Paul: An Apostle to the Gentiles
 
Lecture One:
"Why Paul?" A question and some answers from Stephen Westerholm, Preface to the Study of Paul (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997) ix-x.
 
1) "Paul ...[seems to have] done more than any other for the early spread of Christianity."
2) "Letters in his name comprise half of the books of the New Testament."
3) "His letter to the Romans is, by a wide margin, the most influential nonnarrative account of the Christian faith."
 
On the basis of biblical authority, we read Paul, but if we as modern readers unacquainted with Paul were given the task of choosing whom to give authority, would we still choose to read Paul? As Westerholm points out, Paul's thinking strikes the student reader as obtuse and confusing. The purpose of the following introduction to Paul is to provide you with basic information about Paul and the nature of his writing, so that you will be better prepared to make your way through his prose and come to your own conclusions about what Paul is saying.
 
A description of Paul from The Acts of Paul and Thecla: "a man small in size, bald-headed, bandy-legged, well-built, with eyebrows meeting, rather long-nose, full of grace.... sometimes he seemed like a man and sometimes he had the countenance of an angel.""
 
Paul's Story
 
Before his trip to Damascus
 
Paul claims to be a Hebrew of the Hebrew (Phil 3:5; 2 Cor 11:22) presumably a Aramaic speaking Jew. He is from Tarsus, a tent maker by trade, and can claim Roman citizenship, but he also claims to have been raised in Jerusalem (Acts 22:3). He may be referring to his education "at the feet of Gamaliel" a leading Pharisee. Paul is a zealous Pharisee: he observes the Pharisaic traditions such as hand washing and Sabbath observance, he holds the Prophets and Writings to be scripture, and he is schooled in advanced methods of interpretation. He believes in the resurrection of the dead and final judgment; this last belief may include the conviction that some day all the nations will come to God's holy mountain (the Temple in Jerusalem) and acknowledge God's sovereignty. He does not believe that Jesus has been resurrected from the dead. As a Pharisee he becomes an opponent of Jesus' followers and even a persecutor of them. Paula Frederickson's suggestion that Paul's motives were political rather than strictly religious has found many supporters among New Testament scholars. According to her theory, the followers of Jesus who are proclaiming Jesus' message of the Kingdom and pronouncing him their Messiah pose a political threat to the larger Jewish communities in the diaspora. In fact, during the war in Judea less than forty years later, the Jewish community is rounded up in a gymnasium in Damascus under the charge of sedition and are slaughtered.
 
His trip to Damascus and what follows
 
Sometime between 34 and 36 c.e., Paul travels to Damascus to warn Jews in the synagogues not to heed the preaching of Jesus' followers. Enroute, he meets the resurrected Jesus and is forced to concede that Jesus has indeed been resurrected. He spends three years in Nabatea sorting out what has happened and then goes to Antioch with Barnabas and begins a series of three missionary journeys in which he acts as an apostle to the gentiles. He is arrested in Jerusalem for speaking against and violating the Temple sometime between 58 and 60 c.e. (Acts 21:27ff) and is taken to Rome where he is decapitated -- a privilege of his citizenship -- under Nero in 67-68 c.e.
 
Paul's experience on the road to Damascus is often called a conversion. Take a look at Gal 1:11-17; Acts 9:1-19; 22:4-16; 26:1-9. Paul seems to be comparing himself to a prophet, in particular to Isaiah (cf. Is 49:1. 6 "The Lord called me from the womb .... I will give you as a light to the nations, that my salvation may reach to the ends of the earth.") and Jeremiah (cf. Jer 1:5 "Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you, and before you were born, I consecrated you. I appointed you a prophet to the nations."). His claim to be an apostle to the gentiles is a response to his revelation that Jesus has been resurrected. Rather than a conversion experience, Paul experiences a revelation about God's unfolding plan of salvation. Clearly he sees Jesus' resurrection as an event that inaugerates the ingathering of the nations.
 
Once he begins his proselytization of Gentiles, his understanding of scripture and the law come under new scrutiny. He comes to the conclusion that the resurrection of Jesus spells the end of the reign of the law.
 
During Paul's ministry, he wrote letters to churches that he had established or visited, to individuals with whom he had church business, and to the community in Rome where he hoped to visit. Paul never wrote down the gospel that he preached to these churches. His letters are analogous to a telephone conversation that we overhear: we get only one side of the conversation. The letters are largely occasional letters written to address a particular situation. Some of them address problems that have arisen or questions that have been put to Paul or challenges to Paul's authority.
 
Even though, Paul's letters do not outline his theology or doctrinal beliefs as a treatise would, and although they tend to address extraordinary rather than ordinary situations, Christianity has based much of its doctrinal teachings and church order upon these letters. One of our principal tasks in our introductory examination of Paul's letters is to look at how we have derived doctrine and normative rules for the church from the letters.
 
With these thoughts in mind, let us turn to Paul's first letter to the Corinthians and look at how Paul answers the question of what sort of behavior defines the Church? What should the Church look like? Who is in and who is out?
 
1 Corinthians
Ancient Corinth
 
This letter contains some of Paul's most popular and poetic words, "If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong and a clanging symbol" (1 Cor 13:1). It also contains one of the more problematic passages for the ordination of women, "women should be silent in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as the law also says" (1 Cor 14:34). Many Mennonite women and all Amish women wear head coverings, because of one verse in this letter, althought it is based on logic which strikes us as odd: "women ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels" (1 Cor 11:10).
 
In order to make sense of this letter, we will proceed by asking basic questions that should be put to all of Paul's letters, and then we will attempt to articulate some basic principles upon which Paul's teachings about church order may be based. Then we will ask whether these principles may still be used to guide decisions about church order that Paul may not have anticipated.
 
General questions:
1:1-9 Introduction
1:10-6:20 Condemnation of situations in the Corinthian Church
7:1-15:58 Answers to questions in the letter from Corinth to Paul
16:1-24 Conclusion
 
Specific questions:
 
For each of the condemnation and answers, can we delineate what Paul's logic or purpose may have been?
 
Let us look at one condemnation and two questions:
The fellow who committed incest should be tossed out.
Should Christians eat meat offered to idols?
Should women speak in church?
 
Chapter 5 On Sexual Immorality
 
The situation seems straight forward. Incest is a sin, so kick the sinner out. ( Note that Paul includes sexual immorality in a list with such things as greed.) Before we draw up the simple rule that sinners should be tossed out of the church, let us look at how Paul envisions the church.
 
What sort of language does he use to describe the church? This is covenantal language borrowed from the Exodus story. Paul sees the church as analogous to Israel. He seems to have a notion of purity and holiness. Like Israel in the Old Testament, the church must be distinct from the world. It cannot confuse the ways of the world with its ways. If it is not distinct, how will the world recognize it and know that it represents life in Christ?
 
Paul seems to want to keep the church pure, but is this his final end or is it simply a means to an end? What does Paul hope for the man who is tossed from the church? In 5:5 Paul writes, "You are to hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord."
This line may mean a number of things:
In either case, Paul is not concerned about the purity of the Church for its own sake. He is worried about the purity of the Church for the sake of others.
 
Paul repeats a saying a couple of times in this letter: "All things are lawful for me" (6:12; 10:23), but then he adds that doing such things is not always beneficial to the body (the Church) nor do they build up the body. Paul is clearly concerned with the strength and growth of the church. Look at the metaphors that he uses for the Church, the body and the temple( 3:10 Jesus is the foundation). Conveniently, we in the late twentieth century can use the verb to build for both.
 
Now let us turn to Paul's answers to questions. What principle does he apply to the question of whether one should eat meat sacrificed to idols? He writes, "if food is a cause of their falling, I will never eat meat, so that I may not cause of of them to fall" (8:13). What does he mean by falling? What might someone who has eaten meat dedicated to an idol think he or she has done? Possibly, he or she might think they have committed an act of idolatry. To what sort of weak understanding could Paul be referring? Could Paul be concerned about those outside the Church as well as those in? If Christians are seen to act as though they were worshipping other gods, if they appeared to be like other religious groups, would their invitation to join the church seem as urgent or necessary?
 
Again, Paul is concerned with building up the church. Whether something is appropriate or not cannot simply be determined by whether it is immoral. The Church cannot draw up a definitive list of acceptable and unacceptable behaviors. Situations and perceptions change. For example, Paul says women should wear head coverings. If this seems like nonsense to women within the church and becomes a reason for leaving the church or worse an obstacle for entering the church, then does it build up the church?
 
Paul's principle: that which does not build up the Church, that which impedes the work of the Church by making the gospel seem irrelevant or baptism unnecessary, should not be allowed within the Church.
 
We now turn to one of the most problematic passages in the letter, the prohibition against speaking in church. The following is an argument that you can accept or reject; I ask only that you understand the argument.
 
When a text is confusing, one begins by asking how does this passage fit into Paul's thought in general or in the context of the letter.
 
Given that Paul encourages a unity of practice in the church and the ministry of women elsewhere, it seems unlikely that Paul affirms the Corinthian churches prohibition.
 
What general principles can we then delineate for church order in the Pauline churches?
 
Galatians
 
Galatians is a doctrinal letter insofar as it discusses why one should enter the church rather than be circumcised into the Sinai covenant. His argument generates an antithesis between works of the law and faith.
 
What do we think the distinction between works of the law and faith means?
 
Luther and other protestant reformers used this antithesis to argue against the sale of indulgences in the Roman Catholic church and against that church's sacramental theology. But Paul writes about the question of whether one should enter into the covenant of Abraham through circumcision or the church through baptism and whether it is necessary to be circumcized in order to join the church. The idea that what you think is more important than what you do would be absurd to Paul. Paul advocates baptism into the Christian community and behavior consonant with that community.
 
Paul delineates a series of distinctions between the two covenants of the Hebrew Scripture (the Abraham covenant and, perhaps, the Sinai covenant) and a life in Christ:
 
 Sinai Covenant  Life in Christ
 Circumcision  Baptism
 flesh  spirit
 law  faith / law of Christ
 slavery  freedom
 Adam  New Adam
 death  life
 child by birth  child by adoption
 old covenant  new covenant
   
 
 
Does Paul's rejection of circumcision signify that he thinks the law is evil?
No! Paul says the purpose of the law is to serve as a paidegogos (3:24), as the servant who escorts the school boy to school and sees that he stays out of trouble.
 
A helpful question to ask is how does Paul then read scripture? He seems to read it typologically. That is, he sees the events of the Old Testament narrative as types of the events of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection and the church.
 
Is the Sinai covenant a false covenant? No! Paul argues that the covenant of circumcision does not do, nor does it claim to do, what the covenant of Christ does. The Sinai covenant is intended to bring the Israelites into a relationship with God. Paul seems to argue that the new covenant brings both Jew and Gentile into relationship with God, but more than this, it is the preliminary step toward the general resurrection.
 
The contrast between the law and faith seems to use metonomy, a figure of speech in which an attribute or a part is substituted for the name of the thing intended. For example, when we can refer to the Queen by calling her the crown. When Paul refers to participation in the resurrected body of Christ, he calls this faith. When Paul refers to the Sinai covenant, he calls this the law.
 
The popular view that Paul preaches "justification by faith not by law" by which he means that one cannot save oneself by his or her own efforts seems to distort Paul's teaching. Paul drives a wedge between the promise to Abraham and the Covenant of Abraham. Christ fulfills that promise. Jews, either by birth or through circumcision, share in fellowship under the law, but this fellowship has no special priviledge. This sort of fellowship is not the fulfillment of the promise that in Abraham all the nations shall be blessed, because it maintains a distinction between Jews and Gentiles. Paul seems to be arguing that all Gentiles need not become Jews in order to receive the blessing.
 
If we look at Paul's letter to the Romans and back to 1 Corinthians, we find that Paul argues that something and everything changes with the Christ event.
What does Jesus' death and resurrection accomplish according to Paul?
 
Paul uses multiple narratives to describe the Christ event. Humanity was enslaved to sin and Jesus paid the ransom. Humanity was in peril, and Jesus came to the rescue. Humanity has indentured itself to servitude and Jesus paid the price of redemption. Humanity was estranged from God and Jesus brought reconciliation. Humanity was in a state of impurity and Jesus rendered it pure. Humanity was dead and Jesus brought it back to life.
 
In Rom 8:17 Paul writes, "I have been crucified with Christ, it is not longer I who live, but Christ who live is me." In many places, Paul describes his baptism as a death and resurrection. Baptism is the beginning of a transformation. For Paul, Jesus is the first of the general resurrection. Paul does not assume that he will die before the general resurrection; he believes that he may be transformed in the twinkling of an eye" (1 Cor 15:32).
 
Conclusion: As you will have noted, Paul's letters are not easy to read, and I have qualified many of the statements that I make about them with perhaps and maybe. Moreover, we have only skimmed the surface of Paul's writing and our conclusions are general. Paul wrote with a sense of urgency that the Church should be united and should seek to grow for the sake of the world. Paul seems to base his conclusions about how the Church should act upon whether those actions are beneficial to that goal. I have tried to clarify two issues: the contemporary question regarding women's ordination and the false understanding of Paul's distinction between works of the law and faith.
 
 
 
PAUL'S EPISTLES

1 Thessalonians ca. 51 AD. Due to Paul's hasty departure, he sends a letter with Timothy giving further instructions and words of encouragement regarding idleness, the parousia, and life in Christ.

2 Thessalonians is written shortly thereafter. Paul responds to speculation that the Day of the Lord has already come that has resulted in idleness on the part of some members of the community.

1 Corinthians ca. 53-54. Chloe's people have reported to Paul the following: division in the community, a scandalous case of incest, and litigation among members. Paul has also received a letter with a series of questions regarding, marriage, meat sacrificed to idols, the doctrine of resurrection, spiritual gifts, women speaking in worship, and Paul's own status as an apostle. This letter gives us several important key themes: freedom in Christ is not license, the telos (end/goal) of Christian ethics is "building up the body of Christ," and love as the greatest of spiritual gifts.

2 Corinthians After writing 1 Cor a new problem arises: groups have arrived in Corinth carrying letters of recommendation from Jerusalem, perhaps with a summary of the law (cf. Acts 15) or Noachim precepts. These people reject Paul's apostolic status. Paul has visited, but the visit is not felicitous. He does not come for a second expected visit and people accuse him of being fickle. He has sent Timothy in the summer of 54 with a "letter of tears." Paul responds to all of this and he also writes to introduce Titus who is there to collect money for the Church. We know from Rom 15:26 that this last effort is successful, and given that the community kept the letter, I think that we can suppose that there was reconciliation.

Galatians -- Paul has been accused of preaching a watered down gospel, because he does not require circumcision or calendar observance, and his authority as an apostle has been challenged. His opponents argue that his authority is derived from Jerusalem and depends upon Jerusalem leadership. Paul argues that his gospel is directly from Christ. He creates a dichotomy between law and faith by driving a wedge between Abraham and the Torah. Christ is the sole recipient and content of the promise 3:16-29. Faith does not become a reality until Christ comes, and then one can become a child of God through baptism in Christ.

Roman ca 55-58 -- Paul is at the close of his third missionary journey and his task in the east is finished. He now plans to visit Rome and points west. (Note: he eventually gets there after being arrested in Caesarea and arguing that as a Roman citizen he should be tried was such.) He seems to be writing to defuse the hostility between Jewish and Gentile Christians. The letter begins with the question of the relationship between Jews and Gentiles and the "universal" church. On the one hand, he wants to convince his Jewish reader that not only were Gentiles in a state of sin prior to Jesus Christ, but so were the Jews. They needed the Gospel of Christ as well. On the other hand, he wants to deal with the question of why Gentiles rather than Jews are entering into the body of Christ. What is the place of the Jew in God's plan for salvation. Paul argues that the Jews will eventually enter into the new Israel as God intends. Chapters 5-8 explore the meaning of life in Christ.

Philippians ca 60-63 -- This is mainly a letter of thanks and encourages a life of imitation of Christ, hence, the inclusion of the Christ Hymn 2:6-11. Paul also wants to relieve anxiety about the welfare of Epaphroditus and warn them about detractors of his who may pay a call.

Philemon -- Paul is writing from Rome. The letter is addressed to the christian owner of a run away slave, Onesimus. Onesimus has ended up in Rome and has become a part of Paul's following. Paul has now sent Onesimus back to his master with this letter in hand. The letter encourages Philemon to make Onesimus a brother in Christ in all respects, that is to grant his freedom.

Ephesians -- This letter is an announcement of God's plan to create a messianic people of God and an exhortation to unity.

Colossians -- This letter addresses the absolute pre-eminence of Christ in the universe and in the church, warnings against false teachers and a description of the life in Christ

Pastoral Epistles: 1 and 2 Timothy -- Timothy is Paul's legate in the region of Ephesus, and Titus is Paul's legate on the island of Crete. The purpose of these epistles is to instruct these two younger men on the direction of local christian communities stressing the following recommendations: (1) to adhere faithfully to the traditional deposit of the faith, (2) to defend the faith against heretical teaching, (3) to appoint qualified officials in the local communities, (4) to regulate public worship, (5) to exhort the faithful to lead exemplary lives in accordance with the duties of their state in life.

Hebrews has often been attributed to Paul but there are good reasons for believing that the author is someone else. For one thing, the vocabulary and style is very different from Paul's. Hebrews is not a letter; it is a treatise, a systematic argument that explains how the institutions of the Old Testament are forerunners of Jesus. They are provisional, transient copies of the reality that Jesus completely embodies for all time.

 
Writing Assignment Four: Pauline Ethics
 
Because Paul describes right behavior in terms of whether or not it will build up the church, some have described Paul's ethic as an interim ethic -- a temporary ethic until Christ's second coming-- and others have described it as a pragmatic ethic -- an ethic measured by what it accomplishes. This last writing assignment is designed to help you put more flesh on the bones of the ethic described in class.
 
The following are questions that might help you come to some decisions about Paul's ethic in the epistle that you choose to study (Philippians or Phlemon):
 
What principles of right behavior does Paul advocate for a decision-making guide for individuals and groups?
What does Paul seem to suggest ought to be rather than what is?
Does Paul make normative ethical statements, such as, stealing is wrong?
Does Paul delineate moral principles, such as, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you?"
Does Paul presuppose any principle that takes precedence over other considerations, including legal ones or customs?
 
Students aiming for an A might consider whether Paul presupposes a natural law. Saint Thomas Aquinas, a natural law theorist, argues that both natural and divine law are expressions of the one basic law, established by God but knowable by reason. Instead, you might consider whether Paul reasons from a teleological or deontological theory of right and wrong. In teleological ethics, good or bad obtains in the ends of an act, while in deontological ethics, certain acts are intrinsically right or wrong. Or, you could explore Paul's ethic in terms of virtue theory. Does Paul encourage the development of virtues or qualities or character rather than advocating a form of moral reasoning?