7. Paul in Community - GeorgeMartin.org · Chapter 7: Paul in Community 3 about oneself and one’s life.”” Gregory went on to say God becomes something like “a combination

6/10/19 11:02:07 AM Note from author: This is a work in progress. Please do not reproduce without my permission. I welcome editorial

suggestions, comments & questions. Use the Contact Link.

7. Paul in Community

“And there is something on the stage of history that was not there before: a community that calls itself by the name of the crucified Messiah.”1

"God settles into the recesses formed in the world by the little ones, the nothings and nobodies of

the world, what Paul in First Corinthians calls ta me onta.”2

It is not that stories are part of human life, but that human life is part of a story.3 7.1 To see a most unusual leader A major part of the story behind this book is that I had gone through many years of ministry as a pastor and preacher thinking that I knew what was in the Bible, and that included knowing what I thought was essential to the Pauline letters themselves. What I’m offering here isn’t what I thought I knew. Like many, as noted by the New Testament scholar Paul Meyer, I had fallen into the error of thinking that I knew what was in the Bible. “No curse lies more heavily upon our study of the Bible, especially in a theological seminary, than the confidence that we already know what is written on its pages.”4 What if the mysterious workings of the Holy Spirit that originally inspired Holy Scripture are still there waiting to erupt into life, or better yet into the lives of those of who dare to open its pages? Can it be possible that ordinary pastors and people can have something akin to the experience Karl Barth reported having as he wrote what became a monumental earth-shattering commentary on Paul’s letter to the Romans? “During the work it was often as though I caught her breath from afar, from Asia Minor or Corinth, something primeval, from the ancient East, indefinably sunny, wild, original that somehow is hidden behind the sentences.”5 I’m not sure about catching Paul’s breath, but finding stories (both implicit and explicit) of the narrative of Paul in his letters lets us see him in a different light. It isn’t a Paul striding assuredly through the history of his time. It is a Paul whose own life, and the certainty he once had, was turned around leading him to a life he could never have imagined. We don’t need the account in Acts to understand what changed for Paul as it is right there in his letters. What mattered is how this once proud Pharisee ended up living the Jesus story with the very people he was trained to disrespect, but now saw fully included in God’s grace and mercy. What also appears in nearly all of his letters—perhaps with Romans as the outlier—is an emotional honesty that may be the most neglected reality in the way many of us were taught to read Paul. What leaps out from Paul’s 2nd letter to the Corinthians, for example, is a picture into Paul’s “grieving soul.” This is the way he is described in Welborn’s book The End of Enmity: Paul and the Wrongdoer of Second Corinthians. Earlier in this book I discussed a number of paintings of 1 Meyer, Paul. 2004, 14. 2 Caputo, 2006, 45. (ta me onta be translated either as “nobodies,” or literally “those without a being.) 3 Newbigin, 1995, 82. 4 Ibid. 15. 5 MacDonald, Neil B., 2000, 75 [Originally from Barth, “The Strange New World Within the Bible.” 98-9.]

Chapter 7: Paul in Community 2

Paul stemming mostly from the imaginations of artists in the Renaissance and beyond. A tall, well fed, and muscular Paul was more often than not the usual picture. In contrast Welborn finds a Paul expressing his anguish and “psychological distress”6 with regard to the rupture of a relationship with a dear friend—never identified by name in any letter. Welborn concluded it had to be to Gaius, a wealthy patron of the early assembly in Corinth. He was one of the two who Paul remembered by name that he had baptized. (1 Cor. 1:14) Seeing Paul in community is a challenge because the usual assumptions are that Paul must have been a strong leader, with the usual set of skills applied to those with power and authority. This just isn’t the reality we see in his letters. He chose a strange way and used unusual metaphors for a man who wanted to be considered an admirable leader. This Paul would be equally weird in our world. A leader writing a letter of tears isn’t actually standing tall. (2 Cor. 2:4) A leader talking about his escape from arrest by being let down in a basket over the walls of Damascus isn’t an example of courage. (2 Cor. 11:32-33). Rarely will a leader remind people of a terrible physical disability that launched their relationship. Paul did. Paul arrived in Galatia in some physical state that would ordinarily call forth scorn (Gal. 4:14). Few leaders would list the terrible things they had endured as badges of honor, but Paul did. (2 Cor. 11:23-33) He even told the Corinthians he was “…content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities for the sake of Christ…” (2 Cor. 12:10) He could not have been the example of leadership they admired. I can think of few leaders of our times who proclaim a similar story, though there have been some notable exceptions, such as Ghandi, Martin Luther King, and Nelson Mandela. What we have with Paul is “the apostle of weakness.”7 What we discover in Paul is a paradoxical counter-narrative that deconstructs a world of upward mobility and pretensions to importance. In a very real sense Paul had to be a disappointment, or at the very least, the most paradoxical confusing man in a world that valued conformity and traditional roles. This Paul, small, beleaguered, and impoverished, rarely recognized at least in public, was always there in his letters. This same Paul would not be readily embraced in our world—especially if it is a world that values strength, youthfulness, wealthy, and prosperity. The Mennonite theologian John Yoder questioned if this Paul would fit with the image that was traditionally associated with the evangelical movement called Campus Crusade. He said that they had an “expectation that the gospel has a special attraction for, or a special tendency to produce, beauty queens and sports heroes.”8 Yoder pointed this out in an essay challenging the individualistic approach to evangelism characteristic of many segments of Protestantism. It it his translation of a key passage in 2 Corinthinians 5:17, discussed below, which can help us see, at least from Paul’s eyes, the importance of community in the life of these new followers of Jesus. 7.2 A community even Paul could never have imagined—at least prior to Jesus A good place to begin is where we are right now. It’s a “do your own thing world.” Advertising immerses us in the idea that we deserve the very best. Religion itself has been transformed into what one sociologist has called “Moralistic Therapeutic Deism.” The underlying philosophy here is that we can choose our own religion; no one should try to convince or persuade anyone else about what to believe; and that basically all religions are interchangeable. Brad Gregory explains that this modernistic and individualistic approach to faith is “...to make one “feel good and happy

6 Welborn, 2011, 436. 7 Sumney, 1993, 90. 8 Yoder, John 1980, 128


about oneself and one’s life.”” Gregory went on to say God becomes something like “a combination Divine Butler and Cosmic Therapist.”9 Paul would be sick to his stomach. What Paul knew about community was radically different than what is sometimes offered up as the way to have God in your life. The extreme example of this comes from the scholar J. R. Kirk’s book “Jesus I Have Loved, but Paul?” Kirk is not an advocate for this particular theology. Note how often the word “my” (singular) appears in the following:

“My heart. My life. My relationship with God. My alienation from God. My repentance. My faith. My allegiance. My Lord. My justification. My sanctification. My membership added to the church. My quiet time. My closed-eye self–examination at communion. My route to heaven. My escape from the coming conflagration. My soul with Jesus forever.”10

Once more we see Paul gasping for air with regard to this kind of claim. Framing it more in light of the kind of philosophy that grounds identity in relationship and community these claims to selfhood are what Father Colin D. Miller thinks of as a “historical oddity.”

“We are, in other words, a historical oddity: we are “selves.” A “self” is the “core of an individual” who has no telos, no virtues, no vices, no authority, and no story. We are, in other words, a shadow of what we once were. We live in a way that our classical forefathers, if MacIntyre is right, could hardly recognize as human.”11

In Chapter 4 “Paul the Storyteller” there was a reference to MacIntyre’s foundational belief that we are all embedded in stories that are larger than ourselves, even if we have never understood it in those terms. Those who can’t see themselves in the context of story, however, are sadly “historical oddities.” That is not Paul’s story. We find him not only in community, which he clearly is, but as in a a network of communities sharing historical continuity. Critical to this story of Paul is the related insight of MacIntyre regarding the reality of “Stories are lived before they are told—except in the case of fiction.”12 In the context of finding Paul we see him inside his letters living a very Jewish story on the edge of history. Paul is in conversation about that story with the expectation of seeing God acting in the midst of their world. The present moment was relevant because of the larger story in which Paul and his friends lived. There are two aspects to Biblical time that are relevant in reference to the way Paul and were living. It was with expectant hope for what God would do next. The observations of Jurgen Moltmann can help clarify what their concepts of time were all about. First of all, there is a sharp, even jarring, difference between a nuclear-time, such as we have known in this world wondering if the earth even has a future and Pauline time. Paul was grounded in a biblical concept of apocalyptic time which “awaits the end of time with

9 Gregory, 2012, 170-1. 10 Kirk, 2011, 53. 11 Miller, 2014, 39. 12 MacIntyre, 2010, 212.


passionate hope: ‘Come, Lord Jesus, come soon’ (Rev. 22.20)”13 Second, we need to understand the meaning of the Greek word eggus. It is a word known to us in the phrase “the kingdom of God is present (eggus),” which is to say it is near. As a child I remember watching the clock at the end of each school day waiting for the magical moment the bell would ring singling “freedom.” The Greek phrase “it is near” (eggus) though isn’t about watching a clock or looking at a calendar. In Greek it is more of a “spatial term,” relating to geography and not to time.14 It is near in the sense of being “close by,” or “just around the corner.” It is also, as Moltmann emphasizes, a matter involving followers of Jesus certain that “the signs of the messianic era are already visible.”15 Inside these new faith communities Paul found these signs! He belonged to community (actually “communities” plural) and not just as one in leadership. He writes, after all, to his brothers and sisters. Mention was made previously about a key translation of a passage from 2 Corinthians. We must begin with the King James Version, because this translation was the basic source for much biblical scholarship for many recent centuries during which Protestant Reformation, in particular, had a focus on conversion of individuals. This one verse was important in that context. In what follows the King James Version and the New Revised Standard Version appear side-by-side: KJV 2 Cor (5:17) NRSV “If any man is in Christ, “So if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creature.” there is new creation.” These two versions are basically the same, except that the NRSV avoids using “man” or the pronoun “he.”16 This passage has generally been focused on what changes must occur in our inner-being when we are converted or find ourselves believing in Christ. There are assumptions at work about the inward nature of our being, but based on Yoder’s study of this text these are presumptions more often coming from a Protestant bias.. What matters in light of the main subject of this chapter is that Paul wasn’t preaching in a tent and calling for individual conversions. But he was creating a unique community, the make-up of which, was radically different from what even he ever imagined possible. We need a correct understanding of this passage to get at this key principle. What’s wrong with these translations. First of all, the word “he” or any singular pronoun is missing in Greek. The second issue, with regard to the KJV translation is with the Greek word ktisis with translation using the singular English word creature. It really twists the meaning of what Paul was saying when the focus becomes what happens to an individual. To be sure the KJV also used the singular word creature in that famous part of Romans 8 when Paul considered what future glory awaits us. There is passage familiar to many from attending funerals, but it may sound strange if we hear the King James

13 Moltmann, 1999, 159. 14 Arndt & Gingrich, 1958, 214 15 Moltmann, 1999, 97. 16 Yoder, 1980, 130. (Much of this argument is indebted to Yoder.)


version, “Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature [ktisis] shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom 8:39.) Compare the NRSV translation: “Nor height, nor depth, nor anything else in all creation (ktisis) will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord.” Paul has a new creation in mind. It means the coming of a whole new world, the first fruits of which are in evidence in the communities bearing the name of Jesus as their Lord. This phrase new creation was at the heart of Paul’s argument in Galatians. Paul’s vision is for Jews in community with those from all the nations (ethne). Thus, he closed his argument in Galatians saying, “For neither circumcision nor uncircumcision is anything; but new creation (ktisis) is everything.” Gal. 6:15 The powerful inclusive vision of what is to come is best captured in the translation of 2 Cor. 5:17 offered by N.T. Wright, namely “if anyone in Messiah, new creation!”17 There isn’t a verb in that sentence in Greek, but it is a statement of fact. No matter where you come from you belong to something new on the face of the earth, and you belong together. What will distinguish Paul’s concept of belonging from what is often emphasized in many of our churches is the emphasis placed on belonging to the story of Christ, and far less on knowing the story. There was no such thing in Paul’s world as a “confession of faith,” unless it was understood to be the Shema: “and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might.” (Deut. 6:5) Paul’s Jewish roots mean that his was a monotheistic faith as we see in the following comment by N.T. Wright, which emphasizes Paul’s revision of the Shema in light of his experience of Jesus Messiah (Christ). “And that fresh theology – creational, eschatological and cultic monotheism, brought into three dimensions through having the crucified Jesus at its heart – finds its richest and densest expression in Paul’s radical revision of the Shema. ‘For us there is one theos, one kyrios.’”18 What is dramatically different is not the proclamation of the oneness of God, but all those now brought into that story through Christ. The concept of the unity and singularity of God (and yes, God in Christ) wasn’t something to be confessed, as if you understood what it meant, but to be lived—especially in relationship to other believers and non-believers. What must be emphasized over and over in our considerations of Paul in community is that faith (pistis) didn’t really mean belief but loyalty. This was actually what the Roman emperor understood by the Greek word pistis, in that all in the empire were expected to render their loyalty (pistis) to him. Therein lay the foundation for what would bring about Paul’s death during the time of Nero. With Paul and his favorite term ekklesia we must consider the political implications of the kind of community Paul envisioned and commended to those early followers of Jesus Messiah. As just suggested Paul’s use of the term pistis had a direct connection to the claims of the Roman emperors in the time of Paul. These same emperors expected all in

17 Wright, 2015, 1072 18 Ibid, 670.


the empire, whether citizen or slave, to acknowledge their emperor as their Kyrios (Lord). With these Greek words in mind we can go deeper into this picture of Paul in community. What Paul expected to find in these communities of faith was a standard of ethical practice that he knew to be antithetical to many of the values maintained by those in power in 1st century Rome. We must always remember, of course, that Rome was more than a city. To speak the word “Rome” was to invoke the entire idea of empire, and what’s especially important for our understanding of Paul, is that it was an empire founded on the principles of violence and domination. The violence imposed on Jesus (crucifixion) was standard throughout the Roman Empire, known to one and all as the way Rome controlled any who might question its power or authority. What we must also keep in mind is that Paul immersed himself in the lives of those who led “short, desperate, and destitute lives.”19 That is a phrase used by the philosopher Caputo describing those known to Jesus. He made the point that we can see the very same people clearly depicted in our times with the movie Slumdog Millionaire—a movie where we massive numbers of people wearing rags were digging through garbage to find anything of value. Our modern day “slumdogs” have always had their counterparts throughout history, and certainly during the first century when Paul responded to the call of God. The Paul we are finding in his letters is one who had trouble with those of privilege who neglected the needs of the most destitute in their midst. Thankfully the few letters we have offer us a picture of Paul who was willing to contend for the dignity of the “least” in his world. That is how Paul began responding to some questions that the Corinthians had addressed to him. He also had a report of some issues that had emerged in the life of the assembly in Corinth. His first letter to the Corinthians begins with his observations regarding the divisions that had taken place in a competitive environment destined to undermine the essential aspects of community, or koinonia. Paul expected followers of Jesus to live, as he did, with a whole set of values quite different from the prevailing vertical relationships in which only a very few were privileged. It is important to note just how serious Paul began when writing 1 Corinthians. The NRSV translation of Paul wishing that there would be “no divisions among you” is misleading, because the Greek word there is schisma. The better translation is “no schisms among you!” A schism is a tearing of the body. Its more than an argument or a difference of opinion. In the Greco-Roman world as well as in our world it is a negative term. In the view of Margaret Mitchell Paul was using the word schisma because Paul was addressing “a serious social threat to the life of the church community.”20 Also misleading is the NRSV translation “For it has been reported to me by Chloe’s people that there are quarrels among you, my brothers and sisters.” Mitchell said the word is too weak.21 The Greek word is erides and it is related to the Greek god of discord

19 Caputo, John D, 21013, 253. 20 Mitchell, 1991, 72. 21 Ibid, 81.


with the name Eris. Paul was dealing with something more serious in which there were strong interests and parties with the potential to destroy the community. Paul wasted little time in getting the heart of the serious issues at stake. There were factions at work were claiming different allegiances: to Paul, to Apollos, to Cephas, or to Christ. Paul asked similar rhetorical questions “Has Christ been divided?” A little further on Paul continued: “What then is Apollos? “What is Paul?” (1 Cor. 3:5-9). In those verses Paul clearly assumed priority over Apollos by making a comparison designed to indicate who was meant to be followed in regard to the direction of life in the community. Paul planted, and Apollos got out the hose to water what Paul started. He did affirm that both of them were God’s servants, but the point of affirming Paul’s role certainly could not have gone unnoticed by those who knew the story of Paul’s ministry in Corinth. A little further on in there is another allusion to Apollos, but he isn’t even named. “According to the grace of God given to me, like a skilled master builder I laid a foundation, and someone else is building on it.” (1 Cor. 3:10). We will never know what Apollos thought when hearing that metaphor. In many ways 1 Corinthians begins with Paul’s rebuke of those claiming a sophisticated spirituality and therefore an authority in the community where some were demeaning others. By virtue of what Paul himself said in 1 Cor. 1:26 we can assume that these were the few who were wise, powerful, or of noble birth. It would be hard to not place Apollos in that category. What we cannot avoid at this point is the clear assumption on Paul’s part claiming an originating authority. By this term—not borrowed from anyone else—I am recognizing that Paul sees himself as a father (and we should say mother) to those in churches he founded. The question is this: are Paul’s patriarchal assumptions any different from those in the prevailing culture? To be sure Paul never shirked from claiming responsibility for the assemblies he founded. At the same time my contention is that he is unlike any father or master members of these Jesus Messiah communities had ever known. He was, to be sure, claiming authority and the responsibility for teaching and preaching the meaning of the gospel. Moreover, and something often overlooked, Paul offered practical advice, meant to bring members of the community together, all the while sharing in the peace of Christ. Paul, however, has little respect for the patriarchal assumptions that diminish the worth of others. This is critical to our understanding of Paul in his own words. Paul certainly, and maybe we might say justly, expected some degree of obedience to the norms he understood as essential to their common life. What we should consider is that Paul sought a form of equality and mutuality in the context of fellowship almost unheard of in his world. Cynthia Kittridge is a New Testament scholar who has looked at the different expectations regarding Paul’s concept of obedience. In particular she makes a contrast between the Paul who wrote Philippians and the one (presumably a devoted follower of Paul some year later) who wrote Colossians and Ephesians. What she sees happening with both Pauls is what she called “a vision of equality struggling for


expression within the dominant patriarchal culture.”22 As we will note when we look at Paul’s advice regarding marriage and celibacy (1 Cor. 7) the practical advice he offers is intended to create unity among equals, who are also asked to respect the decisions others make. For a moment, though, we need to consider what Paul remembered about those who first responded to his gospel after he had come to Corinth. “Consider your own call, brothers and sisters: not many of you were wise by human standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth.” (1 Cor. 1:26) There are two ways to interpret this passage. One is the way of Gerhard Theissen who emphasized the exception, namely the few who must have been those “wise, powerful, and of noble birth” Theissen wrote, "If Paul nevertheless hints at exceptions to his picture, it is due to the fact that in these exceptions reality breaks through the Pauline rhetoric and we must assume that these exceptions had a great significance in the social reality of the Corinthian congregation.”23 We can certainly see at other points in this letter that Paul was dealing the arrogance and presumption of a few with their own sense of privilege. This matter was clearly an issue for Paul with regard to the communal celebration of the Lord’s Supper which Paul addressed in the 11th chapter. The other point to make on this verse, regards the many who would listen to this letter, and rejoice in what Paul was saying. Paul was writing to the slumdogs of his world, now connected to Jesus and now welcomed to a level of dignity hardly visible anywhere but in Paul’s understanding of ekklesia.24 If our focus, however, remains on those privileged few we most likely fail to reckon with the stunning claim of Paul made just a few verses later. “God chose what is low and despised in the world, things that are not (ta me onta), to reduce to nothing things that are.” (1 Cor 1:28) Paul’s declaration regarding God choosing “things that are not” flew directly in the face of Greek philosophy which primarily gave license to the very few who claimed their place in the world based on the concept that they had a “being” (ousia) that preceded and precluded all the others in their world.25 Notably, Paul is recognizing the “things that are not” (the ta me onta) having much greater theological significance in contrast to the “things that are”, namely those who were those from a social and political context claiming their “being” (ousia) in contrast to all others. Consider how Caputo understands the importance of this verse.

“By this I mean that God withdraws from the world’s order of presence, prestige, and sovereignty in order to settle into those pockets of protest in contradiction to the world. God belongs to the air, to the call, the spirit that inspires and aspires, that breeds justice. God settles into the recesses formed in the world by the little

22 Kittredge, C. 1998. 36. 23 Theissen, G. 2003. 375-6. 24 Greg Woolf notes that in ancient Rome humanity was equated with wealth, thus assuming the poor (the vast majority) were equivalent to dogs. Woolf, 2206, 95. 25 Caputo,J. 2006. 147.


ones, the nothings and nobodies of the world, what Paul in First Corinthians calls ta me onta.”26 p. 45

Over and over throughout his letters to the Corinthians we see Paul claiming allegiance with those nobodies (the ta me onta). This reality of Paul’s story continues throughout this account because by virtue of what he tells us he was no longer claiming to be part of world of privilege. Remember, Paul called himself a slave (doulos) in writing to the Romans. The Letter begins, Paulos doulos iesou christou! (Rom1:1) Paul a slave of Jesus Christ. The genitive formation of the last word (christou) means that Paul belongs to this one, this Jesus Christ. Paul, who accepted as his own identity that of being a slave, also saw in the story of Jesus the same. It is a story told poetically in a hymn encased in Philippians. Most scholars are in agreement that the hymn in Philippians (2:6-11) was not written by Paul, but quoted because the community in Philippi must have known it through their worship. This hymn (or poem) described the story of the one who shared the life of God (Jesus) as the one “who emptied (ekenosen) himself, taking the form of a slave (doulos). What is striking about this picture is that giving up privilege and power was so rare in that world. It is equally rare in our world as well. Rather than think of this as some quaint, slightly off-center, action we must consider its political implications. As Elizabeth Tamez has pointed out this hymn appeared in “a context where ambition abounds and people kill for the kind of power, wealth, and status that demands a servile prostration of its subjects.”27 She concluded, “Reading the poem as a provocative political statement takes away the absolute dominion of the emperor and also highlights the emperor’s unhealthy attitudes toward power, luxury, and grandeur.” One of the issues throughout 1 Corinthians is the unity Paul expected to find among those shaping Christ-like lives. It is a unity that will come with a cost, particularly for the privileged. Nearly every issue addressed in that letter concerns a unity that seems to be in jeopardy, but that is because of the assertions of rights to status and influence by the very few. Paul addressed himself to those causing divisions because they had what Tamez has rightly called “unhealthy attitudes.” What was at stake was Paul’s concept of ekklesia. 7.3 Reflecting on ekklesia Paul certainly had a sense of history in terms of what God had done in the past, but he would not have expected to see what we know as a subject of study—what we call ‘church history.” The word “church”, so familiar to us, would also be strange. Paul only knew the word ekklesia as key for those who gathered in the name of Jesus as the word for their corporate identity. As noted in the Introduction I have been reluctant to use the English word “church” is this account, even though every English translation of the New Testment consistently translates ekklesia as church. For our purposes here we must remember that Paul could not have conceived of ekkleisa as a word applying to various

26 Ibid, 45. 27 Tamez, 2016, 75.


buildings arranged around a town square. For Paul an ekklesia was always a community! I think he would have agreed with the two-fold understanding of church articulated by Rowan Wiliams: “…the Christian ekklesia is both an assembly for those who are not at home in the present order and a revelation of true order—as a sign of both disruption and of harmony.”28 I am not inclined, however, as some Biblical scholars are to affirm that Paul’s use of the term ekklesia was overtly and intentionally subversive. There were many associations (religious, economic, trade-oriented, and social) that used the same term to describe themselves. The basic understanding for the multiple groups using the term was “…a call for togetherness—the idea stressed by almost every other known ancient association’s title.”29 The conclusion of Last is in contrast to that of Horsely who wrote “Ekklesia is thus a political term with certain religious overtones.”30 I have no trouble with the idea that Paul is extremely aware of the subversive nature of what it meant to be a group that dared to say that a man crucified had risen from the dead. Paul wasn’t writing letters in prison for jay-walking. We will explore the political and subversive side of Paul in Chapter 12, “Paul in Trouble”, but for now we understand what Paul expected to find in the ekklesia he had founded. Given how common were the many associations in the first century called ekklesia, it is hard to pin politically revolutionary aspects to this word as something that got Paul arrested. Last and Ascough31 have pointed out too many other groups across a broad spectrum of categories in the first century also called themselves ekkleisa. The better path to follow regarding Paul’s use of the term ekklesia is to understand how it framed membership in the community and established boundary markers distinguishing insiders from outsiders. Clearly, Paul expected something different from ekklesia connected to Christ. For one thing geography did not matter. Some church names in America, to be sure, have framed their identity in terms of geographical location. I have treasured the insight of Louis Martyn regarding Galatian 1:22 where Paul commented on his first visit to Peter and James in Jerusalem three years after he returned to Damascus from Arabia. Having met Peter and James, Paul said, “…and I was still unknown by sight to the churches of Judea that are in Christ.” Martyn’s comment was, “Thus while the churches are geographically located in Judea, they are more importantly located in Christ.”32 Theology trumps geography! Would that all churches would say, first and foremost, that “we are located in Christ!” We see the same kind of designation in the opening of the letter to the Philippians: “ To all the saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi…” (1:1) Sometimes Paul writes to a

28 Williams, Rowan, 2005, 46. 29 Last, Richard., 2018, 959. 30 Horsely, 1997, 208. 31 Ascough, Richard, 2003. 32 Martyn, 1997, 176.


singular ekklesia (as in Philippi) but at other times to multiple expressions of ekklesia, as in Galatians 1:2. (There the word is ekllesiais.) Only once in an opening in his seven letters did Paul fail to use the term ekklesia, and that is in Romans. If the word was missing in the preface, Paul more than compensated for this omission, in the conclusion of the letter—Chapter 16. 7.4 Paul and Biographical Memory There is a difference between the various memories all of us have as individuals from those “cultural memories” that link us to others within society. There are aspects to cultural memory that have to do with “social obligations,” but as the historian Jan Assman points out the key question is always “What we must not forget?”33Memories in a cultural sense aren’t just stories, but are the framework for judgments about life in the present, offering at the same time a way to see into the future. What can be seen in Paul is one whose call to preach the gospel was grounded in part by his own experience, God’s apocalyptic (revealing) of Jesus as Messiah. That was his autobiographical memory which he willingly shared with others, and with the wider world through Galatians, and really everywhere he went. His memory included mystical experiences that were hard to put into words. It seems he had multiple experiences, one of which included his declaration of having seen the risen Lord. (1 Cor. 15:8). Paul’s memory bank was full of so many other God-graced times, as well. Consider all the dangers Paul had faced and how this extensive list tells the story of his dedication to follow Christ.

Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I received a stoning. Three times I was shipwrecked; for a night and a day I was adrift at sea; on frequent journeys, in danger from rivers, danger from bandits, danger from my own people, danger from Gentiles, danger in the city, danger in the wilderness, danger at sea, danger from false brothers and sisters; in toil and hardship, through many a sleepless night, hungry and thirsty, often without food, cold and naked. And, besides other things, I am under daily pressure because of my anxiety for all the churches. (2 Corinthians 11:25-28)

Was this the first occasion members of the assemblies in Corinth had heard this list? I doubt it. In their various encounters with Paul I imagine their requests often were “Tell us more!” We know from the account in Galatians about Paul’s early story with Peter and the leaders of the community of disciples in Jerusalem, that Paul could spin a good story. All the years seemingly lost to us were, nonetheless, filled with innumerable conversations with friends and strangers. I think, also, about all the months Paul spent in prison, and how, according to his own accounts, he shared those times with fellow-workers. The letter to the Philippians, for example, was written by Paul and Timothy (1:1) and we learn a few verses later that it was written while they were in prison. They had long days, and maybe even longer seeming nights in which to talk and share stories.

33 Assman, 2011, 16.


What needs to be emphasized is that Paul’s memories of these events, in the context of his ministry, were never just his memories alone. His memories were encapsulated in the life he was living and sharing as one who’s goal was to live “in Christ.” Those two words were central for Paul. We must also keep the communal nature of those memories and the demands of living the story of Christ clearly in view. What Paul was sharing with the earliest followers of Jesus, known to him through his evangelistic work, were two kinds of memory. They are “foundational memory” and “biographical memory.” Credit for this distinction belongs to the historian Jan Assman.34 “Biographical memory” is more immediate and social. It concerns the recent past, and only becomes relevant in a relational context. As Assman points out biographical memory isn’t part of the institution or part of the mechanisms at work in the formation of group identity. When Paul spoke of the mother of Rufus, for example, at the end of Romans, he said, “Greet Rufus, chosen in the Lordl and also greet his mother—a mother to me also.” I wonder if others, not having ever met Paul in person, might have turned to the mother of Rufus when the letter was read, and asked her, “How it is that you were like a mother to Paul?” We can’t even begin to guess what her answer might have been, but we can be sure others were listening as carefully as possible. My point in pointing out the part of Paul’s ministry that involved “biographical memory” is to alert us to the great range of memories and stories that Paul had to tell. The ending of Romans with Paul offering greetings to a huge list of people he had known personally in many cases, and who he was hoping to meet, offer us a rich picture of the relational side of Paul. Since we are trying to see Paul on his own terms the closing chapter of Romans offers us a great window to help us appreciate the depth and variety of people in his life. Foundational memory is also crucial for our understanding of Paul in relationship to the communities he claimed. A little further on we will spend some time unpacking Paul’s reference to the memory of the Philippians regarding what Paul called “the early days of the gospel.”(Phil 4:15) In that same letter the opening has Paul reflecting on how they shared “in the gospel from the first day until now.” (Phil. 1:5) We will return to this topic further on because foundational memory was always implicit in Paul’s strong unequivocal ethical expectations for belonging to Christ and to one another. Excursus 7.1—Paul’s friends What we find in the last chapter of Romans are the names of 29 people who were either mentioned by name or alluded to in reference to a household that is named. In addition, we have no idea how many people were associated with those households and thus felt included in the letter as well. There are a number of excellent commentaries on Romans by eminent biblical scholars who spend pages detailing biographical data, along with archeological finds in some cases, aa well as comparative data from other sources to

34 Ibid, 37.


bring to life many of the names mentioned by Paul.35 I’m not going into great detail with this survey, but I hope to show the wide range of friends that Paul had in this community. Bear in mind he intended to make his first visit. Many of these were people he met in the course of his journeys far to the north and east of Rome. In terms of the purpose of this book, what needs to be emphasized is that we find Paul with a most diverse set of friends and co-workers. Think of the women mentioned in this letter: Phoebe, Prisca (of Prisca and Aquila), Mary, Junia (connected to Andronicus), Tryphaena and Tryphosa, Persis, the mother of Rufus, Julia, the sister of Nereus, and Olympus. There were many in this list clearly in the category of co-workers like Phoebe, Prisca and Aquila, Andronicus and Junia, Urbanus, Tryphaena and Tryphosa, and Persis. A number of those mentioned were probably Jewish members of the Jesus assemblies forced to leave Rome when the Emperor Claudius expelled all Jews from Rome in 49 CE. That is probably how Paul first met Prisca and Aquila in Ephesus. This couple is mentioned first in the list of those greetings, and this may be due to the importance they played in Paul’s life. With Prisca and Aquila we also find them in Acts which accounts for their arrival in Corinth as a consequence of all their exile from Rome. (Acts 18:1-3). Only in Acts do we learn that Paul worked alongside of them as a tentmaker. This is not a detail we can confirm since Paul never mentions his trade. There is more to the story about Paul and his friends Prisca and Aquila based on other external sources, as well as Paul’s intriguing comment in Romans 16.4 that they were his “co-workers alongside of him” and that they had “risked their necks for my life.” The last part of the Prisca and Aquila greeting requiring our attention is Paul’s sentence “Greet also the ekklesia in their house.” (Roman 16:5a) We need to cover a number of details regarding Prisca and Aquila. One detail that catching the eyes of biblical scholars is how Paul named Prisca first. It must have indicated her higher social status. The best guess about their names is that Prisca was a Roman noblewoman (thus explaining some wealth) and that Aquila may have been a Jewish slave who became a freedman. They had a mixed marriage!36 Paul isn’t the lone eagle when it came to ministry. We see in his letters the term “co-workers” quite frequently and in a number of instances it includes women, as it does in a number of places in Romans 16. The term in Greek is sunergos, and it simply means that this is someone working alongside Paul in their common missionary work. They essentially share the same divine commission and are colleagues. We don’t know what Prisca and Aquila did to save Paul’s life, but he said they “risked their necks for him.” In the Roman world that meant risking execution, or “death by

35 Three noteworthy commentaries: Jewitt,2006; Huiltgren, 2011; and Wright, N.T.,2002. 36 Jewitt, 2006, 956.


decapitation.” Such a quick and swift execution was the punishment reserved only for Roman citizens. According to Jewitt it indicated the “high social status of Prisca and Aquila.”37 [We should note that the traditional of Paul being a “citizen” based on the account in Acts led to the legend that he received the death penalty accorded to a Roman citizen—namely decapitation. This accounts for all the traditional images of Paul holding a sword in one hand.] Thus, in just a few verses we catch a few intriguing glimpses into the life of Paul in reference to Prisca and Aquila. A few more observations regarding the mention of a few others are important because of they reflect on Paul’s story in connection the early days of the Jesus movement. Andronicus and Junia are mentioned in Romans 16:7. They were fellow prisoners with him at one point, but most importantly in Paul’s eyes were two other facts. They were “prominent among the apostles” and “they were in Christ before I was.” Where there ever any women among the early apostles? According to Acts there weren’t. Paul, however, said that his friends Andronicus and Junia were both apostles. What Paul also said about them, according to Jewitt is that they were “outstanding among the apostles.”38 Paul places this husband and wife team essentially alongside the others who were witnesses to the resurrection. It means they were active in ministry soon after the crucifixion. It was noted in the second chapter (Paul in Arabia), it seems credible that Paul’s revelation (apocalypse) came within a few years of the resurrection, maybe as early as 33 or 34CE. With the mention of Rufus and his mother we may being going back to the day of the crucifixion itself. In Mark’s gospel a passerby, just coming in from the country, was compelled to carry the cross of Jesus. He is identified as Simon of Cyrene, the father of Alexander and Rufus. This may have been in 30CE. Mark’s gospel has traditionally been connected to the community of early followers in Rome. Could a foundational memory of the Roman Jesus community have included the wife of Simon of Cyrene and their two sons Alexander and Rufus? Paul mentioned that Rufus was “chosen in the Lord.” It was “an honorific title of one who has a long and tested record of discipleship.”39Rufus and his mother may have been exiled by the edict of Claudius, and like Prisca and Aquila had returned to Rome around 55 CE. What I see in just a few of these snapshots of various friends of Paul is the way his life and ministry was wrapped up in the stories of so many others committed to follow Jesus. To be sure, we’d love to know more. But the other part of this story is how much we actually can know by paying closer attention to what Paul was telling others in his letters. 7.5 Paul and Foundational Memory

37 Ibid, 958. 38 Ibid. 963 39 Hultgren, 2011, 587.


When we find Paul in community, not only do we see a rich mixture of friends and co-workers, but we also find Paul addressing critical issues facing the communities of faith that he started, or which, in the case of Romans, are assemblies he intends to visit. Paul’s ministry, then, involves what Assman terms “foundational” or “cultural” memory. The terms seem interchangeable. The idea is that each community in its common life needs to remember it’s past, especially it’s origins. Memories of where it came from are preserved, as it were, as sign posts for living in the present, and going into the future. Cultural memory is at work in ritual, and in various repeatable events. This kind of memory is grounded in the major faith stories that give people their own identity. The preservation of cultural memory and the ways in which others gain acceptance and recognition, comes through participation and familiarity leading to the status of one who belongs. Each community, as it transitions from the past into the future, must essentially keep reproducing itself. Christians have followed the Jewish practice which involves placing a heavy emphasis on foundational identity through teaching and learning40 as a constant through a variety of communal events along with special public ceremonies of transition, such as a bar mitzvah or baptism. What we see repeatedly in Paul’s letters is a teaching based on what he considered to be the basic fundamental parts of the story along with the ground-rules for belonging. The basic, not to be questioned ethic was belonging with one-an-other. For a moment, however, we need to deal with the possibility that Paul found his way to his new life without a teacher or guide. Were we to follow the guidance of Acts—which we aren’t doing—we would say, at this point, that Paul sat at the feet of Gamaliel, in Jerusalem “educated strictly according to our ancestral law.” (Acts 22.3). But we are not using Acts. Paul must speak for himself in this account, and this means what we know about his Jewish background must be based on his own words. He was a Pharisee, and certainly was quite serious about his faith. In his own words “as to zeal, a persecutor of the church (ekklesia)” Phil. 3:6. Paul did not try to hide his past from others. It was there to see but now in the light of his embrace of Christ crucified so visible not just in what he said but how he lived the story. He who would teach others, and be the teacher we see in Corinthians, had only one source for what he knew to be the truth about Jesus. It didn’t come from any human teacher or a Biblical test. What Paul discovered about Jesus being the messiah (the Christ) came to him without any human intervention. He said, “For I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin; for I did not receive it from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation (apocalypse) of Jesus Christ.” (Gal. 1:11-12). From this declaration the biblical scholar Leander Keck wrote, “Paul had no Christian teacher. He was nobody's pupil, but was an autodidact, that

40 Assman, 2011, 75.


is, a self-taught thinker who, while indebted to traditions, never appealed to an authoritative teacher."41 Offering a more nuanced expression regarding Paul’s revelation Paul Meyer has written, “In an important sense, Paul is not “autodidact”; he is qeodidaktos42 [“God taught”] and he calls his converts qeodidaktoi because God has been present and active in their learning what it really means to love one another (1 Thess 4:9).43 I could make a case that the Greek word theodidaktos (God-taught) might suitably be inscribed on the inside of every pulpit, so that every preacher would hope and pray that the words spoken were truly those God wanted others to hear. It was important in the context of his letter to the Galatians for Paul to declare his independence as an apostle, because it was his very credentials that had been questioned by those who, according to Paul, were “confusing you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.” (Gal. 1:7). After Paul departed from Galatia the first time44, other evangelists arrived with message counter to what Paul had offered. They were demanding that the male followers must be circumcised to be truly confident of being saved. Paul’s unrelenting argument against them rises and falls with vitriolic fervor throughout the letter and maybe reached a crescendo when Paul strongly countered the opponents by declaring “I wish those who unsettle you would castrate themselves.” (Gal. 5:12) In the midst of making himself very clear on this particular matter Paul offered a rather curious rhetorical question, “But my friends, why I am still being persecuted if I am still preaching circumcision? In that case the offense of the cross has been removed.” (Gal. 5:11). Clearly, Paul’s credentials as a legitimate apostle were being called into question. It’s actually an issue at work in a number of his letters. “…these letters are nonetheless linked by common themes and agenda such as the establishment of Paul’s credentials, clarification of the gospel, defense of the gospel against rival claims or counterfeit alternatives, and Paul’s pursuit of the collection for Jerusalem.”45 Here there seems to be a direct intentional attack on Paul and what he considered a perversion of the gospel. Maybe his opponents knew more about Paul’s past than we do? 7.6 Did Paul preach circumcision? This dramatic question must be asked at this point, because it seems to be a critical part of Paul’s story, perhaps as an apostle whose mission and strategy may have changed, as he grew into a deeper, and shall we say, more profound sense of his calling. The key rhetorical phrase is “if I am still preaching circumcision.” (Gal. 5:11) Obviously, at this point, when writing Galatians he was not preaching circumcision, but some were! But did Paul, as a follower of Jesus, require male converts to be circumcised in the early days

41 Keck, 1983, 28. 42 Qeodidaktos translitered as theodidaktos. 43 Meyer, P. 2004. 114. 44 It is doubtful if he ever returned. Clearly his letter arrived! 45 Garroway, 2018, 77.


after his call? I made mention of this question in the chapter “Paul in Arabia,” because we can presume his preaching caused him to be a marked man in the eyes of the Nabataen authorities. They wanted to arrest him, having discovered he was in Damascus, for some reason. Did the Nabatean authorities want to arrest Paul for preaching circumcision—i.e. turns them into Jews? Once more, we are dealing with some of the details discussed in that previous chapter. Issues of chronology, also arise, because Paul’s letters, with their memories of his story as an apostle, raise even more questions about those early days after he received the revelation (apocalypse) of Jesus as Messiah. In our chapter Paul in Arabia we were able to propose a date, not only for Paul’s escape from Damascus in a basket, but to also suggest an earlier date whenPaul began to follow Jesus—maybe as early as 33 or 34 CE, just a few years after the crucifixion. If it was in late 36 CE or early 37CE when he escaped from Damascus, then it is probable we also know, approximately, when he met Peter (Cephas) for the first time. We need to keep Paul’s memory of these events in mind:

“…but I went away at once into Arabia, and afterwards I returned to Damascus. Then after three years I did go up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and stayed with him fifteen days; but I did not see any other apostle, except James, the Lord’s brother. In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie! Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia…” Gal. 1:17-21

Paul made no mention of the basket that helped him escape from Damascus, but we know from 2 Cor. 11:32-33, it was part of his memory of that story. What matters, at this point, is that Paul wrote about his first missionary work in the regions of Syria and Cilicia, but offered no details about those efforts. We are about to enter a long fourteen-year period when we know very little about Paul. There is one letter than can credibly be ascribed to him in his period of time, though not all scholars agree about this. That is the first letter to the Thessalonians. Gerd Leudemann46 and John Knox47, something of outliers when it comes to dating the epistles, place it either in the late 30’s or early 40’s. Another scholar, publishing his book in 2014, also believes this letter was written in the early 40s.48 The trail we are following with Paul’s memory of his ministry involves the possibility that his methods and his message may have changed somewhere along the way. The early dating of 1 Thessalonians plays a role in this account, but we must recognize that a great many scholars place this letter around the year 50CE. Thus, “Almost all commentators are agreed that the Epistle [1 Thessalonians] must be dated in the early 50’s.”49 I think it is fair to say that when biblical scholars base their Pauline chronology on the account in Acts, then they nearly all date this first letter as coming almost 17 years into Paul’s

46 Leudemann, 1984, 238. 47 Knox, 1990, 265. 48 Campbell, 2014, 406. 49 Lohse, 1959, 26.


ministry. N. T. Wright, in his recent comprehensive biography of Paul, takes his cures from Acts and places this letter in late 50 or early 51CE.50 Once more the strategy here follows the guidelines of John Knox. Regarding an earlier missionary journey only reported in Acts 13-14 Knox said,

“But whatever the extent of this possible, even probable, mission, I should be inclined to deny that Paul had any connection with it. I would feel serious doubt about such a connection simply for the same reason I would question anything in Acts involving Paul that is not explicitly or by clear implication indicated also in the letters, and in this case the letters are completely silent.”51

Paul’s memory is the critical factor in our discovery of his story. A small, but very telling, passage in Philippians deserves our attention. It is the phrase “You Philippians indeed know that in the early days of the gospel, when I left Macedonia…” We’re those really the early days for Paul? It just doesn’t match up to what he explained in Galatians where he briefly accounted for a fourteen-year period of following Jesus as Messiah. He “…went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, and was still unknown to the churches of Judea that are in Christ.” (Gal. 1:21-22). What are we to make of that extended time of missionary activity which doesn’t include mention of any faith communities that succeeded? Or did Paul meet failure? Our dating of 1 Thessalonians falls fairly early in this fourteen-year period. According to Knox we can presume that after his brief first visit with Peter, if Paul was on his way to Syria, he must have first been in Antioch. It wouldn’t be the only time he’d be there, however. His roots in the Antiochene community came to the fore in the conflict over shared meals that James declared were unacceptable for Jewish followers of the Messiah. That all happened later, maybe even after the council in Jerusalem.52 According to Knox this extended period of time—the unknown years— brought Paul to Galatia, Macedonia, Greece and Asia. In a real sense Paul’s mission field was Southern Europe. With the letter to the Thessalonians we have a glimpse back at Paul’s work in two geographical regions of Greece located respectively to the North East and to the West—namely Macedonia and Achaia. (1 Thess. 1:7). Paul called them regions of Greece. (1 Thess. 1:9). In the same letter Paul discussed his mistreatment while in Philippi, an Eastern Macedonian city. Thessalonica was also located in Northern Macedonia. One other city is mentioned in the letter and that was Athens. He did get around to a great many places. Ramsey’s book certainly had the correct title Paul the Traveler. What concerns us in this account of Paul in Community is that he may have started off with a message for those not from Judea that involved circumcision for men seeking to belong to his new communities of followers of Messiah Jesus. We are in an area where

50 Wright, 2018, 187. 51 Knox, 1987, 58. 52 Leudemann, 1984, 75-77


we won’t find a consensus among Greek scholars, but based on the recent work of Joshua Garroway I think it’s important to consider Paul’s message changing at some point. If this is the case, we must rely on his words alone. We begin our analysis with Paul’s comment early in the letter to the Galatians in which he mentioned that he “was proclaiming the faith he once tried to destroy.” What is significant about that passage? It is the use of the word faith instead of gospel. The opening of the letter has Paul astonished at those who are turning to a different gospel! (Gal. 1:6). Then there is the question he asked later in the letter: “But my friends, why am I still being persecuted if I am still preaching circumcision?” (Gal. 5:11) If we take Paul at his word, which is our premise, then this isn’t just a rhetorical question—in which he was quite skilled—but rather part of Paul’s memory. What if Paul’s story is that at first, in those parts of the world closer to Jerusalem, Paul believing Jesus as Messiah, was also reaching people of different nationalities with the message about Christ’s death and resurrection, but insisting upon full obedience and ethnic identity as Jews for all who would claim Jesus as Lord? That seems to be the very message that the opponents of Paul in Galatia were preaching. Maybe they knew or heard Paul had once preached that non-Jews had to be circumcised. Maybe Paul wasn’t even using the word “gospel” but was preaching “the faith.” Maybe that was his message while in Arabia, and if so,it was a message certain to upset Arabs. If he once preached this message it must have been within a few years of his apocalypse of Jesus. It is in Galatians that the issue of circumcision regarding gentiles was most clearly in focused. Paul was defending his action, for example, of having in his company while in Jerusalem a man who was not circumcised—namely Titus. He did not need that surgery as far as Paul was concerned. “But even Titus, who was with me, was not compelled to be circumcised, though he was a Greek.” Gal. 2:3). What is especially interesting in the first two chapters of Galatians is the way the term “the gospel” is used. Note first of all that “gospel” is always singular for Paul as well as in the rest of the New Testament. Paul seems to have intentionally avoided using the plural form of the Greek word good news (euangelia). That was the word used by an emperor like Caesar Augustus to refer to a plurality of accomplishments. On the contrary, there was only one thing that was good news—thus the word in Galatians in Greek was euangelion—one gospel! Garroway makes the distinction clear: “Whereas a Roman Emperor might have proclaimed various glad tidings in his life — for example, his birth, his accession, or his success in battle – followers of Christ emphasized the uniqueness of their single glad tidings, the one euangelion as opposed to the many euangelia of us Caesar.”53 This idea of gospel as the heart and soul of Paul’s ministry may not, however, as we have discussed marked his first years of following Jesus. At some point early on, though, it was the marker word for the rest of his story. But when? To receive some hints to answer

53 Garroway, 2018, 9.


that question we can to turn to Philippians to know that there was a beginning for the word gospel. Framing this another way, it seems there might have been a time, maybe a short time, when gospel may not have been in Paul’s vocabulary. Toward the end of Philippians Paul wrote, “You Philippians know that in the early days of the gospel, when I left Macedonia, no church (ekklesia) shared with me in the matter of giving and receiving, except you alone.” (Phil. 4:15) This is the “initial period of the Pauline proclamation.”54 All of Paul’s correspondence beginning with 1 Thessalonians commences with Paul using the singular word gospel. We know nothing about what he preached prior to this time, maybe for three to five years, except for his vague but his intriguing comment in Galatians that the early Jesus people had heard about Paul and were saying, “The one who formerly was persecuting us is now proclaiming the faith he once tried to destroy.” (Gal. 1:23) He didn’t use the word gospel there. Was it just the same word as the faith? I don’t think so. That is why this is so relevant to our understanding of Paul in community. It’s a different kind of community. 7. 7 Paul’s vision of community—seeing “others” as family What is the strongest connection between the Paul of his letters, and Jesus inside the four gospels? I think the answer is found in the kind of community they envisioned as one most reflective of God—especially communities welcoming the most marginalized in their respective worlds. The word that may sum of the meaning of this communal life is Christopraxis, defined by Jurgen Moltmann as the essential way in which we can live collectively in a way that reflects the message of Christ. Thus he wrote:”Christopraxis inevitably leads the community of Christ to the poor, the sick, to ‘surplus people’ and to the oppressed. Like the Messiah himself, the messianic community is sent first of all to unimportant people, people of ‘of no account’…”55 Paul recognized the people of “no account” when he said, “God choose what is low and despised in the world, things that are not, to reduce to nothing things that are.” (1 Cor. 1:28) As noted earlier in this chapter, the phrase “things that are not” are just three words in Greek: ta me onta. Literally, in contrast to all who have being, importance and significance, in Paul’s world as well as ours, the vast majority do not have “being” (onta). Those who have presence, importance, power, and status in the world have “ta onta.” They possess being, in contrast to all the others. Ah, that word: other! It is also called alterity, meaning the state of “otherness.” The other, by definition, is “not like us.” Commenting on the deeper meaning of alterity the philosopher Caputo wrote: “It picks out the out-of-power and dispossessed, the out-of-luck and the unfortunate, the hungry and the homeless, the ta me onta who suffer from their otherness (not advantaged by it), were diminished by exclusion and apartness (apartheid), to those whose diminution of worldly being raises them up in majesty in the kingdom; alterity refers to the victims not the victimizers.”56

54 Leudemann, 1984, 199. 55 Moltmann, 1993, 43. 56 Caputo, 2006, 137. (Italics in original.)


Consider the command of Jesus in his parable of a great feast prepared for important people who made flimsy excuses to not attend and thereby snubbed the host. The master told his servant to “Go out at once into the streets and lanes of the town and bring in the poor, the crippled, the blind, and the lame.” (Luke 14:21) Is there a link to Paul to be found here? The answer is found in many places 1 Corinthians 11. There we hear the stunning rebuke of the way the powerful and wealthier members of the Corinthian assemblies were sharing the Lord’s supper. Just prior to Paul’s strong condemnation of the way the poorer members of the community were treated in the meal meant to bind all together, Paul had already reminded them about the significance of the meal with specific regard to the “cup of blessing” and “the bread that we break.”

“The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a sharing (koinonia) in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a sharing (kononia) in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread.” (1 Cor. 10:16-17).

But Paul knew they weren’t a real community of equals (a koinonia), as he addressed the profound evidence of schisms and factions.57 It is the lack of unity in worship itself which Paul found most disturbing. The social differences were evident in regard to those who ate well, and those who remained hungry. A strong condemnation led to Paul’s rhetorical question, “Or do you show contempt for the church (ekklesia) of God and humiliate those who have nothing (echo mey).” (1 Cor. 11:22). There it is! The word “nothing” as also found in those that had no being (ta me onta.) Paul is asking for followers of Christ to act in ways toward each other in dramatic, even subversive, ways in contrast to the predominant social and political ideology of all living in the orbit of Roman imperialism. A basic presupposition of Roman rule was what Lopez termed its “core image of divinely ordained Roman domination over all the nations."58 This ideology wasn’t unique to Rome, but clearly militaristic rule was based on affirmations of “might over right.” To be conquered, almost by definition, meant having few rights—and that included even the right to life itself. The defeated, therefore, had before them, especially in the Greco-Roman world constant reminders of the power of Rome. Consider this relief that Paul himself may have seen on a temple on his way to preach in Galatia.

57 Note that the NRSV in 1 Cor 1:18 translates the Greek word “schimas” as divisions. 58 Lopez, 2008, 135.


Emperor Claudius vanquishing Britannia This relief was part of a large imperial complex built in the years 42-45CE bearing the name Sebasteion, which was the Greek name for Caesar Augustus. The name of the city was Aphrodisis, which was famous for its temple to the goddess Aphrodite. The semiotics of this relief are similar to the message found on the Judea Captiva coin which was discussed in chapter 5 “Paul Lost in the Crowd.” Once more a defeated dying woman bears the identity for a conquered vanquished enemy tribe defeated by Rome. Paul on his way to the province of Galatia would have easily seen, if not this imperial complex, other edifices along the way, with similar messages. The coins in his purse would carry their own messages about the power of Rome as well. Even if a coin bore the words “Pax Romana” its message was clear to a Jew knowing that Judea lived under fear of Rome’s version of pacification—namely crucifixion. "In the Empire, a declaration of peace was declared after the subjugation of the people."59 Roman dominance, by definition, and also by symbolic representation in art, public ceremonies, and legal enforcement (Roman law) defined all non-Romans as others. The

59 Lewis, 2016, 155.


term wasn’t neutral. It wasn’t just that people had their differences. The reality is that all the differences as seen through Roman eyes implied inferiority. It was possible then, as it is now, to lump all kinds of people into the category of otherness. Thus Kahl, thinking not only of Paul’s world, but ours’ as well, wrote about “…the covert language that creates this category of otherness: into which we find Jews, women, savages “natives" or “foreigners”, slaves, people of color, the lower classes, homosexuals…. all these groups alike in terms of their inferiority, their materiality, their passivity, their shared differences…”60 Paul in relation to the assemblies of believers in Christ did not bring together the kinds of people that Romans would have called the “best and the brightest.” There may have been a few notable exceptions, but the emphasis must be on the word few. Remember that any Judean (meaning Paul and all who looked to Jerusalem, not Rome, as the center of their world) were in the category of others. A few years after Paul died Jerusalem would be destroyed, thousands killed, the early community of Christ followers erased, and thousands more pressed into slavery. We see in Paul a different kind of judgment regarding otherness and it is a matter that deserves our attention. Paul was creating an unusual community of Jews and those from all nations (all ethné), who would find in their common faith a most unusual solidarity based on language associated with family. They became brothers and sisters with each other. The traditional binary markers of difference were recognized, but not to be consequential or definitional for status or prestige. Problems arose then, and always have ever since, whenever the social practices of division and subjugation enter the life of what knew as ekklesia. What we need to see is that Paul imagined the community of those who followed Jesus as one in which distinctions among people would not matter at all when it came to their shared life together. Paul had come from a world of privilege as a Pharisee. Once fully immersed in Christ he found all those differences irrelevant, and thus he wrote:

As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is no longer Jew or Greek, there is no longer slave or free, there is no longer male and female; for all of you are one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to the promise. (Gal. 3:27-29)

This oft quoted passage of scripture may be one of the most explosive, as well as subversive, things Paul ever wrote. We have to be careful, however, with its interpretation, as some have read this as Paul’s call to uniformity or the erasure of differences. Boyarin, for example, believes that while Galatians cannot be termed an “anti-Judaic text, its theory of the Jews nevertheless is one that is inimical to Jewish difference, indeed to all difference as such.”61 My reference to Galatians 3:28 includes

60 Kahl, 2014, 12-13. 61 Boyarin, 1994, 156.


the verses before and after, which means seeing something different from what Boyarin concludes. First of all, it is baptism that unites all in Christ. We wear Christ, as it were. It is important to emphasize the deeper more expansive sense of history crucial for Paul’s faith in Christ. It was never for a moment a story bringing us to Jesus Messiah invented on the spot on the day of the crucifixion. It began with call of Abraham. In Chapter 6, “Paul Sent to the Nations” I briefly discussed that there were converts to Judaism. The male convert was called ben Avraham (son of Abraham), while a female convert was called bas Avraham (daughter of Abraham). Baptism essentially gave them these names as well, but the world that diminished women, and so many others, so consistent in the Greco-Roman world, would not be, in Paul’s eyes, how anyone should be treated as someone baptized in Christ. Continually, in the seven letters Paul, is the concern for how those baptized in Christ treat one another, and we must add, how those outside the community are treated as well. One of the marker words Paul used for those belonging to one another was faith. The Greek word is pistis. It is mentioned at the very end of Paul’s magnificent hymn lauding agape love. Paul concluded, “And now faith, hope, and love abide; but the greatest of these is love.” (1 Cor. 13:13) The word used more often than pistis was apistoi, which meant unbelievers. (Note the letter “a” added to a word in Greek makes it a negative. Thus in English the word the opposite to the word moral is amoral.) If having faith is the marker word for knowing that you belonged to Christ how would that faith be in evidence? It has often been turned into dogma in Christian history, but it does not appear that there were creeds or doctrinal statements used in Paul’s ministry. It was really more of a call to share a common life that was grounded in ethics, not theology per se. To be sure those coming to the Jesus story in Paul’s mission field, may have had only a little understanding of the Jewish story, and maybe more often learned it first hand from him. Take, for example, what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians when he started to address the divisions caused by those asserting their spiritual superiority with regard to their privileged spiritual gifts.

“Now concerning spiritual gifts, brothers and sisters, I do not want you to be uninformed. You know that when you were pagans, you were enticed and led astray to idols that could not speak. Therefore, I want you to understand that no one speaking by the Spirit of God ever says “Let Jesus be cursed!” and no one can say “Jesus is Lord” except by the Holy Spirit.” (1 Cor. 12:1-3)

The NRSV translated the word “ethné” as pagans. It isn’t necessarily a terrible translation, but it’s hard to imagine Paul using the term so important to his identity as one sent to the nations (i.e. sent to the ethné) as something someone could be ashamed of having in their past. The term idiolect may be more relevant here. Each of us has a particular way of speaking and that is why we can so readily identify certain accents or particular expressions as coming from people in different regions of a country. Sometimes the idiolect of those from Minnesota can become the source of humor with


regard to phrases like “You betcha” or “Ufda.” Such a Minnesotan idiolect, though, only applies to some from that world—actually very few. We should assume that Paul can write to those who were not raised in a Jewish family, coming from one of the many nations, using a Jewish perspective on all those nations with the word ethné. Having been brought to their faith—Jesus is Lord—meant they could look back on part of their past life, not with regret necessarily, but with perspective. Trebilco explained it this way: “This would be part of adopting the idiolect of the new community, which involves significant linguistic re-learning on the part of newcomers, including changes in the meaning and referent of a term. They needed to grasp that ta eqnh (ta ethne] now meant ‘all non-Jewish outsiders’ to our community.”62 Learning the language and this very Jewish story certainly involved a change of identity commensurate with the stories many of us have—"I am not now what I once was!” Riahard Hays termed his study of Paul’s use of scripture with the phrase “the conversion of imagination.” Hays said of those belonging to the Jesus story, “….Jew and Gentile alike found themselves summoned by the gospel story to a sweeping reevaluation of their identities, and then imagine to paradigm shift so comprehensive that can only be described as a “conversion of the imagination.””63 This identity shift also means learning that I am a sinner. Hauerwas maintained that this was a key part of the practice of being a Christian, in that this language of identity as a sinner makes one part of a very unique community. Church is a practice for Hauerwas. It means, he wrote, “So in an odd way I can only know I’m a sinner because I been graced by God. I’m able to confess my sin only because I know first I have been forgiven.”64 How would any of us know this? It’s because we see ourselves inside the story of God in Christ. Those coming from all those different ethnic and nationalistic identities in Paul’s world were learning the story, the language, and the practices that brought about lives shaped in the image of Jesus—a Christopraxis. We see Paul’s community involving an unusual spectrum of people from many nations, and most importantly the nobodies of the ancient world given hope, dignity and respect—all within the context of a very Jewish story. We can read in the various letters that these were communities in which Paul, at least, held out high standards for its members. The occasion for 1 Corinthians, for example, was the diversion from those standards in so many areas of their common life. Paul’s letter to the Galatians had him wasting no time in his introduction. He quickly named that the real issue was that they seemed to be turning to “a different gospel—not that there is another gospel.” (Gal. 1:6-7) He was worried in writing to the Philippians about those who proclaimed Christ “from envy and rivalry” and added there were also those with “selfish ambition. (Phil. 1:15-17).

62 Trebilco, 2017, 157 63 Hays, 2005, 5-6. 64 Hauerwas, 1996, 77.


Were Paul’s ethical standards a kind of imposing wall separating those with faith (pistis) from unbelievers (apistio)? The answer to this question is complicated. The early followers were living lives quite contrary to their neighbors and the vertical structure of Roman society. In some instances their common life was marked by a mutualism and other-regard that was the very opposite of the competitive world of patronage and military rule. I’m indebted to David Horrell for the term other-regard which he also used an adjective defining Paul’s concept of agape: “Other-regarding love: a self-sacrificial looking to the interests and well-being of the other.”65 But were these standards exclusionary? What about those curious about this story and its effects on the obviously changed lives their neighbors into people of joy and hope in the face of what had to be for many the harshest challenges in a world defined by status and access to power? We have some clues to answer this question. High standards were clear in all of Paul’s letters. He even called Philemon, wealthy enough to own slaves, to receive Onesimus back into his household, but not just as another slave, but as a brother! “Onesimus and Philemon [were] redefined as adelphoi [brothers], to have a kind of equal-regard supervening their former relationship.”66 Perhaps Philemon lowered himself, and certainly would have done so in Roman eyes, while Onesimus was elevated in status, if actually followed the counsel of Paul. That remains a mysrery. (Slaves could assume important positions, but it was extremely rare.) Paul, we must remember, began most of his letters with kindred language: “we know brothers and sisters beloved by God, that he has chosen you.” (1 Thess 1:4) The word “beloved” is also quite frequent in the same letter. In a similar fashion it is a letter like others ending with strong affirming ethical admonitions. Images of Paul the thinker and Paul the theologian can’t hold a candle to Paul’s ethics. We must ask, however, if Paul’s ethical admonitions are evidence of assertions of power, or pleas for a radical kind of communal unity? There are those who see in Paul a patriarchal figure, functioning with the authority of a ruler—Elizabeth Fiorenza Schuller gave it the term kyriarchy.67 She coined the term combining the Greek word kyrios for lord or master, with the Greek word arche to lead, rule, or govern. In her book In Memory of Her, she clearly identifies many of the obstacles we have discussed with regard to the charges that Paul is a misogynist and hierarchical in his understanding of community. The first charge will be addressed in the next chapter, while I hope we have seen Paul in a different light in this chapter with its focus on all the ways Paul wanted the least in the community to have a place of honor and respect at the table. Cynthia Briggs Kittridge, is another feminist biblical scholar or note. She sees in Paul what she called the rhetoric of obedience. The words related to submission were clearly part of the Greco-Roman world of vertical relationships dominated by men who used fear

65 Horrell, 2016, 206. 66 Ibid, 126. 67 But She Said: Feminist Practices of Biblical Interpretation, 1992


to maintain order and their power. Kittridge noted, “Fear is associated with the inferior and relationships of unequal power .”68 Relationships of unequal power, however, are exactly Paul’s concerns in 1 Corinthians when he pleaded for unity, and mutual acceptance of one another, with a bias towards those who are weak, over against those asserting power, greater knowledge, or a deeper more mystical spirituality. Before we leave the topic of Paul in Community we must also take note of the place of outsiders in relation to these nascent communities of faith. If the boundary markers of belonging were defined by clear ethics, what about engagement with those who did not know the story of God through Jewish eyes? What about the guests coming to worship? For those who followed Jesus and no longer worshiped idols what should they do when invited out for dinner? The answers to those questions set the stage for the remarkable spread of Christianity. Paul helped guide the process by his example, and by his teaching. 7.8 Welcoming non-believers and outsiders To this point little has been said about the relationship between the teachings of Jesus and Paul’s awareness of those stories and examples. The reason is clear. There just isn’t any evidence that Paul knew the stories, the parables, and the many details in the gospels. There are a few times when Paul was dealing with different issues and referred to what we might call the word of the Lord. For example, in 1 Corinthians 7 Paul discussed marriage, divorce, remarriage, and celibacy. He made a distinction between what he knew was a command of Jesus, as opposed to his own opinions. Once he referred to a command given by the Lord—“…the wife should not separate from her husband.” He added at the end of that passage the same prohibition applied to her husband— “the husband should not divorce his wife.” (1 Cor. 7:10-11) It is interesting to note that the verb “separate”, applying to a wife, is the Greek word chorizo, which means to divide, depart, or separate. Even though the NRSV used the verb divorce with regard to the actions of a husband, that translation misses the social implications of the Greek verb aphiēmi which means to dismiss, forsake, send away, desert, or forsake. The verb can mean to divorce, but that is an obscure use of this verb.69 Far more frequent are social implication of this word in scripture regarding issue of forgiveness, but also leaving something behind when you leave or depart. The Jewish concern for widows was clearly part of the prophetic ethical heritage, because a women without her husband, had no one to support her. Whether through death or divorce she had been abandoned. In the rest of the chapter regarding marriage Paul was extremely careful in offering advice to make it clear in a number of others places that he was only speaking for himself—“To the rest I say—I and not the Lord…” (1 Cor 7:12, 25)

68 Kittridge, Cynthia Briggs, 1998, 48. 69 Arndt, William, 1958, 126.


Perhaps, the most famous words of the Lord are what Paul reported when commenting on the divisive ways in which the poor were treated during their celebrations of the Lord’s Supper in Corinth. The words of Jesus applicable to this meal, according to Paul, were delivered to him directly. We don’t know how. Paul simply said “For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you…” (1 Cor. 11:23) It was really was as if Jesus was speaking through Paul. In celebrations of the Lord’s supper the same words have been repeated for two thousand years. Pastors, ministers, priests, bishops, and popes all repeat these words at each celebration of the Eucharist. Blessed be Paul for writing this letter! Paul, in turn, would like to think that Jesus is speaking to all of us through his letters. If Paul did not know more of the words and stories of Jesus, we, nonetheless, can ascertain that Paul knew and embodied the vision of Jesus regarding those judged to be the least in their world. We can call it their world because both knew what it meant to live under the military rule of Rome. A little earlier we noted the difference between two types of believers referenced often in Paul’s letters—those with faith (pistis) and those without faith, unbelievers (apistoi). The better understanding of what Paul meant by faith is that it was defined far more by loyalty than knowledge or understanding. Faith meant living the story with others in a way that did not reflect the world of patronage and the use of power to dominate others. But was Paul condemning unbelievers? We’re followers of Jesus to avoid all contact with apostoi? If that is what Paul meant then he certainly disagreed with Jesus who loved the unbelievers in his world. They were called sinners. The first of many meal stories in the Gospel of Mark involved the encounter between the religious authorities and Jesus as he sat in the home of Levi, a tax collector who had just began to follow Jesus, who clearly did not associate with the right people.

And as he sat at dinner in Levi’s house, many tax collectors and sinners were also sitting with Jesus and his disciples—for there were many who followed him. When the scribes of the Pharisees saw that he was eating with sinners and tax collectors, they said to his disciples, “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?” When Jesus heard this, he said to them, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I have come to call not the righteous but sinners.” (Mark 2:15-17)

What concerns us, at this point, is to understand the phrase “tax collectors and sinners.” One particular kind of sinner, the tax collector, belongs with all the rest in the master category of sinners. The Greek word for tax collector was telones. You wouldn’t hope your son would grow up to be one. “Toll collectors were universally despised and were widely regarded as dishonest and greedy. They would have been regarded as ‘sinners’ by everyone and not just by the Pharisees.”70 The word we really need to have in focus, however, is the word sinners.

70 Trebilco, 2017, 121-122.


The Greek word for sinners was amartalos. (It should be pronounced hamartalos.) Paul uses this Greek word just five times, but more often he used the root word amartia (sin) and its other cognates. The difference between the use of sinners and Paul’s far more frequent references to outsiders is explained by Trebilco: “We see then that whereas for Jesus amartwloi [amartoloi] referred to blatant lawbreakers, for Paul the outsider designation includes all of humanity.”71 While Jesus ate with sinners, as labeled by others, he saw them included in his vision of the eschatological kingdom to come (for which we pray in the Lord’s prayer). Paul saw all of humanity, even though plagued by sin, nonetheless, included in God’s grace and plan of salvation. “But God proves his love for us in that while we were still sinners (amartalon) Christ died for us.” (Rom. 5:8) Essentially in Paul, as in Jesus, the designation sinners, has been upended by inclusion in the circle that follows Jesus, and in the scope of God’s salvation for Paul. But what about outsiders? With regard to what Paul said about worship issues facing the Corinthians, they seem to have dismissed or ignored the presence of “outsiders or unbelievers.” Paul wondered what those “outsiders or unbelievers,” would say in regard to worship marked by speaking in tongues, i.e. glossolalia. It is important that we recognize that “outsiders and unbelievers” were present in that corporate worship. Paul presumes this is so. “If, therefore, the whole church comes together and all speak in tongues, and outsiders or unbelievers enter, will they not say that you are out of your mind?” (1 Cor. 14:23) For the moment our focus should not be on the ecstatic aspects of worship, but rather on the outsiders. The Greek word there is idiōtēs. It appears in English today as “idiots”, meaning someone who is stupid. That was not its meaning in Greek at the time of Paul. It simply meant a plain, common, or ordinary person. Isn’t it interesting that Paul would lump ordinary people with unbelievers? Either group must have been found inside worship and by implication some might be on the way to having faith and also becoming loyal followers of Jesus. Others might walk away, but even so they had been welcomed, and presumably, would still be. What may have seemed to us as negative terms, may have been for Paul, simply the opportunity to engage in conversation. We must also go back to earlier discussions regarding the word ethné, most often translated “Gentiles). Trebilco in his book Outsider Designations and Boundary Construction in the New Testament makes a most interesting observation regarding the change in the meaning of the word ethné in the early Pauline communities. These hybrid communities crossing so many nationalistic, class, and other differences, were bound together in language centered in what God had and was doing in and through Messiah Jesus their Lord. For Jewish members of these assemblies they needed to learn a far less judgmental, separatist, use of the word ethné. Those not raised in the Jewish world could, nonetheless, now share in this story rooted in the Abrahamic covenant now reshaped and expanded in the story of the Messiah crucified and risen.

71 Ibid, 132.


What about the ethné themselves? The first learning had to be with the word itself. As I noted in the Introduction “so-called Gentiles” didn’t exist. Asking a stranger “Are you a gentle?” would have resulted in a look of incomprehension. “Asking where are you from?” was the better question. It would elicit some place name, some region, or some tribal name. Thus these Philppians, Macedonians, and Thessalonians, for all the differences between them, along with pride of place and heritage, would need to know they had once been labeled collectively as ethné and now as followers of Messiah Jesus their Lord they were different. Those from many different nations or tribal groups in the Pauline assemblies would learn a new meaning of the word ethné. If [ethné] was short hand for those who were not originally part of Israel, were they in some distinctive ways different from those we called ‘Jewish Christians’? “The vital point for Paul, of course, is that such a distinction between ‘Jew’ and ‘Gentile’ no longer mattered with regard to salvation Paul neutralized ta eqnh [ta ethné], so that it no longer carried negative or derogatory connotations, as a juice for insiders.”72 Paul consistently used the term gentiles (ethné) to describe his ministry, and in reality, the central focus of it. At the core of his agreement with James, Cephas and John two mission fields were identified. He would go to the ethné, while they “to the circumcised.” (We should note that by this time it was James, the brother of the Lord, who seemed to be in charge—not Peter.) (Gal. 2:9) It must be emphasized, at this point, a disagreement with what Acts described as a consistent missionary practice of Paul. Acts has Paul beginning his stay in various cities by first going to a synagogue, from which he was often ungraciously expelled. This seems to be contrary to Paul’s account of the original agreement. Often in these stories in Acts some Jews were favorable to Paul, but he usually ended in the midst of some divisive issue causing Paul and his fellow apostles to flee for their lives. (Thus Acts 14:1-7). Paul, on the other hand, has as his mission focus in his letters those places where Christ had not been preached. Jews like Paul were welcome, but the focus was on people from all the nations. Relevant to Paul reaching people from all the nations is also the vision Paul had for going to Spain. It seems improbable that he made it there, but there were some early church traditions that he did reach what for him, and for others with a Jewish perspective, was the end of the world.73 7.9 Paul with his eyes on Spain Paul never explained his reasons for wanting to go to Spain in Romans. Based on what we know about his vision for a community so connected to the Jewish story reaching past 72 Ibid, 161-162. 73 1st Clement, a second-century document stares that Paul did plant the gospel in Spain. Other secondary sources offer little information to confirm this matter. (Kirk, Alexander N., 2015, 68.)


all barriers separating people from one another, we must add the possibility that the vision of Isaiah was guiding him. In Isaiah 60:1-18 holds up a prophetic vision of all nations and kings coming in peace to Jerusalem, inaugurating a world without violence, devastation, or destruction. (Is. 60: 18). This passage of scripture relates to our understanding of Paul’s desire to bring a collection from his assemblies to Jerusalem. The collection will be discussed in the forthcoming chapter on the subversive Paul. What interests us, with regard to Spain, is that in the mindset of the Jewish world, in ancient eyes, the end of the world was the Western edge of the Iberian peninsula with a shipping destination called Tarshish. It was mentioned in Isaiah’s vision. “For the coastlands will wait for me, the ships of Tarsish first…” (Is. 60:9). Maybe Paul wanted to plant new Jesus communities in Spain, but to find a ship in the harbor of Tarshish to return to Jerusalem. There were politics involved, at any rate, in his desire to reach Spain. The letter in Romans is the only place in any of the seven letters where Paul discussed his plans to carry the gospel to Spain. He doesn’t tell us why he has chosen this destination. He did, however, according to N.T. Wright leave us a small clue in the beginning of the letter.74 He began by clarifying his understanding of what he was doing in the context of his Jewish story. As such, with regard to the question if being Jewish was an advantage of any sort, he wrote, “For in the first place the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God.” The Greek phrase for “oracles of God” is ta logia tou theou. It could be translated “the words of God.” Paul worked with a sense of mission to take “the words of God” to entire world. No one in the first-century, though, had a map of the entire world. Sailors and overland traders knew that wherever they went there was more to see or discover, yet while the unknown and unexplored could mean discovery of treasure it could also bring disaster. Without the kinds of maps we have, people in the ancient world, with mental maps, named, as best they could, the barbarians living next door. There were also stories of where ships sailed, and the evidence of the goods they brought from far away. The Phoenicians led the way. “The Phoenicians were the great sailors of the ancient world, and early in the last millennium BC their ships often visited Spain–the Tarshish of the Old Testament–and even went to south-west Britain for tin, which was highly prized because it permitted the making of bronze. Phoenician colonies were established in Spain and North Africa, one of the latter being Carthage, founded perhaps in the eighth century BC.”75 What was of value in Spain? The eastern provinces were prime agricultural land, while the more mountainous regions to West (modern day Portugal) and to the north contained veins of copper, lead, and silver. While the Phoenicians were the outstanding traders of the ancient maritime world, Rome, hundreds of years after Phoenicians dominating the seas, sought to conquer and subjugate all the peoples of lands on their ever-enlarging borders. The various tribal groups in Spain proved to be particularly challenging and

74 Wright, N.T., 2012, 490. 75 Goldsworthy, Adrian, 2016, 91.


difficult to conquer and subdue during the time of Augustus (27 BCE – 14 CE). His goal was to pacify the entire Iberian peninsula. Goldsworthy credited Augustus with the conquest of Spain, but it took five Roman legions to accomplish the task.76 It just didn’t stay conquered. Raids by various ethnic Spanish tribes haunted the Romans from the time of Tiberius and after, thus explaining the continuing presence of a Roman legion in Spain.77 With the vicious aggressive Iberian tribal groups in mind, along with the equally difficult Gauls, Celts, and Germanic tribes to the north and east of the Iberian peninsula, Rome was establishing more fixed provincial governments in all these regions in the time of Augustus. These provincial government structures continued in the time of Paul. In all these provinces the power of Caesar was asserted and re-enforced through military might and violence. Paul’s mission field, in view with his letters, actually went to the edges of the more recently conquered provinces. He never had the entire Roman Empire, thugh, in his vision. There were messianic Jesus communities in North Africa and Egypt, for example. Paul never commented on these other lands and must not have considered them as a possible destination. His rule was to avoid going to places where others had planted assemblies. “Thus I make it my ambition to proclaim the good news, not where Christ is already named, so that I do not build on someone else’s foundation…” (Rom 15:20) I think N.T. Wright has correctly figured out why Paul chose Spain as his next destination when he was writing to the Romans.

“If we add up the key sites of his mission: Galatia, Ephesus, Philippi, Thessalonica and Corinth, and add to that list Illyricum (Romans 15.19), Rome itself and the Roman cities of Spain, what we are looking at is not a trail of the whole created order, but the establishment of messianic communities in the very places where Caesar’s power was strongest. Granted, Caesar’s power was also strong in Alexandria (in Egypt) and in Carthage (in ‘Africa’ proper: roughly modern Tunisia). But a glance at the map indicates the priorities, even supposing that Paul imagined the north African seaboard still to be virgin territory. He had travelled the central heartlands of the Roman empire, and it was now time to head for the city at the very heart itself, and to go on from there to the key western outpost of Rome’s wide domains. If we want to understand Paul’s ‘aims’, this is where to look.”78

Note that Wright has identified Spain as the western outpost of the Roman empire. Geographically, the Iberian peninsula, was set between the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic ocean. There Paul would encounter a multitude of languages, but it is a good guess many of these tribes had trading partners to the north in Gaul. It was a world in which people had to speak to the neighbors. Perhaps the only language missing for Paul in heading to Spain would be Greek. I mentioned in Chapter 2 (Paul in Arabia) how far to

76 Ibid, 172. 77 Ibid, 237. 78 Wright, N. T, 2015, 1502.


the East the language of Greek had spread due to the armies of Alexander the Great. But they never came West. In my rather extensive research for this account of Paul the only link I can find to help Paul communicate with his intention to head West, comes from his ministry in Galatia. The Galatians Paul knew were also Gauls. We usually associate the ancient Gauls with modern day France, but in the history of ancient world the Gauls were always on the move. “They spread far and wide over the ancient Mediterranean, having contact with many other nations the Romans identified, described, conquered, memorized, and assimilated. They have been preserved in text and image as stereotypical representatives of those who must be conquered, initially on the bottom side of a Roman/nations, civilized/uncivilized, male/female hierarchy."79 It was Gauls who invaded and settled in Galatia long prior to Paul’s ministry there. In her important commentary on Galatians Bridgett Kahl uses the iconic image of a figure near death at the hands of a solider that came from a time three centuries before Rome conquered Anatolia. (It is a relief quite similar to the one on page 22.) On a relief, that is part of the of Temple of Pergamum, any passing by were expected to understand the might and power of the civilized over the barbarians at the borders. We must remember that at the heart of Paul’s message is the story that the one Rome crucified is alive. Announcing the resurrection, while always keeping the crucifixion in focus, meant that Paul’s had an “upside down” message “offering righteousness to the undeserving and envisioning, through the eyes of the vanquished, a new city and civilization of peacemaking.”80 With Roman goals set on conquering and subjecting the barbarians to the West (Spain), as well as to the north and to the East, we find Paul having mapped out a strategy of planting communities in all those cities listed in the previous quote from N.T. Wright that would have symbolized the success of Augustus. As best, as we can determine, even though each of the communities Paul founded had their challenges, they also had Paul’s love and attention. The letters evidence his concerns and his hopes for these assemblies. We can only wonder what letters he might have written to new found believers in Spain. There is just one more detail deserving our attention. It involves this question: if Paul reached Spain with the intention to share the gospel, what were his linguistic challenges? According to Ehrensperger there were at least four main languages, not including Latin, to be found in the Iberian peninisula. She noted that an expected part of life for nearly all in that world included the skills of learning other languages.81 This small detail is relevant to the language challenge that actually might not have been so great for Paul. It regards one of the many hostile barbarian tribes called the Callaeci. Be mindful they were barbarians in the judgment of Rome. They occupied the Northwest corner of modern-day Portugal. What interested me was a comment made by the geographer, philosopher and

79 Lopez, 2008, 103. 80 Kahl, 2014, 127, 81 Ehrensperger, 2013, 72 and 74.


historian Strabo. “The Spanish Callaeci are "godless" and sleep on the ground “like the Keltoi,” are interbred Gauls and Iberians, kept to their bodies, and have women who switch roles with men (Strabo, Georg 2.65, 2.67, 2.77, 2.103)”82 They were “interbred Gauls” and thus could speak to one another. Paul had already created a community in Galatia that had been founded by Gauls. Did he know that one of the places where he might find a similar language was in the Northwest of Spain? We can’t with authority answer that question, but it seems he was really sincere about taking the next steps to get there. His background in Galatia may have paved the way.

82 Lopez, 2008, 107-8.

Documents

7. Paul in Community - GeorgeMartin.org · Chapter 7: Paul in Community 3 about oneself and one’s life.”” Gregory went on to say God becomes something like “a combination