaging personal and communal development (radically anti-nomial—
particularly after the Jerusalem Conference—his second visit to meet with the
apostolic community).
--as a Pharisee (and a rigidly adherent one—as Paul claims to be in his
early letters), he would have had strong views on eating, washing, even
associating with those who weren’t comparably observant—but later in life, Paul
permits consumption of food previously offered in pagan sacrifice (provided it
doesn’t scandalize), dines with non-Jews, and even argues that circumcision is
not a prerequisite to being a Christian.

Paul’s Antinomialism
Jesus and the Law If we look at the Gospels, we see that, while in some cases,
Jesus seems to go beyond the Law, in requiring more in the way of internal
conversion, he does not specifically abrogate the Law in words—although his
conduct suggests that he did not keep some of the detailed rules (purity, dietary,
Sabbath). The 700 plus laws of the Torah, when categorized fall into two lists:
those involving daily physical conduct (dietary, sanitary, special rules on lifestyle
such as cutting hair, what clothes to wear (no mixing of fabrics)—which identify a
Jew, and others dealing with ethics (don’t lie, don’t kill, don’t steal, don’t engage
in sexual impurity) deal with conduct. Neither Jesus nor Paul abrogates the
latter. This is a serious issue for Paul. It had both practical and theological
implications: circumcision and dietary laws. The circumcision requirement would
have eliminated many conversions. The dietary laws would have significantly
hindered community formation. Paul finds support for his relaxation of the Law in
the life of Jesus.

Paul recognizes that people who are “of the law” cannot live side by side with
those who are not. Law corrupts, it is the easy way. If you know a specific rule,
you can change your conduct to meet the requirements of the rule without an
internal conversion. So he becomes radically antinomial. People of the Law
cannot live side by side with those who are not of the Law. The Law will creep in
and take over. Paul abandons completely the Pharisaic legalism and begins to
focus on “conversion.” Some practical implications:
1. Paul appears to disagree with Jesus: prohibition of divorce, but see: 1 Cor
7:10, a teacher-evangelist need not earn a living, but see: 1 Cor 7:15; 9:15-18;
Paul’s position on the Law gives him the “authority” to abrogate an explicit
statement of Jesus.
2. Paul does not again command his churches on a matter of policy or conduct
—although he does make firm administrative decisions. See 1 Cor 7:5; 2 Cor 8:7
where he commands, then corrects himself; in Philemon 8-9a where he explicitly
states he could command, but chooses to recommend instead).
3. Radical idealism of community replacing the “rule of law” becomes Pauline
theology. Scandal becomes an important sin. Community is the highest goal
and test of conduct. All freedom is in community.

17
This represents a major change in Paul’s theology (post-Antioch). From this
point on, Paul apparently believes firmly that Christians are not sectarian Jews,
but followers of Jesus. He doesn’t abandon his Semitic ways, but he no longer
feels that the Law is compatible with the teachings of Jesus.

Paul reinvents himself as an apostle of Jesus Christ (not of Antioch or

Jerusalem). He goes to his friendly Galatia north of the Lycos valley for some
rest and recuperation (and wound-licking and rethinking).

Jerusalem
Probably went for first time in late teens- 15 ce—perhaps a pilgrimage via
Antioch, Jewish identity was reinforced, public works were impressive: Caesarea,
temple (larger than anything in Rome), aqueducts. (Some have suggested that
Paul’s parents sent him to Jerusalem to reinforce his Jewish identity—to Torah
school--which was challenged in cosmopolitan Tarsus, or perhaps to further their
business interests—although Paul’s presence in the Torah school would not
have left time for business.)
He becomes a Pharisee: Phil 3:5 (Acts 23:6—parental Pharisaism is
probably not correct as there were few Pharisees in diaspora—difficulty of
keeping the law—particularly the dietary rules—although they may have been
Pharisee partisans before their departure from Gischala. Pharisaic views on
the temple and the need to maintain the principles of righteousness
outside the temple would stand well with a diaspora people. Modern day
Jewish scholars credit the Pharisaic view of Jewish piety outside the Temple as a
significant factor in the survival of Judaism after the destruction of the Second
Temple in 70 CE). Others (Jacob Neusner) consider the Pharisees to be the first
“rabbis”—in the contemporary sense.
--Paul’s early time in Jerusalem reinforced the Pharisaic Judaism
(which was probably the view of his father) and he adapted his life to being a
“good Pharisee”—which seems to have replaced the tolerance and secularism of
the Greek education he had had up to that time. Consider the implications for a
developing teen.

Paul and Celibacy (an example of contextualization)

Commonly expected that men would marry—abstinence from sex only
when engaged in worship; Gen 1:28: be fruitful
Did Paul marry? Did he have children?
Essenes and celibacy: middle aged widowers, extended
worship=extended abstinence
Role of Stoicism and Gnosticism (two prevailing philosophies which may
have appeal to Pauline communities: Stoicism (no strong attachments to life—
including a spouse and children; Gnosticism (dualism of mind/body meant that
what the body did was irrelevant—some suggested daily sex with different
partners every day, but no offspring or marriage/marital love). Paul seems to
respond in Gal and Thes.

18
 Paul never speaks about his family—although Acts refers to a sister “in
Jerusalem.”
Many theories, no hard evidence on any of it—which means using Paul as
the source for a preference for celibacy is problematic. Pauline theology is not
the basis for priestly celibacy in the RC Church. (Timothy) For some time, the
Judaic priesthood may have been—but we now know a good deal about this as
well. The result of practical issues in the later life of the church.

The only reference in Paul to his aversion to marriage is in 1 Cor 8. (If you can’t
be celibate and you will “play around” because of the weakness of your flesh,
then it is best that you marry.) But put this in the context of some of the most
beautiful language in the Bible relating to love and how love forms a personality
and conduct.

Did Paul know Jesus in Jerusalem?

Paul was likely to have been there about 15-33 CE.
Jesus public ministry was in late 20s; crucified in April 30 (April 7, 30!!—
this is deduced from the date of Passover in 30 by JMOC.)
How long did Jesus stay in Jerusalem? Matt, Luke and Mark vs. John (1-
3 years)
2 Cor 5:16 Paul says he “knew him in the flesh”; Jesus mission was
considered a failure among pious Jews so why bother—Pharisaic use in the NT
as foes of the followers of the Way may be a code word for confrontation with
authority—the Sadducees—see Raymond Brown, or it may be metaphoric and
not a continuous confrontation.
Rabbi Gamaliel I at about this time: keep away from the Nazarenes: either
they are “of men” and will fail or “of God” and we don’t want to be seen as
opposing a movement of God. (Gamaliel may have been Paul’s Torah mentor.)
Paul seems to be in a minority as a Pharisee who persecuted Christians—
it is not clear why Paul persecuted Christians. (In fact the whole question of early
persecution of Christians is hotly debated today.)

Why did Paul persecute? Did he try to end the “foolishness” of the Messiah
talk.
Some speculation about what Paul may have thought:
1. Christians were in the synagogue and were proclaiming the Messiah
—so there was an overlap of the time of the Law and the time of the Messiah.
(An intellectual violation of linear history broken by the appearance of the
messiah—a problem for a Pharisee.)
2. Paul: either-or, not both-and—he may have perceived that the
Christians were saying that the Law was no longer relevant. Saved by the Law
or saved by Jesus?
3. For Paul, Jesus did not fit the messiah of the Pharisees

Acts is different: Acts 9: Paul is official prosecutor of the Christians for

the Sanhedrin, with authority to do so; Paul himself describes his persecution as

19
personal, a matter of personal zeal: Phil 3:5-6 and Gal 1:14. We have no
independent historical evidence that the Sanhedrin had power outside Israel or
that they persecuted the Christians—at least in this period—and it is unlikely that
they did so. Luke may be embellishing the story to shift some of the blame to the
Jewish hierarchy.3

Is Luke incorrect? We must remember that Luke is building up the “bad

guy” aspect of Paul to enhance the contrast of his post conversion conduct.

Paul’s Conversion Experience

Acts 9: portrays Paul on the way to Damascus with an official mission—
but High Priest authority did not extend to another Roman province
Jesus appears to him: he is struck dumb and blind; none of the onlookers
see Jesus, but they hear the words and witness Paul’s reaction.
Paul himself talks about his conversion experience and confirms the basic
facts of Luke’s account in Acts.
1 Cor 9:1 “Have I not seen Jesus our Lord?”
1 Cor 15:8 “He appeared to me.”
Speculation on what may have happened: Paul was on a journey
(journeys were perilous) and was hurt by an accident or a highwayman. He was
befriended and nursed by individuals who had escaped from Jerusalem after the
execution of Jesus of Nazareth. At this turning point in his life, he began to
reconsider his belief systems. He goes on a long “retreat” and experiences a
personal conversion/transformation.
But there is little doubt that Paul experienced an epiphanic
conversion (whether sudden or not) and became convinced that the
Christian Jews who had begun to talk about the life of Jesus had a
philosophy of life that was worth studying and, ultimately, following.

Post Resurrection Experiences

Biblical Scholars have tried to characterize and compare the post-
Resurrection experiences: 30-40 incidents, possibly involving almost 400
persons; Jesus only appeared to those who had believed in him—his disciples
and their contacts—except for Paul, the only NT appearance to a non-
disciple.
Recognition: The experiences are all similar: First: non-recognition;
Second: Jesus takes initiative, and gives a sign of his identity; Third: recognition.
Fourth: Jesus confers a task.
Some examples: Jn 20:11-16 (probably the oldest, involving a woman);
also Emmaus.
3
In recent years, Judaic scholars have focused on the governing role and responsibility of the
high priest, the Sadducees and the Sanhedrin during the 1st Century. There are three sources:
the Christian writings (most notably the Gospels and Acts), the writings of Flavius Josephus
(probably written after the Gospels and by a curiously suspicious person, and the Mishnah
(rabbinic compilations from 2nd-3rd C in Babylonia). They do not produce identical (or even very
similar) historical evidence—and so the debate continues. There is far more “theorizing” than
“reporting of evidence.”

20
 Does Cor 15:8 fit this model? Probably too brief a mention by Paul to fill in
all the details of a typical post-resurrection experience; but Acts does fit the
pattern—except that Paul was not a believer.

What could Paul Know about Jesus—apart from the appearance

experience?
1. Josephus in his book Antiquities: refers to Jesus as a teacher and
miracle worker (faith healer), crucified under Pontius Pilate on charge of Jewish
treason, believed to be messiah by his followers. (Paul probably never had
access to this.)
2. Critical of the Law, above the Law?
3. Gossip about resurrection (Pharisees alone among the Jewish sects at
that time preached a bodily resurrection)—monistic anthropology (soul needs
body) a belief of Pharisees in distinction to dualistic anthropology (body and soul)
—more common Jewish belief: soul can survive without the body.

Conversion/ Knowledge about Jesus

When Paul encounters Jesus, risen from the dead, this means that God
guarantees everything that Jesus has said—and this is the point of radical
conversion—a complete turning around, a crisis: Lord, thus Son of God and
thus Messiah
(In HB, “son of God” is not genetic, it is earned by total compliance with
the Law—so something more was needed for Paul to attribute to Jesus literal
son-of-Godness.)

Paul’s either-or mentality means he must make a 180 turn—zeal follows zeal;
Law is meaningless, only Jesus saves, salvation for all is now possible—how
long did it take for Paul to come to these conclusions?
--This is the “born-again” conversion that is so prevalent in Christianity—a
radical conversion, a radical life change—that changes everything

Arabia: Retreat to Reconsider, and a time to develop a trade

Paul goes to Arabia (area south of Damascus, land of the Nabateans, not
friendly to Jews. Was he considered to be an agent provocateur? He then
spends about 3 years in Damascus. Paul needs to escape from Damascus,
probably in 37, when the Nabateans are “given” Damascus by Caligula (Herod)
and arrive in force to make it their capital.
During this period, Paul probably needed to learn a trade. Remember that
Paul, as a young scholar would not have worked with his hands; it is somewhat
logical to think that post-conversion, his family may have disinherited him or at
least reduced their support when his studies ended; he needed to work. He may
have learned some tent making skills at this time, but we cannot be certain.
Evidence that he worked with his hands: 1 Thess 2:9; 2 Thess 3:7-9; 1 Cor 6:12
—he worked with his hands; 1 Cor 4:12; 2 Cor 6:5 and 11:23-27—unfair

21
hardship; 1 Cor 9:19—slavish; and 2 Cor 1:11—demeaning. The tent maker
label comes from Luke in Acts 18:3

When the Nabateans take over Damascus, Paul must flee again (over the wall in
a basket?). Paul apparently saw his preaching to the poor and downtrodden as a
threat to Nabatean authority and may have had a bit of a persecution complex—
at any rate, he leaves.

The First Jerusalem Visit

Paul then goes to Jerusalem for a brief visit (15 days?) with Peter and James
(Gal 1:18)—his second trip to Jerusalem (the first was the extended period of his
studies). Peter has been preaching for about 7 years and the Christian story is
beginning to take creedal shape in his mind—and preaching. Our best guess is
that the oral stories about Jesus have begun circulating in the Christian
communities—and given the storytelling techniques of the time, the stories are
told by wandering evangelists, memorized, and probably changed slightly with
some tellings—perhaps resulting in community-specific stories. By the time Paul
begins his missions, there were probably only a few hundred Christians.

(Mark may begin his gospel from those stories within the next ten years. The
evangelists likely made much use of the oral tradition of storytelling when they
began composing their gospels.)

The Earthly, Historical Jesus

By this time, Paul knows a great deal about the historical Jesus but he wants
more, and he wants it from the source—key to Paul. Here are some of the
reasons that point to Paul’s knowledge of Jesus:
1. Jesus is the man, the model for ethical behavior imitation possible—Paul
tells his listeners, follow me as I follow Jesus (1 Cor 11:1).
2. References to specific facts: Note Paul’s allusions to specific facts about
Jesus that Paul obviously knew: Jewish (Gal 4:4); Davidic family (Rom 1:3);
several married brothers (1 Cor 9:5), one is James (Gal 1:19), celebrated a last
meal (1 Cor 11: 23-25); steadfastness, total commitment; gentleness and
kindness (2 Cor 10:1; Phil 1:8), needs of others always first (Rom 15:3).
3. Quotes: Paul quotes Jesus only 3x:
divorce 1 Cor 10-11;
support for evangelizers 1 Cor 9:14 and
the institution of the Eucharist 1 Cor 11: 23-25.
4. Use of “Insider” Language: Paul assumes his audience knows Jesus in
writing his letters. The Letters were written after his evangelization efforts—and
there were other evangelizers (Spiritists, Judaizers et al)
5. Comparisons with Jesus:
Paul deliberately sought parallels between his life and that of Jesus—he
was modeling his life on the life of Jesus, as he understood it—the pattern for
Christian conversion for the rest of Christian history.

22
 Note the Categories of Potential Parallel:
 Jewish, ties to Davidic line,
 Galilean—or at least “from” Galilee,
 age contemporaries,
 flight/exile in early life,
 students of the Torah,
 change of temporary “profession”,
 radical turn from Law (this is one of the most debated issues of Gospel
scholarship: did Jesus abolish the Law, change the Law, or make the Law
subservient to the Great Commandment of Love,
 manual labor (Paul the tentmaker) (Jesus the carpenter)
 Celibacy—but reliance on women as disciples

Part 4: Paul and Practical Theology

 Redemption Theology
 Community, Sin, Church: and the Body of Christ
 Christology
 Paul, the Missionary: Church Builder
 --Congregational
 --Reliance on both women and men
 --Practical, not dogmatic: adaptive

Redemption Theology

1. Redemption Theology (sometimes called, “atonement theology”) is a fundamental

concept in Christianity: the crucifixion and death of Jesus, the man and Son of God,
redeemed humankind from the consequences of the Sin of Adam and restored the
relationship between God and God’s creation.

2. Christian Origins:
--Letters of Paul—from the very first (Galatians and developed over his lifetime)
--Developed in the Gospels (development can be seen by looking at the theology
of the Gospels in the order in which they were likely written—culminating with the
definitive statement in the Gospel of John)
--Refined by theologians through the ages

3. Context of Sacrifice:
Paul (and Jesus) both lived during a time when sacrifice to God (Yahweh, pagan
gods) was pervasive: all observant male Jews were expected to sacrifice periodically (at
least annually) at the Temple in Jerusalem. Sacrifice was in atonement for sin or to
request favor. In Israel, sacrifice for the sins (or good) of the people at large was also
practiced. Jews were not alone—virtually all people at that time and most prior to that
time practiced sacrifice. One of the oldest stories in the Jewish Bible, the story of
Abraham and Isaac, suggests that sacrifice (even of a first born child) was practiced in
earlier times.
Sources: Roland deVaux (Judaeo-Christian context), Joseph Campbell (secular)

23
 Basic notion: give back, give up something tangible and of value to the offeror
(presumably there is no value to God since God created and possesses all things).
Proportionality: the sacrifice must be proportional to the sin (for which
forgiveness is requested) or the favor—based on intrinsic value and the value to the
offeror (a wealthy person was expected to sacrifice something of greater value).
Recognition that God is on a different level—God doesn’t need anything; in a
sense, God owns everything—so the sacrifice deprives the offeror—focus on the offeror,
giver.

Paul and the Jerusalem Christians were Jews—and they lived in the context of
sacrifice in the Temple—sacrifice was part of their lives

4. The Death of Jesus in Paul’s Context:

Paul needs to deal with a difficult conundrum:
Jesus is God
Jesus is crucified--that degrading, horrible, gruesome reality—and it was done by
humans to God
Jesus is the Messiah—but he is not the Messiah projected in the Jewish Bible
and he does not bring about the anticipated climax of the coming of the Messiah which
has been anticipated by Jews for generations (the liberation of Israel and the ushering in
of the Reign of God on earth—which many saw as the restoration of the reign of David—
the Kingdom of Israel—which is the focus of so much nostalgia).
There is no precedent in Roman or Greek religion for a sacrifice of a god—
although there are hero stories in which humans give their lives for others or a cause
and are subsequently deified.
Those hearing Paul had no context for the crucifixion of Jesus.

5. Why?
It must be because God willed it—which means Jesus willed it (or at least
permitted it to happen to him).
Paul believes this and it is central to his faith and teaching.
(The Gospel authors also get it, but gradually, culminating in John where Jesus
seems to direct all the action around his crucifixion.)

6. But, why?
Sacrifice was needed.
Ultimate sacrifice for the ultimate sin of Adam
Redemption Theology

7. Some issues of theological inquiry (over the ages to today):

What is the sin of Adam that required such a great sacrifice?
Disobedience? Pride? Selfishness? Weakness (in the face of
temptation)?
Redemptive theology, as often preached, presupposes that humankind is prone
to sin, that sin is built in to human nature—and this seems to be a contradiction of the
notion that God created all in God’s likeness—so obviously a proclivity to sin is not a
logical possibility. But we all know human nature involves varying degrees of built in
selfishness—it is basic to survival.
Some see the role of evolution: humankind (all life) is essentially self-ish and
needs to be conditioned (evolve) to a recognition that survival and flourishing requires
community (the evolutionary concept).

24
 Attempt to transform the negativity of sacrifice (the crucifixion) to a notion of
ultimate love, the ultimate demonstration that, despite everything, it is possible for one to
love: Dickens—“It is a far far better thing I have done…….”—giving up one’s own life for
than of another. These theologians would have us focus on Jesus—the one crucified for
the sake of fellow human-beings, and the love which this suggests, rather than on the
crucifixion itself.
Sacrifice sublimated into charity: in the Jewish context, after the destruction of
the Temple (around 70), sacrifice is sublimated to almsgiving (charity).

Social Conditioning and Physical Determinism: the contemporary notion that

context and challenge are determinants of conduct and personal philosophy.
This concept, which underlies much of “practical theology”, suggests that Paul’s
theology grows out of his experience—personal and in the Christian communities
that he founded during his evangelical travels. This style of theology places less
emphasis on inspiration (although inspiration clearly remains a critical aspect)
than on experience. Contemporary Pauline biographers tend to use this
technique.

Personal Experience as Formative of Belief Systems

Some practical aspects of life that impacted formation of Paul theology. 4
Without going into Paul’s biography in detail, let’s consider a few aspects of his
life that might be helpful in understanding Paul’s practical theology:

Paul in Community: Paul adopts the role of charity as a central theme of his
letters (and the communities he founds). And for Paul charity and love are
synonyms. Paul also begins the inquiry into the role of community—what role
does community play in avoiding sin? Can the community itself sin? Or is it just
an envelope that causes its members to avoid sin and do love?
Paul initially started life as a privileged son with a good education (probably first
in a Greek gymnasium which had both Greek and Jewish boys as students) and
then the companionship of Pharisaic brothers when he studied with a rabbinic
mentor in Jerusalem. He had an excellent support system and felt part of a
family/community. He may have seen the Christians (then called “Followers of
the Way”) as “another sect” within Judaism which threatened the order that
Pharisaic Judaism promised—even in times of occupation. Therefore, he sought
to persecute them; or at least to reduce their influence and growth.

After his conversion, Paul was called to evangelize—and he needed to subject

himself to the world, to support himself, to stand for himself every day. This was
a shock. Imagine the psychological impact of losing a support system at the
same time that your lifelong belief systems were being called into question .
Paul’s conversion was a solitary experience—and he retreated to “get his stuff in
order.” He emerged from this period sure of his mission and confident.

4
It is quite apparent from the letters, when read in order in which they were likely written that
there is significant development; if we start with Romans, we miss the development.

25
His missionary life also had life-lessons:
--Travels on the road (marauders, requisitioning, “the Zealots” (we would
call them terrorists today), need friends, caravans); despite his commitment
to the goodness in people (as taught by Jesus),
--his experience on the road convinces him that society forces people into
sin (Sin is social sin: a social force that forces people to certain conducts or
conversely, if the community is a force for good, it can improve its members.)
Thus Paul has a very early concept of the sin of the world, “original sin”—this
culminates in Romans, see 3:9.
--For Paul, sin is not “neutral” it is a real power that draws people. Paul’s
experience is projected into his ministry and philosophy. Sin is real; sin is
social; there is an evil force in the world (devil). Paul’s anthropological
view of humankind is negative—we must overcome a tendency to sin
because our society has conditioned us to sin. Out of this experience,
Paul’s sense of community is born. In community we can reduce the draw
of sin, the impact of sin. Jesus is portrayed in the Gospels as traveling with his
disciples—not alone, but Paul rarely has more than one traveling companion.
His experiences on the road and his physical afflictions caused him to consider
the community support system as vital to both personal survival and salvation
(i.e. avoidance of sin).
For Paul community is critical—it helps us to avoid evil temptation, it helps
us to understand the needs of others, it supplies our deficiencies—and as we will
see later, violation of community becomes a major sin—Judaic cultic laws and
scandal, marriage and divorce.
Paul invents the notion of the Body of Christ—that Christian communities
are capable of functioning as the continuing presence of Jesus on earth—each
according to his/her talents (gifts) and ambitions. (Later we will see how he fully
develops this notion in Corinthians to characterize all talents as gifts and
equivalent.)

Pauline Christology

Paul’s development of Redemption Theology also has an impact on his

Christology.
Paul the Pharisee had some ingrained notions of what the Messiah would be:
--the Messiah saves his people, but the Jews are manifestly not saved
and little if anything has changed—the Romans are still in charge;
--the Messiah ushers in a new social order and a new age when the
theocracy that characterizes Israel and the piety that characterizes the Pharisees
is made universal, but this has not occurred;
--the Messiah does not die, but Jesus is manifestly dead;
SO HOW DOES PAUL DEAL WITH THIS?
He creates an entirely new Messiology—the first “Christology”:--that is, the
theology of the Messiah, the theology of Jesus the Christ.
Jesus the apparent failure who nevertheless changed everything: early
Christianity preached a savior who did not save; didn’t change anything—but he

26
would at some time in the future when the communities that develop after his
death have had an impact on the world around them—Paul understood the
emerging concept of Messiah in Judaism (Isaiah’s servant messiah, not a
Davidic warrior king) and applied these principles to Jesus.

Messiah does not die, but Jesus is dead. So Jesus the Messiah must have
chosen to die: Gal 1:4; Gal 2:20; Phil 2:7; Eph 5:2, 5:25.

His death was self-sacrifice—no other human could have made this choice. “For
us and our sins.” 1 Thes 5:9. In First Corinthians, Paul’s discussion of the
Exodus account suggests he beginning to see Jesus as the ultimate Passover
lamb—and later in the same letter, he talks about Eucharist, the ultimate
transformation of the Passover sacrifice to Christian Eucharist.

Crucifixion is a voluntary choice out of love, extraordinary love. It is a sacrifice.

And sacrifice assumes sin and expiation/atonement for sin in Judaic theology—
the basis for the “atonement theology” which has characterized Christianity. This
sinful humankind is redeemed by a God-made-man. This is a complex and
critical theology.

And because the purpose of the messiah has not yet been achieved, there will
be a second coming or perousia to complete the healing—and to reward those
who have followed the messiah in his first coming by continuing to build the reign
of God on earth in the interim period. For Paul, this interim period (before the
second coming was relatively short—perhaps less than a generation.

The notion of Second Coming creates a hiatus in time—between the

Resurrection and the Second Coming. This is the time we live in. This is a time
when the People of God—the Body of Christ are required to attempt to create the
Reign of God on Earth as the continuing Presence of Jesus, inspired by the Holy
Spirit: Realized Reign of God and Realizing Reign of God.

Early Ministry: Paul’s Theology Develops with his Ministry

(Back to some history)
Paul’s Initial Ministry
After his retreat and the escape from Syria, Paul goes to Antioch and
becomes familiar with the Christian Jewish community which is organizing there.
He wants to meet the leaders in Jerusalem—and so he goes for a brief two week
visit (by his own account). He returns to Antioch (possibly after a side trip home
to Tarsus if Acts is correct—since Luke says that Barnabas goes to Tarsus and
brings Paul to Antioch where they are joint missionaries for a period) and makes
this his home, sponsoring church. Gal 2:11-12 and Acts 11:25-26.
Role of Barnabas: did he vouch for Paul’s story and character?
Did Paul need a “sponsor” for his evangelization? Paul’s first mission is as
representative of Antioch. What do we know about the church in Antioch?

27
Paul’s First Solo Mission—Asia to Athens

Galatia (46-48)
Celtic area from about 300 BCE. 50,000 (est) people from north of Pyrennes
migrated and about 20,000 reached this area of Asia Minor—Roman allies in
central Turkey by 200 BCE. Celtoi=Gallicoi. Romanized, not Hellenized. The
Galatians appear to be the only pagan community that Paul encountered where
the dominant god was a woman, Cybele, who has a “toyboy” named Pesynas, In
Galatia women were deemed superior in many ways—perhaps because their
spouses were often off at war, mercenaries for the Romans and as such the
women maintained the society. Did this experience convince Paul that women
could be an essential part of his ministry?

Paul would not have likely chosen a group like this for his missionary activities:
remote location, linguistic issues; alien mentality—but he was successful and he
founded several churches here. Personality characteristics: stubborn, reluctant
to commit, reluctant to be wrong. Perhaps an accident or an illness.

Paul proceeds on past Troas (no stop, why?—perhaps hurry to reach Europe—
HB mission to preach to the ends of the earth—first European missionary?)—
sails to Samothrace and to Neopolis—Shipwreck (3x!!) Perils along the Via
Egnatia.

Philippi (48)
Roman city, about 10 miles inland from Neopolis; Greek spoken language,
retiree community for former soldiers (as many places with this name were)

Paul looks for a synagogue and the Gentiles who seemed to congregate around
it (God fearers who were attracted to monotheism); he doesn’t find one: only
women praying by a stream—a wealthy businesswoman (Lydia) befriends him
and he lives in her house (which becomes the house church for the new
community). Acts 16:15.There are other parallels for this conduct in Phil 4:3.—
their working with him was taken completely for granted, fully equal in
evangelization and administration of the church. This the first clue to Paul’s
attitude toward women.

Apostolic churches in Phil and Thes: 1 Thes 6 and Phil 1:5—sets model for future
conduct—preaching about the model life of Jesus, followed up by conduct as the
Christians emulate the life of Jesus

Thessalonica (capital)
Journey west to capital of Thessaly: a trade route city with lots of work for those
involved in trade: tents, boats, cartage, traveler infrastructure.

Thessalonian converts were workers—some suggestion that this middle class

working group had been co-opted by the wealthy and were feeling down (the

28
wealthy had co-opted their worker god: Carberus); Paul preaches Jesus—the
God of the underprivileged and he makes rapid converts. Some suggestion that
this may have been seen as subversive by the ruling class and Paul is ultimately
forced to leave quickly.

Paul worked hard “so as not be a burden”—apparently no sponsorship 1 Thes

2:9 (“our toil and drudgery, working night and day in order not to burden any of
you”) and 2 Thes 3:8 (“in toil and drudgery, night and day we worked.”)—Paul is
certainly not the patron saint of manual laborers. Many references to hardships,
his need to work etc. 2 Cor 11:27 (in toil and hardship, through many sleepless
nights, through hunger and thirst, through frequent fastings, through cold and
exposure…);--all of this suggesting that Paul did not have wealthy patrons--yet;

1 Thes 2:9 (work and preaching were simultaneous). Some suggestion that
Philippi may have helped some. Phil 4:11 ff.

Paul heads south from Thessalonica, perhaps avoiding the major road to avoid
apprehension by the power elite of that city. He reaches Athens.

Athens
Former glory has been eclipsed, university town, ancient great city, but not a
thriving economic center—preservation dominated and there was little openness
to his preaching. Arrives and is soon joined by Timothy in 50 (Acts 17:15 and 1
Tim 3:1 (this verse indicates that later Timothy is sent on, suggesting he had
been there). Paul did not succeed. Some difference between Paul and Acts on
how long he spent there, but neither source indicates any success. Then it
appears that Paul heard that some of his churches were being persecuted—
Timothy is sent to Thessalonika to report back. Upon return of Tim with good
news on progress of earlier founded churches, they leave for Corinth.

The Speech in the Areopagus Acts 17:22

Significant debate as to whether these are Paul’s words or Luke’s words for Paul.
This is “Paul’s” greatest statement on monotheism. It also talks about the God-
ness of God—trying to counter the anthropomorphosis that Greek theology
taught.

Corinth (50)
Acts 18:1, arrives in Corinth; meets Prisca (Priscilla) and Aquila, Roman exiles
(an exile from Rome in 41, probably the result of some disturbances in the
Jewish community involving the Christians), tentmakers, probably Christian when
they moved (no subsequent mention of their conversion and baptism).

Corinth is a major trading center, good communications and transportation; lively

middle class; free-wheeling lifestyle. This kind of city is exactly what Paul
seeks—he has discovered the advantages of locating mission churches in
places like this. Corinth is to become the epitome of the Pauline community,

29
the one which occupies so much of his time and talent, the one with which he
appears to have a love-hate relationship.

He finds this arrangement quite to his liking: family community, with some
advance work done by P&A, preaching in synagogue, working conditions
permitted part-time evangelizing.

First converts in Corinth are relatively wealthy people 1 Cor 1:14-16—baptism

includes households; unusually large homes for meeting. Rom 16:23 (“Gaius
who is host to the whole church”); Acts 18:8 (“Crispus, the synagogue official and
his whole household). Paul may have sought people who could facilitate his
church founding—with surplus wealth, time and homes. Phoebe: Rom 16:1-2
(most likely the head of the church in eastern Corinth), Erastas: Rom 16:23.

“The Nouveau Riche Theory of Evangelization”: Wealthy listened because

they were nouveau and did not consider that the community adequately
respected their achievement—insecurity (born of a slave, a woman, an
overachieving artisan) and they had the resources (houses, money) to support
the effort. Willingness to experiment. Ambitious, economically successful. To
them, power out of weakness is an accessible concept; a crucified criminal
who saves the world.

What Can We Learn from the Early Evangelization Activity?

--Role of god-fearers. Paul often sought out God-fearers: Gentiles who

were attracted to Judaism, who “hung around” the synagogues where they
learned and debated, but who did not become Jews—because it would have
implied adult circumcision and adherence to Levitical laws.
--Women. Paul routinely worked with women, accepted them as leaders
of his communities and supporters of his ministry.
--Adaptability of theology. Paul used his developing Christology of a
Jesus Messiah who championed the underprivileged—where the Greco-Roman
gods were very much associated with the aristocracy—but he also understood
the necessity of working with the artisan-middle class and the aristocracy (with
homes and leisure to underpin his community churches).
--Congregationalism. Paul adapted his message and his community
structure to the context—congregationalism. There were probably 40-50
Christians in two or three house churches in Antioch—actually “insulae”—
apartment churches (1 Cor 16)—permitted Gentile and Jewish believers to live
side by side. Paul also speaks of the “whole church” Rom 16:23 and 1 Cor
14:23. During his missionary travels, Paul apparently fosters or founds many
such churches—house churches, very loosely tied to Antioch or Jerusalem.
Clearly, with limited communication and substantial independence, these local
churches began to look at themselves as church. Paul’s ecclesiology is
congregational: house churches; but he clearly understood the value of unity (a
major Greek philosophical concept)—tension between unity (which required

30
universal principles, standardization, hierarchy) and community (which required
adaptation to local conditions, horizontal responsibility). This tension is to
become a major differentiating factor after the Reformation. There is significant
debate over Paul’s use of the word ekklesia and the apparent contexts in which it
is used: the household church or the whole church. This debate also extends to
Paul’s concept of the Body of Christ. Paul seems to draw the balance in favor of
the house church, the small community of believers. Unity does not mean
sameness.
--Jesus the Model. Paul emphasized that Jesus was a model for
acceptable human conduct, not an unapproachable (and un-imitatable) god.
(Contrast: the Olympian gods)
All of these features contributed to the success of Paul’s evangelization and the
substantial increase in the number of Gentile Christians, now outnumbering the
Jewish Christians—with an inevitable consequence for the future of Christianity

Part 5: The Lessons of Corinth: Origins of Moral Theology

The Setting for the Corinthian Letters

Paul is living in Ephesus around 53CE and is visited by a delegation from his
favorite community.

Factionalism has come to Corinth—the Judaizers and the Spiritists (as Paul
names them) have been critique-ing Paul’s theology—and Paul’s disciples don’t
seem to be able to counteract.
The Judaizers are probably missionaries from the Jerusalem church
(perhaps by way of Antioch) which had continued to insist that conversion to
Judaism (circumcision, adherence to dietary and sanitary laws) is a prerequisite
to becoming a Christian. They had also brought with them the Semitic notions of
patriarchy and the lesser role of women—concepts which were not welcome in a
Greco-Roman community where women were engaged in commerce, owned
property, and had influence.
The “Spiritists” were probably proto-Gnostics (Philo, Apollos)—a name
derived from the Greek, meaning having special knowledge (about Jesus? About
the path to salvation?), preaching duality of body and soul—such that the body
was irrelevant—and if it is irrelevant, why prohibit “things of the flesh” that are
enjoyable?). This raises sexuality issues that were critical to the lifestyles of the
Corinthian community.
Another overriding concern raised by Raymond Brown: being self-made,
nouveau riche, the leaders of the Corinthian community may have been
concerned about social status—Pauline theology (Body of Christ) is anti-
hierarchical.

Also, Greco-Roman notion of gift: complex notion—giving a gift places the

receiver in a subordinate position—give an equal gift back levels the playing field,

31
give a smaller gift (accept lower status), give a larger gift and turn the tables.
Paul has refused financial support from the Corinthians (gift), but he is known to
have accepted help from the Thessalonians—what does this say about Paul’s
social status and what are the implications for his message?

Specific questions are posed to Paul—who adopts a combination of Greek

rhetoric and proto-rabbinical argument to respond:

This is the essence of Paul’s practical theology.

 The implications of the duality of body and soul for personal conduct
--Particularly the role of sexuality, marriage in Christianity
 The relationship between the Christian community and secular society
 The meaning of the Eucharistic meal
 Relationship with other (pagan) religions
 Relationship within the Body of Christ (hierarchy of charism?)
 The use of pagan courts to resolve community differences, immorality
(incest, prostitution and homosexuality) and the practice of the agape
(Eucharistic meal). As to charity, “Who is my neighbor?” is asked.

Paul realizes that his preaching has been misinterpreted (corrupted?) so that he
has “created” a community without any standards of conduct—one can be saved
by faith and belief alone in Jesus; personal conduct on earth is not important.

The Corinthian community has heard Paul, but has adopted lifestyle models that
are very far from what he intended. Paul is upset, but this is the community he
created and taught—and he must take responsibility for their errors.
Apparently while Paul is pondering these issues, another delegation arrives.
Additional questions are raised: Is sex legitimate within marriage? Can
Christians use meat previously offered to idols? Are certain gifts or charisms of a
higher order? And what exactly is resurrection from the dead?

Pauline Christology and Community

Paul’s Christology is “bottom-up” or “low Christology”—this means that it focuses

on the human deeds of Jesus as a model for personal conduct and a means to
salvation. Paul recognizes that individuals develop their lives in community—
influenced by and influencing the community in which they live. Paul’s moral
theology is wound up with his ideas of the role of community in “forming”
conscience and influencing behavior. Paul would find very strange the “rugged
individualism” of the American ethos and the emphasis on personal choice and
charity: his Body of Christ theology is the antithesis of contemporary emphasis
on individuality, self-fulfillment and self-actualization. For Paul, the meaning of
life is in service to others in community and in playing a role in the development
of community. Ekklesia (church) is the antithesis of division, barriers,
discrimination—it is community.

32
A Note on the Relationship between Community and Salvation:
Paul believes that true freedom and salvation itself is only possible within
community.
There are three aspects of death in Pauline literature:
--Life—physical death
--virtue—lack of virtue results in existential death
--eternal life or—eternal punishment
Those outside community are not free since only freedom is in community. BUT:
Those outside are not culpable, not damned—damnation is not possible for those
outside community. Paul’s freedom is not freedom of the will. “Outside the
community (Church) there is no damnation.” Teaching individuals is
“dangerous”—individuals who are exposed to the words and life of Jesus and
reject him are more culpable (and damned) than those who have never been
exposed. Some Christian theologians argue that “innocence” of the Christian
truth is not possible; based upon the Gospel of John and the words of Jesus
quoted there, those who do not make a personal commitment to adopt Jesus and
their Lord and Savior (born again), cannot be saved—irrespective of
circumstance. But many Christians believe that individuals who lead exemplary
lives (measured by Christian standards), do achieve salvation: baptism of desire,
baptism of fire. This is a very important concept in a pluralistic society—and it
has implications for evangelization.

1 Cor (Examples of Moral and Practical Consequences of Community;

Development of Moral Principles Based upon the Great Commandment )

Paul has his hands full. 1 Cor is the result. Cor 1 is fairly obvious on its face and
is the most frequently used in bible study groups, often misquoted (proof-texting
is a common problem when short statements are taken out of context.) But
many consider the most important letter because of its development of the
community theme (Body of Christ), the value of unity, and the meaning of
Eucharist.

1 Cor After typical greetings, thanksgiving, self-abnegation, Paul gets to the

questions—and in doing so sets out a textbook of moral theological principles:

1. No Soul/Body Duality; Body of Christ. Paul argues against the

body/soul duality of the Spirit People. He has apparently been preceded in
Corinth by one of the leaders of the Spirit Movement: Apollos—who argues that
the body is an irrelevance, if not a hindrance to salvation.
Body of Christ: GalatiansCorinthiansRomans
Here is the starkest development of the notion of the community as
the Body of Christ—a notion introduced first in the Letter to the Galatians,
developed in Corinthians, and repeated in Romans—and evidence of the
practical theology that characterizes Paul. Jesus was; he offered by example
a code of moral conduct which suggested the whole-ness (holiness) of body and

33
soul. Paul uses various metaphors to suggest body/soul unity. He continues the
argument in chap 5: Philo has taught that the body is the prison of the soul. The
spirit people have been teaching therefore that corporal sins are irrelevant
because the body is irrelevant. Paul responds that the reality of act is more
important than words. And then he ties questions of morality to community.
Apparently the Corinthians took pride in one form of immorality (i.e. incest;
throughout history, communities which value property and possessions have
flirted with various forms of incest—to keep the property in the family)—and Paul
holds the community responsible. Remember Paul’s view of freedom in
community: some things may not be wrong per se, but in community they may
be—if they decrease the love in the community—the notion of “giving scandal” is
emphasized.

What does it mean to be the Body of Christ? This discussion has

occupied Church theologians from the beginning. For Paul it is a celebration of
diversity within oneness. (Contrast: debates about “one posture” during liturgy.)
Paul argues that talents/gifts/grace are given differently in to each member to be
used for the benefit of the community—and he is careful not to place these gifts
in a hierarchy(??). JMOC argues that some have “denigrated” the notion of the
Body by emphasizing the functional roles and mutual dependence of each
member; for JMOC, the notion of Body means that we co-exist in Christ—it is a
question of existence, not function—and a plea for equality of each member.

2. Relationship of Faith and Reason. Some have suggested that Paul

in 1 Cor 4 is opposed to reason as a way to God (contra: Augustine, Thomas
Aquinas, Fides et Ratio—the ability of humans to supplement Scripture with
natural observations and enhance their belief,based upon revelation, in existence
of God--natural theology). Early 20th century Lutheran scholars argued that one
could not “earn” salvation with “works”—and that “reason” was a “work” and
therefore reason was useless—one only needed faith.

Note: This chapter is cited for the proposition that reliance solely on faith
eliminates the necessity or even the possibility of knowing God through reason—
but this theology develops further in Romans.

Summary: Paul’s Practical Theology: Life Style Consequences (as

developed in 1Cor)

Implications of the Theology of Body of Christ and Redemption—the

Foundation of Pauline Theology:
--Grace is a gift, salvation is available for all who accept Jesus; the
righteousness which is claimed from adherence to the laws of the Torah is not a
substitute for this grace—and its result: the law of love as contained in the Great
Commandments
--While humans have a soul (the indwelling of the Holy Spirit), the
body is the “temple” of that soul—and must not be defiled—a body/soul duality

34
which permits the defilement of the body (debauchery, gluttony etc) is
inconsistent with this indwelling
--salvation is in community, subordination of the individual as the
pinnacle unit of humankind.

1 Cor divides his advice into four general categories:

 rules of personal conduct: his view of the body as temple
and of marriage
 pagan courts: denial of community
 food to idols: scandal
 Eucharist: community

Personal Morality

(Starting in Chapter 5 of 1 Cor, Paul, in responding to what he believes

are failures of the community, provides a short illustrative list of the implications
of his “simple” theology:)

Chapter 5: Moral Lapses (failures of personal conduct—incest)

The Corinthian community had a reputation within the ancient world of
being particularly promiscuous in personal conduct. Paul had preached against
this—obviously indicating that Paul—personally and in his understanding of the
message of Jesus demanded a level of personal sexual chasteness (denial?)
which was almost unknown in the ancient Greco-Roman world. He deals
particularly here with the practice of sexual relationships within families which
may have been the result of a desire to preserve family wealth—by not fostering
children outside of the family unit. Paul states his revulsion and his command:
shun those who do so and deny them access to your family and community.

Chapter 6. Use of Pagan Courts. Example of Context as having

important implications for interpretation. Paul is not opposed to the concept of
resolving disputes before mediators—but the Roman court system in Corinth was
notoriously corrupt (judgment to the highest bribe). But more importantly, Paul
would have the community resolve disputes itself without use of outside force—
relying instead on the power of love in the community. Use of courts violates
community; a waste of an apostolic opportunity.

Questions related to Social Context.

Chapter 7 social status issues (marriage and divorce)

Paul opens this chapter with his general view of sexuality: avoid it—marriage is
necessary for humankind because of a basic flaw: desires of the flesh—and
marriage is the “convenient” way to avoid sexual sinfulness. 5 But Paul does
5
This chapter 1Cor7:4-5 is often quoted in proof-texting to demonstrate that there can be no rape
within marriage.

35
admit that he has “no commandment from the Lord, but I give my opinion” 1Cor
7:25 with respect to his austere view of human sexuality. Paul has an idealized
view of marriage. Under Jewish law, a bill of divorce is a “permit to remarry”. A
man could put aside his wife without cause or reason, but could not remarry
unless he had received the “bill” from his divorced spouse. Paul suggests that
the husband may repent so the wife should wait before remarrying. Under
Jewish law, the wife would not have been entitled to divorce, but if her husband
had divorced her, after a period she could seek a “bill” to remarry.
In a second case, involving mixed marriage, Paul says wait: believer may
convert the non-believer—but ultimately if the believer’s faith is being challenged,
divorce would be possible.
Compare to Jesus own words in Mark which are unequivocally opposed to
divorce (but language in Matthew which seems to permit divorce under some
circumstances—“unlawful marriages”—not clear what this means: perhaps
incestuous. The principle focus of this passage in Mt seems to be the
requirement that in the event of such a divorce, the man MUST give his wife a bill
of divorce—which was not always done, leaving her in an untenable state).
Matthean privilege today is generally meant to mean a dissolution of a marriage
because of some defect ab initio (impotency or infertility of one of the partners, a
pre-marriage intent by one of the partners not to have children, under age,
consanguineous, or in the broadest sense, “lack to intent to form a lifelong
union.”
“Pauline privilege”: mixed marriages (and civil marriages) can be severed,
particularly where the salvation of one of the spouses is being threatened by the
conduct of the other. Broadened in most Christian sects today to include
marriages where continued cohabitation will cause at least one of the two
partners to fail at his/her faith—or generally to failed marriages

Chapter 8 eating food sacrificed to idols

The Corinthians live in a pagan society in which food (particularly meat) was
often given to the priests at a pagan temple to be sacrificed. A large part of the
sacrificial animal was usually not burned, but instead was consumed by the
priests and their families or sold in the market. Meat was a scarce and
expensive commodity. Christians might be able to purchase this meat at a
favorable price, particularly around the great festivals when many sacrifices were
offered. They argue that there should be no prohibition—because they do not
believe in the pagan gods or the pagan practices—why not benefit from the
practice?
The poor of the community might only be able to purchase meat when it was
available during the festival times when many sacrifices were offered, permitting
much “surplus”—and thus this issue may have been a “charity” issue—although
to Paul, the ideal community would not have poor members.
Paul talks about scandal (impact on community); community and
consensus; even things that are theoretically acceptable become problematic if
they produce scandal.

36
 He concludes: I personally wouldn’t do it, but so long as it doesn’t
scandalize the community, I see no reason to prohibit it. Is Paul setting the basis
for Christians to live in a secular society—so long as they adopt Gospel norms
for themselves and their own community?

Chapter 9: giving up “rights” for the good of the community

This is a prominent theme in Paul and is the logical accompaniment to his views
on the Law—and internalized conversion will produce conduct and lifestyle which
might or might not be specified in the Law. (Paul has made the transition to anti-
nomialism—that is, the philosophical belief that adherence to Judaic (Levitical)
Law is irrelevant to a Christian—and perhaps even counter-productive.

Chapter 11: Paul and Women

This chapter is at the heart of almost any debate about the role of women in
society, in church, including various forms of ministry. Translation issues are key
here. Latin and subsequent English translations, coming out of patriarchal
traditions, seem to focus on the rights and responsibilities of women—but in fact
Paul was probably talking about what he thought was outrageous behavior .

A Summary of the Issue of Women and the Pauline Le tters

Note on feminism and the Church—The basic point is that Paul was a man of his
time—and in his time, women were clearly subordinate in Semitic society (with
few rights)—but they had many more rights in Greco-Roman Society. When the
Semitic strain of Christianity reasserted itself as dominant in the second and third
centuries, some changes were made in the Pauline manuscripts (reducing the
role and value of women)—but Paul himself must have been torn between the
two worlds.

Relevant Passages

1 Cor 11:3-6
“But I want you to know that Christ is the head (kephala) of every man,
and the husband the head of his wife, and God the head of Christ. Any man who
prays or prophesies with his head covered brings shame upon his head. But an
woman who prays of prophesies with her head unveiled brings shame upon her
head, for it is one and the same thing as if she had had her head shaved. For a
women does not have her head veiled, she may as well have her hair cut off.
But if it is shameful for a woman to have her hair cut off or her head shaved, then
she should wear a veil.”
[Paul is reflecting the ancient hierarchical structure of society: God, Christ, man,
woman. He may also be referring to certain practices within the Corinthian
community which blurred the distinction between the sexes (perhaps even
homosexuality and lesbianism)].

Eph 5:21-

37
 “Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ. Wives should
be subordinate to their husbands….” [going on to paraphrase 1 Cor 11]

I Tim 2:8- [a description of how both women and men should dress and comport
themselves in liturgy—avoiding ostentation] “I do not permit a woman to teach or
have authority over a man. She must be quiet. For Adam was formed first and
then Eve. Further, Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and
transgressed.”

Historical Context

Paul was raised in Tarsus until he was a teenager, the child of diaspora Jews.
This was one of the three most important Greco-Roman trading ports with a great
center of Greek thinking. Given that his parents supported him in Jerusalem for
the next 10 or so years, they were obviously reasonably well-off. (Some suggest
Paul was sent to Jerusalem to polish off his Hebrew studies with the rabbinical
masters and to find a wife!) Paul went to the best Greek schools and he was
exposed to a Greek society where (unlike Israel) women were free to engage in
commerce, own land, divorce, and play significant roles in society—only elected
office was denied them. These are the same communities to which Paul
returned after his conversion on the road to Damascus—and these were the
conditions of his youth.

Paul was obviously exposed to the Semitic view of women as a Pharisee living in
Jerusalem—this view was patriarchal—where women had no role in ritual
sacrifice, no role in commerce (outside the home), and had little say in whom
they married or where they lived.

So Paul was familiar with the social context for women in both the Semitic and
Greco-Roman societies.

Historical Evidence of the Letters

The “attributed” Pauline letters show Paul greeting both women and men in the
churches he has established, he commends women as evangelists to those
communities, he refers to women as deacons and as presbyters (some argue
this merely means elder; others argue it means priest). Women may have
created several of the house churches. Women clearly ran several of the house
churches founded by Paul; wealthy women supported his ministry; women clearly
celebrated the agape meals (Eucharists) which they hosted. If one just reads the
greetings and the closings of the Pauline letters, you come away with a feeling
that Paul was gender-blind.

The history of Paul’s ministry (as evidenced in his Letters and to a lesser extent
in Acts of the Apostles) suggests that he relied on women extensively for
financial support, for “hostess” responsibilities in their house churches, and in
leadership and evangelical positions in his communities.

38
 Manuscript Evidence
Modern computer analysis of scriptural passages has largely confirmed what was
“guessed” over the last 40 yearsthe man who wrote the Pauline letters—
undisputedly at least seven of those in the New Testament (presumably Paul) did
not write the “deutero-Pauline” letters (certain letters written by disciples of Paul
during his life or shortly thereafter) nor the “pseudo-epigrapha” (Letters written
long after Paul’s death on which the unknown author placed Paul’s name).

Sometime after the third century, some Pauline manuscripts were altered—and
men’s names were substituted for women’s names—to imply that men had
hosted all the house churches. Most bibles correct this error (but curiously the
KJV until recently persisted in this practice. And of course, much of the
epistolary material was attributed to Paul—even some that he had not written.

The most damaging comments made about Paul’s misanthropy are derived from
the Letter to the Ephesians (which Paul did not write) and the Letters to Timothy
and Titus (which Paul also probably did not write). The comments about conduct
and dress during a service (used to label women as “distractions”) are most likely
aimed at both men and women who were distracting the community with cross-
dressing and other gender denying activities that were popular in Greek society
at the time.

What we learn from the letters is highly elliptical—that is, much is not said and
therefore we must look at the implied beliefs of Paul based upon the entirety of
the authentic letters.

Many modern theologians (see for example, Jerome Murphy-O’Connor) conclude

that Paul, despite the obvious Semitic cultural context which denied women’s
rights, was profoundly modern. He says for example, “The only intellectually
defensible position about Paul and the ordination of women is that Paul can only
be seen as speaking against ordination if he was simultaneously denying that
women were saved by Jesus.”

It seems that when, after the first century, the Semitic patriarchs re-asserted
control over Christian orthodoxy, “women were put back in their place,” and
Pauline letters were subtly altered to be in conformity with this view which
prevailed in Christianity for most of its subsequent history.

Greek and Jewish precedents

Plutarch: In Greece, it is unusual for men to wear long hair, but women
permit their hair to grow and tie it in a basket on top of their heads;
Lucian: considered women with short hair to be “boyish” and Spartan
Juvenal: general condemnation of feminine men
Ezekiel 44:20: they (men) shall not shave their heads or let their locks
grow long, but neatly trim the hair of their heads

39
 1 Cor 11:14-15: long hair is not fit for men
Philo: general condemnation of young boy homosexuality.
Many orthodox Jewish sects interpret Leviticus as prohibiting the cutting
off of beards or hair, although some permit “neat trimming.”

Is this a blurring of sexual distinctions issue? Paul has already said in

Christ there is no man or woman—emphasizing the equality of all before Jesus.
Does this constitute a basis for public conduct denying that different sexes
exist?

Proof-Texting
In general, using isolated phrases from some of the Pauline letters to argue for
the subsidiarity of women is treated as “proof texting” by modern Scripture
scholars who say the overall tone of Paul’s apostleship and preaching treats men
and women as equals.

1. Gen 2:18-23; had been used by Jews to subordinate women; 1 Cor 11-
12: Paul refutes: doesn’t every man have a mother?
2. 1 Cor 14: 33-35 vs. 11:11-12 Subordination of women rejected in
11:11; Many believe v33-35 may be a post-Pauline interpolation (prohibits
women from doing certain things)—because they contradict other Pauline
statements and because they contradict the way Paul established his churches in
which women exercised leadership roles.
3. In the second and third century there is evidence that the “Judaizers”
held the upper hand in the development of the church—and that Semitic views
would have prevailed among the “translators” of the Pauline letters. (Raymond
Brown, Garry Wills)
4. Paul uses the Greek words presbyter (priest) and diacones (deacon) to
refer to both men and women but there is debate as to whether Paul is using
these words as common parlance (elder, helper) or whether they have
ecclesiastical meaning. (A more difficult issue is the use by Paul of the word
apostoloi—apostle—referring to Junia, a woman in Rom 16:7—some claim that
this is a miscopy and that Paul really meant, Junias, a man, but there is no
evidence for this position.)
5. Inconclusivity. Pauline letters can be used to justify two positions:
Jewish patriarchalism or the full ministerial equality of women. For many, the
deciding factor is that Paul treats the gifts and contributions of men and women
equally. He asks women to head “house churches.” He accepts their leadership
of communities. Perhaps we are dealing with a clash of cultures: the Hellenist
(with a generally more tolerant, cosmopolitan view of women—who owned
property, did business, owned houses etc) and the Semitic (with a generally
more patriarchal culture where women were property, without rights, without
education etc). According to JMOC (and most contemporary theologians, using
Paul to subjugate women or deny them rights in the Church is not justified. The
overall conduct and attitude of Paul denies this. Many go on to say that denying

40
women full equality is only possible if one simultaneously concludes that women
cannot be saved…
6. Another interesting thesis is put forward in E. and W. Stegemann, The
Jesus Movement, A Social History of Its First Century, trans. by O.C.Dean,
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999), pp.361-407. Stegemann’s view is that the
Christianity of Palestine was synagogue-and-Semitic-based (where women had
no role) where Paul’s Christianity in the diaspora and the Gentile lands was
home-and-Hellenist-based (where women generally had higher status, or a
senior role). This carried over into the role for women in the church of Paul which
was lost in the Patriarchal period when the basilica replaced the synagogue and
the house church disappeared.

In the view of most biblical scholars today, there is no biblical basis (certainly not
the conduct of Jesus or Paul) for not treating women equal to men in the
Christian church, and what evidence does exist is attributable to the Semitic
culture (i.e. an accident of culture, not a moral prescription) in which the early
Church was born.

Chapter 11: the have/have not issues (Eucharist)

The early Christian communities gathered in homes or apartments. If
there was liturgy, it consisted of general prayers (probably from the Hebrew
Bible, e.g. the Psalms), story telling about the life of Jesus, followed by a meal
which generally followed the stories told about the Last Supper—a form of
Passover meal. But not all houses were large enough for the entire community
to gather. Although Corinthian houses were Roman—with an atrium and a large
vestibule, Corinthian climate is very hot in summer and cold in winter. Apparently
at some Corinthian agape (love meals, the name given to early Eucharist that
followed the Last Supper format), there would have been distinctions made,
based upon class, as to what food was served, when it was served, and where it
was served. Paul sees this as a violation of his notion of charity and community.
Paul was certainly aware of the Exodus story (and he recounts it in Chap
10). There were two Passovers: The first involves the sprinkling of the doorposts
of the Jewish homes so that the angel of death would “pass over” their homes
when the avenging angel destroys the first born of the Egyptians. Note that the
“first born” were the privileged class—first in line, due to inherit all property,
destined to take over a household, if not an office or even the country. The angel
destroys the most privileged individual in each family. The second Passover is of
course the passage of the Israelites through the Red (reed) sea.
For Paul Jesus is both the sacrificial lamb who gives His life for His
people and the bridge (Red sea path?) to salvation (the basis for atonement
theology). Paul is combining the Pascal lamb image (which is also tied to the
servant Messiah (of Isaiah and the background for the words of Jesus at the Last
Supper before he washes the feet of the disciples—the job of a slave) and the
basis for Paul’s Eucharist which both the symbol of community and charge to “go
and do likewise.”

41
 For Paul, the Eucharist/agape meal is more than sacrifice. Chap 11 raises
essential issues about the relationship between Eucharist and the community
(body, church) that celebrates it. Paul seems to be saying that the authenticity of
Eucharist is based upon the character of the community which celebrates that
Eucharist.—a selfish, sinful community does not celebrate an authentic
Eucharist, even if they go through the motions.
And a community which does not recognize its responsibilities as “servant”
is not authentically partaking of Eucharist. (Teillard de Chardin, Henri du Lubac)
This issue is one of the key debates in Christianity today: some emphasize
Eucharist as a sacrifice, partaken by people already washed (in grace), to place
themselves in a personal communion with God for a few moments after they
have taken the bread and wine. Others emphasize Eucharist as a community
activity, celebrating oneness and commitment in charity social justice outreach.
Note: The host or hostess of the home presides at this meal.

1 Cor is thus critical to an understanding of the following central notions of

Pauline theology: demands of community, moral conduct, the role and
responsibilities of women, the essentiality of charity and the meaning of
Eucharist.

Corinthians is the foundational theology of community responsibility for

the welfare of all of its members. Charity is a personal responsibility—but
it is also a community responsibility, where it is occasionally described as
Justice.

The Hymn to Love

Chapter 13 represents one of the most quoted and loved phrases in the
Christian Bible—but for Paul this is an affirmative statement of his position on the
validity of Torah rules to his Gentile Christianity—he is not talking about physical
love (Eros) but charity (Philos)—a state of mind essential to the growth and
flourishing of the individual in community.

Second Corinthians (Oct 54)

Paul writes another letter—actually two—apparently under the impression
that he has so severely critiqued his own home community in Corinth (First
Corinthians is pretty tough in its criticism, and we don’t have the “Painful Letter”
which apparently was even stronger in its criticism), that they no longer support
him. Paul is distressed and composes a letter of reconciliation. Perhaps he
recognizes that his expectations for the community have been too severe?
Paul begins by recounting his difficulties (to elicit some sympathy?) [Do
we see the workings of human nature here? This is often presented as falsely
ingratiating—but think of human conduct….] and then he excuses his failure to
meet his earlier promises to visit. Paul is ingratiating and conciliatory.
The second part, probably a second letter, is more critical: the Corinthians
seem to want a religious leader who was more decisive, in whom they could be

42
proud, a minister with social standing—Paul is distressed by this. Paul lays
the foundation for the notion of social sin:

Social sin is institutionalized sin—a pattern of conduct in a society which is not

deemed sinful because everyone is doing it. Paul recognizes both that personal
conduct is impacted by institutional expectations and societal norms—and that
personal conduct manifests itself in those institutions. Consider some examples:
slavery, the holocaust, some of the legal institutions that exist in all societies
which have the explicit or unintended consequence of keeping some in poverty,
ignorance, and disease. Modern moral theology is very much involved with the
notion of social or institutional sin: institutional norms which seem to justify
conduct and lifestyles that in a Gospel context would not be considered
acceptable.

Paul and Slavery

Paul’s letters have been quoted to justify slavery, but placed in the context of his
overall theology, several points can be made: First, Paul was in a society that
had slaves—but slaves were typically freed after seven years, more like
indentured servitude. Second, Paul was in a hierarchical society where notions
of personal freedom of any kind were foreign.

Some Tentative Conclusions

The Corinthian Letters contain some of the most beautiful prose written by Paul
—his description of love, for example, has become the norm for the ages.

The Letters contain a good deal of practical advice to his community in Corinth—
and they suggest that Paul’s practical theology was developed in the context of
how he saw his teaching developing in community—sometimes with unexpected
results.

Community is critical to Paul—it is the foundation of life and salvation, with the
Great Commandments the central theme of individual conscience formation and
the standard for conduct in community.

Part 5: Nearing the End; The Letter to the Romans

Paul’s Global Mission

Paul is in his 60s; probably living mostly in Ephesus; beset by periodic
illness and perhaps conscious that his messages and activities are placing him in
personal jeopardy—but he is pleased with the communities/churches he has
founded in the eastern part of the Roman Empire.
Paul is beginning to think about preaching to the “end of the earth”:
fulfilling the prophecy in Jer 1:5 and Is 49:1-6 Did Paul identify with the
messianic Jesus?

43
Back to Paul’s Practical Theology: Within His Own Life: Modeling Jesus
Paul seems to be modeling his life on Jesus and the logical implications of this
are that Paul would want to work toward the completion of the mission of Jesus—
not “just” the sacrifice which reconciled humanity with God, but also spreading
the Word to the ends of the earth that the sacrifice of Jesus has reconciled ALL
people to God, provided they accept and acknowledge Jesus as Messiah and
Savior.
Paul returns to Corinth and finds that all is well. Did his letters work?
He begins to think about going to Spain (end of world—Sacred Cape)—
but he thinks that some sort of community sponsorship is probably required.
He needs to return to Jerusalem to get the collection 6 there first—so he
sends Prisca and Aquila to Rome to lay the groundwork.

The Jerusalem Collection:

The Corinthian Letters
Gifting in the Greco-Roman world—no horizontality—gifting was all about
currying favor, demonstrating fealty, placing someone in debt to you (which
suggests the nature of ancient hierarchical society)
Paradox in Paul
a. Thessalonians vs. Corinthians—Paul’s acceptance of
gifts from T, not C
b. But, importance of community with a foundation of charity
c. Now however Paul has asked the Corinthians for gifts for
the Jerusalem Church
d. Jerusalem (dependent upon both Jewish pilgrims and
later Christian contributions)

This ties in with the Letter to the Romans:

It appears that Rome was a “mission” of the Jerusalem church. (This
would explain why Peter was there.) Thus if Paul wants an endorsement from
Rome, he needs to make peace with the Jerusalem community.
We don’t know much about the Roman Christian community, but there are
some inferences we can make:
 Based upon the size of community excavations and a very few references
in Roman literature, Raymond Brown estimates that there were about 25-
30,000 Jews in Rome by the 50s. (Jews made up about 13% of the
Roman Empire, were concentrated in cities, often emigrated to those cities
after unsuccessful revolutions put down by the Romans, involved in
6
Remember that Jerusalem was a pilgrim city without the ability to provide for itself—it relied on
“pilgrim tourism” and charity to survive. This was true of the Jews and the Christian Jews as well.
Paul, mindful of the Jewish customs of providing charity to the Jews in Jerusalem has been
collecting alms from his various community churches. He understands the need to deliver that
charity to the Christian Jewish community—but perhaps he feels that doing so will enhance his
own stature within that community—obviously Paul believes that the Jerusalem Christian
community sees him as a problem, perhaps even a threat—he is changing the Church by
admitting hundreds of non-Jewish Gentiles.

44
 commerce, scholarship and banking.) It is probable that there were
disputes among the Jews (some of whom were Christian)—See
Seutonius, the edicts of Claudius and Nero.
 Paul doesn’t know this community well—but he does know some of its
members and he greets them in the opening lines of Romans.
 Many believe that Rome was a “mission” of the Jerusalem church and
therefore it is assumed that its members would have been taught that one
needed to be a good Jew to be a good Christian

Romans:

The longest letter—and the first to appear in the canon. It is probably the last
letter written for Prisca & Aquila to take to Rome. It is a summary of everything
so far—many inconsistencies, sometimes unclear; Paul needs to show off his
rhetoric to impress the Romans. Paul wants the Roman community to sponsor a
missionary journey to the west—Spain or France. Rome is a community which
Paul has never visited, and it is likely that they do not know who he is. They may
have been warned about Paul from the evangelizers who visited them from
Jerusalem. The letter has created a veritable industry of interpreters, attempting
to find consistency where it is not apparent.
Some see Romans as “book-ending” Paul’s theology—from Galatians to
Romans.
Use of diatribe—a sophisticated rhetorical device, originally attributed to
Socrates, but championed by the Cynics: a conversational tone that sets forth a
principle, and then proceeds to justify that principle by examples that both prove
it and disprove alternative concepts (antitheses). Romans uses diatribe in three
distinct sections of the body. (After the middle ages, Christian theological
education focused on the notion of “Apologetics”—being able to argue
convincingly about the elements of the Christian creed.)

Paul sets up two critical issues which have lived within Christianity for centuries:

Righteousness vs. Justification

Understanding these concepts is critical to understanding the theology of
Romans:
Righteousness is a Jewish concept. A righteous person is one who keeps
the Law (technically “Law” means all the laws explicated in the Torah: the
Decalogue and the rules of life set forth in Leviticus and Deuteronomy). The
Great Commandment comes later. A righteous Jew is saved through the
covenant between Yahweh and the Chosen People which requires adherence to
the Law as the path to salvation—both personal and communal.
As noted previously, Paul as a Pharisee would have embraced this notion
before his conversion; during the early part of his ministry he tried to “fit” the
responsibilities of righteousness with his understanding of the Messiahship of
Jesus—but slowly he began to de-emphasize the Law and ultimately (by the time
he writes Romans) he has rejected the Law (anti-nomialism). Paul personally

45
respects the Law and abides by it, but he doesn’t believe or preach that it is
essential to salvation.
Justification is the name given to the GIFT of salvation by God through the
sacrifice of Jesus—which reconciles humanity with God without any action or
merit of humanity. Humans don’t “earn” salvation—they are graced with it
through acceptance of the faith, by acknowledgement of the sacrifice of Jesus.
During the Protestant Reformation (and through most of subsequent
Christian history) theologians have wrestled with the relationship of “faith and
good works.” If one is saved by acknowledgement of Jesus, shouldn’t one’s life
be changed—and exhibit conversion through good works, charity etc? What is
the relationship between personal conduct and acceptance of Jesus? 7
Paul’s letter to the Romans essentially sets up this conversation.
Particularly in Chapter 12, Paul talks about the conduct implications: be a
good Roman citizen (setting up the modern debate over the respective
responsibilities of individuals, organized religion and the state), abide by the
Great Commandment (which is a statement of personal responsibility/charity, not
communal justice), and statements about “fleshly” things—sexuality (setting up
the history of the Christian opposition to almost anything sexual).

The Relationship Between Judaism and Christianity

As noted on several occasions, the relationship is critical in Paul.

Paul widens the notion of ancestry: Adam is replaced by Jesus—new creation;
Abraham is the father of all—not just the Chosen People.
Paul argues that the Judaic notion of righteousness is not sufficient after Jesus—
Jesus changed everything and it is not necessary for an individual to be a Jew to
be a Christian (circumcision is the subtext).
Paul argues that Christians are the logical successors to the Jews, not merely a
“sect” within Judaism.
However, because Paul recognized that a large part of the Roman Christian
community to which he has been writing does not agree with this principle, he
softens several of his arguments (thus creating the room for debate over the next
thousands of years over “super-cessionism.”)

After this letter, we have nothing from Paul’s hand. 8

The Final Jerusalem Trip

We must turn to Acts 20 to discover the last details near the end of Paul’s life.—
his trip to Jerusalem with the collection that his churches have taken up. These
sections are written with the subject “we”—implying that the author was with Paul
on this journey. It was a long sea journey---lots of stops, perhaps stalling. Paul
7
It should be noted that through its history, Judaism has also debated the relationship between
the nature of the covenant and personal conduct. This is not solely a Christian notion.
8
Some Scripture scholars believe that some of the Deutero-Pauline and other attributed Pauline
letters were the work of Paul—perhaps penned by him in draft or discussed with his disciples and
then edited or composed by disciples after his death.

46
has premonitions about Jerusalem’s receptiveness. He first meets with James
who orders him to engage in ritual Jewish piety and purification (ritual washing,
ritual fasting, offering sacrifice in the Temple). Paul complies—although we know
that by this time, this is meaningless to Paul. One asks whether he still considers
himself a Jew or whether he was playing a role to make peace with the Jewish
Christians in Jerusalem.

Nazorites: a substitute for giving the collection to the Jerusalem church?

Paul is trying to find a way to ingratiate himself, to leave the collection (fearing
perhaps that the Jerusalem church would reject the money if it came from him).
He decides to support the Nazorites. The community of Nazorites had existed for
some time. They were apparently men—not always the same—who came to
Jerusalem to do penance for the people. They shaved their heads, dressed in
white, fasted for extended periods
—and thus were a burden on the community since they needed to be fed and
housed during this period. Paul provides at least some of the collection to them
—thus displacing a community obligation rather than giving the collection directly
to the Jerusalem community which could have been seen as a bribe. So Paul
undergoes purification and finds an indirect way to deliver the collection—thus
avoiding a confrontation with James.

The End?

Unfortunately, the strategy doesn’t work. Riots ensue. Paul is expelled from the
temple. Acts 21:27. There were often riots (perhaps disturbances in and around
the Temple) among the sectarian Jews and these riots were disruptive and often
dealt with severely. Romans wanted a peaceful, commercial outpost of the
empire to forward goods from the east etc but they found the Jews to be
contentious and more difficult among themselves than they were toward the
Romans. Acts continues with the story of Paul’s imprisonment, his demand for
trial as a Roman citizen in Rome, and his trip to Rome. We don’t have any
specific details after this.

One tradition has it that Paul was executed in Rome after trial, perhaps at about
the same time as Peter—but this tradition has Paul crucified, which was not the
typical punishment for a Roman citizen. He would have been about 67 years old.
(Another tradition holds that Paul was acquitted by this own rhetorical genius and
that he subsequently received the endorsement of the Roman community to
travel to Spain.) We have no physical evidence of either of these traditions and
no scriptural description either.

Importance of the Letters

It appears that by this time and during the next few decades, Gentile Christians
began to understand the importance of Paul’s letters. Additional letters were
written by disciples of Paul and attributed to him. Some of the early churches

47
began to “collect” the letters, copying them and exchanging them with other
churches. The earliest compilation of the letters is attributed to an early
“episkopoi—bishop”, named Onesimus (perhaps the slave or a relative that is the
subject of one of Paul’s letters to an individual).

There is no question that Paul is critical to the development of Christianity as a

Gentile Church. His notions of church and community established one of the
major strains of Christian development over the next 2000 years.

At about the same time, the Gospels were being written. The Gospels, read in
the order in which they were likely written, also disclose a development of
theology—in the Letters we see development of the notion of redemption and
salvation (Paul always saw Jesus as the literal Son of God) while in the Gospels
we detect a gradual understanding of the meaning of the divinity of Jesus
(Christology).

Concepts from the Letters of Saint Paul: Summary in Ten Steps

1. Personal Experience has an Impact on Belief. Paul’s personal history

involved an early upbringing in a diaspora Jewish family in a Greco-Roman free
city where he attended “gymnasium” and learned well the basic rhetorical skills of
a learned Hellenist. He completed his education in Jerusalem where he focused
on Hebrew Scripture and moved into the conservative Pharisaic movement. At
midlife, he experienced an epiphany (an encounter with the risen Jesus) and a
conversion to discipleship. All of these experiences are reflected in his letters as
his practical Christian theology developed over the rest of his life. Paul’s
Christianity is a blend of Judaic Scripture and learning about and then modeling
one’s life on the life of Jesus of Nazareth in the context of living and working in
society.

2. Founder of Gentile Christianity. Paul took seriously the commission of

Jesus of Nazareth to evangelize the world. As the Apostle to the Gentiles, he
adapted Christianity to the Gentile world primarily by removing the “cultic” rules of
the Law of Moses from his communities and by not requiring conversion to
Judaism as a pre-requisite to being a Christian. Thus he created a Gentile
Christian Church which lived alongside and ultimately competed with and
overwhelmed the Judaic Christianity of the Jerusalem Church.

3. Anti-nomialism and the Golden Rule. Paul rejected the notion that
salvation was to found by living a “righteous life”, that is by living accordance with
the detailed, hundred-fold prescriptions of the Torah. He preached that Jesus of
Nazareth had proclaimed the primacy of the Golden Rule: love of God and love
of neighbor as the foundation of living a good life.

4. Paul, the First Theologian. Paul was the first Christian theologian: not only
did he reflect upon the life of Jesus and attempt to conform his own life and

48
lifestyle; he attempted to place Jesus in the Judaeo-Christian traditions (as the
new Adam and the new Moses) and to explain the crucifixion in theological
terms. Paul preached “redemption theology”—that Jesus had died to repair the
breach between God and humanity caused by the sin of Adam—that is, a
universal and ever-present sin (not just the ancient sin of an ancient forebear) of
humanity: pride and its resulting selfishness. This act of Jesus was a potential
“gift” that could not be “earned” but was freely bestowed on those who accepted
Jesus and converted their lives as a consequence of that acceptance.

5. Community. Paul founded numerous small community churches (“house

churches”) where Christians could work together toward salvation. For, Paul,
salvation is not an individual achievement, but a community effort. He developed
the notion of the Body of Christ to represent that various ways in which
community members could contribute. This is not an abstract concept, but a way
of looking at life: with recognition of diversity, equality, and interdependence.

6. Eucharist as Communion and Food for the Journey. Paul’s unity (the
Body of Christ) is unity in diversity, not sameness: Christian pilgrims on a journey
to salvation in community—helping each other along the way. His communities
were unique, democratic (within the norms of that time), and congregational. His
view of Eucharist reflected this: it was communion, an agape meal which drew
together the community in the re-enactment of the Lord’s Supper.

7. Equality in All Things. While Paul at least implicitly accepted the

hierarchical social view of his times, he challenged the notion that those “higher
in the hierarchy” were somehow better in the eyes of God—he emphasized
equality in diversity. This applies to his view of women: Paul believed that men
and women were different and had different vocations in life, but were
nevertheless equal before God. Women played key roles in Pauline
communities as leaders, ministers and hosts of Eucharist.

8. Charity. Paul believed that the “law of love”—philos—was the foundation of

society—in fact, the very definition of God; charity was thus the greatest virtue
and the truest virtue of a Christian life. Everything else, every standard of
conduct flowed from this notion of love. His Hymn to Love in 1 Cor is perhaps the
greatest proclamation of this idea.

9. Practical (or Moral) Theology. While Paul’s Letters are foundational in any
analysis of the theology of Christianity, Paul himself seemed much more
concerned with the practical consequences of the Christian creed. Paul was the
first “practical theologian” and the father of Christian moral theology.

10. Context. Paul’s practical theology required him to instruct his communities
in lifestyle morality (that is, the consequences of a life of love) and given the
context of his times, many of those instructions seem archaic to contemporary
society, but must be considered in context and in the entire body of his life’s work

49
and writings. We need to avoid choosing a single line or phrase and spinning
this into an alleged Pauline approval of specific attitudes or conduct today.

JDH2019

50