The First Edition of the Letters of Paul [1 ed.] 1527578038, 9781527578036

Citation preview

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul By

Charles Vergeer

Translation: Elizabeth Harding and Rens Zomerdijk

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul By Charles Vergeer This book first published 2022 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2022 by Charles Vergeer All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-5275-7803-8 ISBN (13): 978-1-5275-7803-6

Original title: De eerste editie van Paulus. Gompels & Svacina, Oud Turnhout /’s Hertogenbosch 2021.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 Prising Open A Chapter One .............................................................................................. 12 Fragments of a missing whole Chapter Two ............................................................................................. 24 Behind the signs of her existence Chapter Three ........................................................................................... 39 Meeting Paul Chapter Four ............................................................................................. 59 The trial before the Proconsul B Chapter Five ............................................................................................. 78 The First Editions C Chapter Six ............................................................................................. 120 Frays and fringes Chapter Seven......................................................................................... 132 A thorn in the flesh Chapter Eight .......................................................................................... 135 The victory over death Chapter Nine........................................................................................... 148 The last words

vi

Table of Contents

Chapter Ten ............................................................................................ 153 The four categories D Chapter Eleven ....................................................................................... 158 A crack in the self-evident Chapter Twelve ...................................................................................... 168 Ephesus Chapter Thirteen ..................................................................................... 173 The tempo of the text Chapter Fourteen .................................................................................... 194 Scratching, tearing and scribbling Chapter Fifteen ....................................................................................... 204 Gossamer in the breeze Chapter Sixteen ...................................................................................... 226 Until the night Chapter Seventeen .................................................................................. 233 Breath of words E Chapter Eighteen .................................................................................... 244 Titus Chapter Nineteen .................................................................................... 249 A glimpse Chapter Twenty ...................................................................................... 253 Not the map but the landscape Chapter Twenty-One .............................................................................. 260 A final attempt

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

vii

F Apostolikon - Dispatches Letter One ............................................................................................... 266 Letter Two .............................................................................................. 273 Letter Three ............................................................................................ 291 Letter Four .............................................................................................. 304 Bibliography ........................................................................................... 323 Index of Bible texts ................................................................................ 327 Index of persons ..................................................................................... 335

INTRODUCTION PRISING OPEN

a. Prising open Texts are rarely crystal clear. Language is often regarded as just a means of communication and then comes the requirement that a text must be transparent. ‘Let’s be totally clear’ is often followed by an explanation containing an obscure threat. Is it possible to read Paul’s letters as clear announcements, as transparent texts? I was recently listening to some music by Louis Couperin (around 1650). The notes can be read, but only the performer can interpret it in such a way that it is made clear that a courante of Couperin, who was French should be slow and elegant, filled with many quavers and other decorative elements whereas a corrente of Frescobaldi should be played in a playful and rapid Italian manner; while a Courante by Froberger should be German-like, stiff and full-bodied. The same dance takes one into three totally different worlds. Suites by Couperin were performed at this concert, but he did not write them as such. He composed about two hundred separate dances. A century later under the influence of J.S. Bach, the then current fashion rearranged them into suites. They were put together by their key, C-major or a-minor. Keys that did not yet exist in the time of Couperin. The result is an amalgamation of dances that do not belong or fit together and were sometimes composed with a difference of twenty years in time. The order was also changed to allemande, courante, sarabande and gigue – completely contradicting previous arrangements. They now began with a prelude, a prelude that was not intended as such. They are preludes non mesuré, as Couperin wrote them, who left the performance to the player and omitted the bars and length of notes.

2

Introduction

The same music sounds so completely different on an Italian spinet, or on a German cembalo or on a French clavecin, with a deep sound box and in the mean tone temperament and not with the overstretched modern a = 442. Does something similar also apply to Paul’s letters? Definitely. Those who are of the opinion that they ‘know’ the author, Paul: his style, letters, his time, the fifties of the first century and his intention, the proclamation of the Christian faith, are creating a void reverberating with hollow sounds. The philosopher Peter Lamarque contrasts transparency with opacity1. ‘Reading for opacity’ means trying to figure out what is behind a text, why a writer writes precisely this, using those words and styles. The writer is telling his story, but does that automatically imply that we have to follow his course like a dog on a leash? In what manner and with what skills does the writer tell his story? What is the construction, the structure of the story and how does the author manage to guide the reader, direct his gaze and stimulate his feelings? How are the reader’s eyes opened and how do the texts manage to avoid certain aspects? That is how we intend to read Paul. When the editors allow Paul to speak at the beginning of the first letter to the Corinthians, he starts to complain at length about the disputes between the various factions at Corinth. These were disputes from the fifties of the first century AD, in the harbour city of Corinth, disputes which in Ephesus, half a century later no one was interested. The text does not clarify what these disputes were actually about, just as we are unable to discover what it was precisely that Peter and Paul clashed so violently about in Antioch. These things had for years been irrelevant, but the editor himself had a great deal of disputes with his ‘brothers in faith’ about the relationship of the Jewish Law and the belief in God’s Anointed. And that clash was characteristic for the period following the catastrophic war of the Romans against the Jews resulting in the destruction of the Temple and the city of Jerusalem, and the suppressing of the people. But those were not yet the tensions and feuds of the days when Paul was active. In order to take part in those party disputes the authors of the first edition needed authority, apostolic authority. Therefore they began their 1

P. Lamarque: The opacity of narrative, London/New York, 2014.

Prising Open

3

edition with the statement Paul had presented at the time he came to Ephesus: the agreement reached between him and the leading apostles in Jerusalem on preaching and caring for the poor. The legitimacy of Paul’s preaching was based on that agreement. Also in two important texts – the one about the Last Supper and the other about victory over death2 – the editors explicitly invoke the authority given to Paul: ‘Now I would remind you brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, in which you stand (…) For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received (…).3‘ But fifty years later it was obviously considered annoying that the authority had been bestowed by the apostles of Jerusalem and Judea, so the text was extensively altered and as a result was partly turned upside down4, with vindictive outbursts against those lying Arch-Apostles. In addition another text of Paul was taken out of context and added after the previous account. The result was that the breach between Peter, who was acting cowardly and insidiously, and Paul, acting heroically and determined, seemed an established fact. The letters, as they were composed and structured by the editorial staff, conclude with appeals for unity. The faithful are urged not to give in to internal disagreement but to preserve unity. These edited texts, whether or not written by Paul, can only be understood against the background of the conflicts which took place around 100 AD. Conflicts between the original, Jewish members of the faith community who wanted to preserve the Law, commandments and writings, and the newer, Greek members of the same community living under a new and unencumbered Christian faith. The later disagreements had nothing to do with the disputes about the proclamation of the new faith of half a century earlier, i.e. between the followers of the apostles of Jerusalem, the baptist group around Apollos and the group around Paul with its own appeals to preserve the unity of the Church. What I endeavour to do in this study which concerns the first edition of what would later be called the ‘Letters of Paul’ is to follow a method postulated by Umberto Eco: learning to see texts as opera aperta. To prise open a text to uncover its meaning.

2

I Corinthians 11 and 15. I Corinthians 15, 1-3. 4 Galatians 1, 13 – 2, 14. 3

4

Introduction

The Corpus Paulinum cannot be seen as one interconnected unit. Only those who are willing to face the fact that more than a century after Paul’s death later editors added as a kind of second appendix later editors added both letters to Timothy and the one to Titus (of which not a word was written by Paul) and that the same editorial board included the three ‘collection letters’, will discover how this cluster of texts was constructed. None of the fund raising, planning travels and appointing women their insignificant and silent place in the church reflects the truth and reality of Paul. What we can see is the developing Christian church in the second-century.

b. Paul ‘Success lulls to sleep while grief and failures leave deeper traces,’ writes Tolstoy in the beginning of his Anna Karenina. The Jewish belief in the Eternal and Only went together with a long history of fleeing, being enslaved, driven out of the homeland and doomed to live in slavery or exile; this is also what happened to her daughter, Christianity. We could give credence to the story of Acts, where the Spirit frees the apostles from their fear and their hiding place in Jerusalem and drives them to Rome to proclaim the faith in all the world. In the story of the Acts of the Apostles Paul was a successful man: it began on the road to Damascus with his conversion through a revelation from God; then followed the successful great missionary tours in Asia Minor, the vision instructing him to cross over to Europe and to found communities of faith in various Greek cities; this he did, chalking up successes in Antioch, Ephesus, Thessaloniki and Corinth. Then he returned to Jerusalem before embarking on his journey to Rome; it is a triumphal procession, the faith being proclaimed everywhere, in Jewish and Greek regions and cities, and finally, the jewel in the crown, in Rome, the capital of the world itself. But the truth and the reality were so very, very different. Paul was born around 12 BC, probably in Gischala, the northernmost town of Galilee near Damascus. During the rebellions which took place following the death of King Herod the Great, he and his family were captured and sold at the slave market. During his childhood in Jerusalem he had a strict Orthodox law-abiding education and training. By the age of

Prising Open

5

forty, he belonged to the majority party, a confidant of the Pharisee Gamaliel and of the high priest Joseph Bar Kaiphas. He had an important role in putting down the Nazarene uproar in AD 27 and persecuted its partisans in Jerusalem and Judea, he was in charge of executions as far reaching as to Damascus. And then suddenly he sided with the former insurgents and just as suddenly believed in the resurrection of God’s Anointed. He had to flee from the revenge of those in power. After three years, he went to the counter-high priest Simon Kèphas, who sent him in exile to Tarsus, to the relief of the followers of God’s Anointed who knew him only as their persecutor. It was not until about 40 AD that he was recalled and received approval from the leading apostles of Jerusalem to lead the faith community in Antioch. However, this led to conflicts with the authority of Jerusalem. Paul left for journeys visiting Jewish communities, first in Asia Minor and then in Macedonia and Greece. After a short time he was whipped out of several cities, Philippi, Thessaloniki and Berea; in Athens he was ridiculed and only in Corinth was he able to stay for a year and a half. Right at the beginning of his sojourn in that harbour town he was expelled from the meetings at the synagogue by the Jewish community, and after the arrival of the new Roman governor, Gallio, he was accused and expelled from the town and its region in the summer of 51. Having fled to Ephesus he taught at the sports school of Tyrannos for some time, but after a popular uproar he barely escaped with his life. He ended up in prison, and was subsequently exiled from this city as well. After these failures he was recalled to Jerusalem to give account of his deeds. The judgment of James, brother of Jesus and leader of the faith community of Jerusalem and Judea, was harsh and practically as severe as a death sentence. After being attacked and charged by the people and the high council, Paul disappeared from the scene: first he was imprisoned for two years at Caesarea, then he was sentenced to death by Porcius Festus. Two more years of imprisonment in Rome followed, his appeal to the emperor was rejected and the sentence was carried out. He was beheaded just outside Rome in year 59 AD. Possibly he was buried further out of town on a side road of the Via Ostiensis near the second milestone. In 846 that grave was looted by the Saracens. Nothing now exists of Paul’s earthly remains. Not much was left of his spiritual legacy either. About half a century after his death fierce debates were held in Ephesus because of the growing

6

Introduction

contrapositions between the Jewish and Christian members of the faith community. Now that Jerusalem had been conquered and destroyed, what apostolic authority was to be recognized? What was the value of God’s promise to Israel and the covenant that the Eternal had made with His people? What was the value of the Law of Moses? Two men whom we do not know by name and will refer to in this book as Anonymous A and B made speeches on these issues: What is the meaning of the Law and of Israel? What does belief in God’s Anointed mean? These sermons of Anonymous A were published, supplemented with other texts, including surviving letter fragments from Paul that had been sent to Corinth from Ephesus sixty years earlier. Now they were used, and partly misused, to enhance the bundle of texts by claiming apostolic authority and pastoral counsel. The collection was apparently quite successful and was followed-up with additions, with no new texts by Paul, but with letters attributed to him. As early as the summer of 144 AD, a second edition of what was then still called the Apostolikon appeared in Rome; later on these texts would subsequently be published as ‘letters of Paul’. These heavily edited, corrected and editorially augmented texts went down over the centuries as the spiritual legacy of Paul. As early as 245, Origen of Alexandria wrote a commentary on the letter to the Romans, of which he was quite aware that it was not in fact addressed to the Romans. In the Latin west Paul became known through Aurelius Augustine and eleven centuries later the interpretation of the letters by Martin Luther became important. During the Second World War, in 1940/41 Karl Barth gave lectures in Basel about the letter to the Romans. In 1956 that text appeared as Kurze Erklärung des Römerbriefes5. An extraordinary book, but a text in which Paul himself would have recognized or acknowledged very little.

c. On a pristine sheath in the morning light In recent decades Paul has occupied a major place in modern philosophy. Whereas in the beginning of the nineteenth century he was still not mentioned by Hegel for instance, at the end of the same century he was very much present in the works of Nietzsche. He was, bypassing Christ 5

K. Barth: Kurze Erklärung des Römerbriefes. Hamburg 1967.

Prising Open

7

himself, even more-or-less proclaimed to be the true founder of Christianity. As such he became one of the main interlocutors of some recent philosophers, whereas within the Christian church he was virtually silenced by the monotonous repetition of the same worn-out words and ideas. The book The Soul of the World by Roger Scruton ends with a confrontation with Paul6. One of the most fascinating conversations with Paul is Il tempo che resta. Un commento alla Lettera ai Romani by Giorgio Agamben7. Word by word, Paul is spoken to in a most intensive and thoughtful way. In six days, as in the six-day work of creation, the first ten words of the Letter to the Romans are read and pondered ad litteram. They are colloquia that Agamben held successively at the universities of Paris, Verona, Evanston and Berkeley. There is a time in which Paul endures. This also goes for Augustine, the father of Western Christianity, in his Confessiones. His book starts off with the idea that man is not just an object, accidentally thrown somewhere in this immense void of space and time, but that we were created by Him, emanate from Him and are created to return to Him (…) quia fecisti nos ad et et inquietum est cor nostrum, donec requiescat in te. ‘You have created us unto You, and our heart is restless until it finds rest in You.’ And the book ends with Dies autem septimus sine vespera est nec habet occasum, ‘the seventh day which is without evening and has no downfall. 8‘ Paul, too does not consider this world and reality as accidental or fatal, but as – klèsis – created. Paragei gar to schèma tou kosmou toutou, ‘For the present form of this world is passing away. 9 ‘But we have to live in it hǀs mè, ‘as if it were nothing’. That, according to Agamben, has nothing to do with Greek philosophical wisdom, the philosophy of the street and the market, the Stoa, taught: let it go, it is not important. It touches the nucleus of the good news, the gospel, Messianism, the proclamation of the coming of God’s Anointed and the Kingdom of God. The earliest gospel, that of Mark, begins with that statement: ‘And a voice came from heaven, You are My beloved son, with you I am well

6

R. Scruton: The Soul of the World. Princeton 2014. G. Agamben: Il tempo che resta: Un commento alle Lettera ai Romani. Turin 2000. 8 Augustinus: Confessiones I 1 en XIII 51. 9 I Corinthians 7, 31. 7

8

Introduction

pleased.10‘ And the first word that the Anointed speaks is Peplèrǀtai ho kairos, ‘the time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand,’ èngiken. Paul expresses the same thing in his letter to the Corinthians. This world, in which men and women marry, in which there is sorrow and joy, longing, buying and selling, possession and property – all that will pass and it is over, now. He stresses it five times in a row: hǀs mè, quasi non, it’s over, it’s like nothing. The passing has passed, the time has come. The coming of the kingdom and God’s Anointed resulted in a triumphal entry into the holy city; the temple was taken and the new king was anointed, but only a few hours later it turned out to be a complete failure and ended in what was, in fact, the execution of a criminal on the cross. Everything was lost: Eloï, Eloï, lama sabaktani, ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?11‘ But the faith in Him remained. After three days He had accepted the sacrifice and, according to the scriptures, kept His promise, He raised the crucified one from the dead and took him up to heaven. This was the gospel Paul was proclaiming: the Eternal will never abandon His people and covenant. The Living One had sent His son. His presence - parousia - is permanent. ‘We live to the Lord (…) we die to the Lord. 12‘ ‘The expression of that belief is, according to Agamben, the hǀs mè, do not live and die as if you belong in this world order of and for people but for the coming of the kingdom of God. But once again, whatever came, it was not the kingdom but the failure. Paul was persecuted and driven out by the Jews in Philippi and Thessaloniki, he was molested in the port of Corinth, imprisoned in Ephesus and exiled. And in Jerusalem he suffered condemnation by the brethren, attempted murders by the Jews, imprisonment by the Romans and finally the execution of the death sentence with the sword. As if that was not enough, his followers deserted him13. But worse, seven years after his beheading just outside Rome, war broke out between Romans and Jews. In September 70, the holy city was taken and the temple destroyed. Had the Lord abandoned His people? His kingdom, would that still come? The situation in which the editors found 10

Mark 1, 11. Mark 15, 34. 12 Romans 14, 8. (Elsewhere in this book I will state that this is not one of Paul’s text himself.) 13 Acts 20, 29-30 and 37-38 en II Timothy 4, 16. 11

Prising Open

9

themselves at the time of the first edition of Paul’s revived letters is painfully clear from the two letters – from Paul allegedly –to the congregation of Thessaloniki. Apart from a few verses, both letters are practically identical, the author of the second letter copied the first letter and attempted to add new elements to it. Even sentences such as ‘we worked night and day that we might not be a burden to any of you’ were neatly repeated14. The author was only concerned with one thing: the second coming of the Lord. The first letter describes with great certainty that the second coming will be very soon. The sounding of the trumpets by the angels is described as if they really can be heard. The second letter urges patience because as it stands the kingdom will not yet come; much remains to be done in the meantime. This is what the editors of Paul’s letters considered a problem that was difficult to solve. Paul proclaimed the coming and presence of the kingdom and God’s Anointed. The editors realized that for the time being this was not quite imminent. It is cruel that owing to this edition of letters, Paul’s actual proclamation was renounced. Paul himself yearned for salvation and he vehemently preached about the coming and presence of the kingdom and God’s Anointed, with the provocative advise to live and die hǀs mè; to live as if wife and friend, child and home, property and strivings no longer mattered, they were mere human affairs of a vanishing world now that God Himself had established His kingdom. Instead, Paul was just given some room for counsel and proscribing guidelines concerning dietary laws; how to deal with women, meat for sacrifice, and the like. The focal point of the first draft of the edition of what in later centuries would be called ‘the letters of Paul’ is given right in the beginning, following the opening scene with the agreement Paul made with the Arch-Apostles in Jerusalem and the legitimacy of his mission, followed by the conflict concerning Law and Jewish dietary laws in Antioch. Paul openly turns against Kèphas (Simon Peter) and lectures him: ‘If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?15‘ 14 15

I Thessalonians 2, 9 and II Thessalonians 3, 8. Galatians 2, 14.

10

Introduction

The other pivot is the editors’ parallel comment in the expositions on Law and belief in the final chapters of the letter to the Galatians: ‘Tell me, you who want to be justified by the Law, are you not listening to the Law?’ The text is rather compelling: ‘tell me!’ The words ouk akouete are also quite sharp: you read the Law but do not understand any of it.

A

CHAPTER ONE FRAGMENTS OF A MISSING WHOLE

The Lord is the One and Eternal. The Greeks and other peoples have many gods and here in Rome are many statues and temples of gods. But in our congregations we recognize only the Living, the Only One, who does not tolerate images. He delivered Abraham and his people from Ur of the Chaldees, He led them away from the images of fertility and motherhood, into the land. He delivered Moses and his people from the bondage of Egypt. He led them out of the wilderness and liberated His holy land under Joshua. He delivered the holy city, Jerusalem, and gave the kingship to David. The son of David built the house of the Lord, the temple in Jerusalem. Once more he brought them out of exile and slavery in Babylon and gave them the land. He liberated the country from Syrian rule and ungodliness and restored the royal house. And King Herod the Great restored the temple in the holy city. The king died and uprisings broke out in Judea which were suppressed by the Romans. The king’s sons, Archelaus and Agrippa, came to Rome – 5 years before our era – so that the emperor would settle the disputes about the succession and inheritance. But after Caesar Augustus had given his verdict, a delegation of fifty Jews appeared on behalf of eight thousand men of Judea to complain about the great king and his eldest son, Archelaus, cruel exploiters and brutal murderers of their people. They spoke out against the House of Herod and for more independence.

Fragments of a missing whole

13

These Jewish representatives were supported by many Jews living in Rome1. Augustus summoned the magistrates and his advisors to the temple of Apollo on the Palatine Hill. There the fifty Jews first walked through the Porticus of the Danaids, with fifty statues out of Numidian yellow marble depicting the naked daughters of Danae and opposite them their fifty lovers. In front of the temple stood the colossal statue of Apollo and in the temple itself they were confronted by an overwhelming wealth of art and religious objects such as the Sibylline books. The charges of the Jews impressed Augustus. After several days of deliberation, he came up with a statement that harshly rejected Archelaus’ claims to his father’s kingdom. He was appointed only to the post of ethnarch of Judea, the wilderness of Idumenea, and a district in Samaria. In addition, some Greek cities were separated from the kingdom and added to the province of Syria. It was a severe humiliation for the king, a cruel and lecherous man.

Coin from Judea with in Greek the name: Herod Archelaus. (Bible Lands Museum Jerusalem)

Archelaus neither forgave nor forgot these insults and took bloody revenge in his kingdom. After receiving another Jewish delegation, Augustus deposed him in 6 AD and exiled him to Vienne in Gaul.

1

Flavius Josephus: Bellum Judaicum II. 80-100.

14

Chapter One

Augustus robbed the country of its independence and made it into a Roman province. He placed Judea under the direct rule of a Roman knight, Coponius2. For the first time in centuries there was no longer a Jewish king in Judea and Jerusalem, and the land of the Eternal was no longer administered in His Name. Coponius ordered a census to impose heavy taxes. A revolt broke out against these measures, led by Judas the Galilean and the rightful Royal House of David. Judas ‘called them cowards if they agreed to pay taxes to the Romans and if they would recognise these new rulers, mortals, instead of the Eternal.3‘ During this rebellion, Johosu’ah ben Pandera, in Greek Jesus Nazoraios, was born while his parents were fleeing the city of David, Bethlehem, in the mountains of Judea. After the death of Augustus, Caesar Tiberius did not change Rome’s attitude. In 26 AD Tiberius withdrew from Rome and settled on Capri. The actual power was in the hands of Lucius Aelius Seianus, the prefect of the Praetorians.

Coin of Caesar Tiberius. The name of Seianus was removed following the damnatio memoriae in October AD 31. (Found during excavations of Bibilis, Spain)

2

Dio Cassius: Historia Romana LV, 27, 6; Flavius Josephus: Antiquitates Judaicae XVII, 342-348; Flavius Josephus: Bellum Judaicum II, 111. 3 Flavius Josephus: Bell Jud. II, 118.

Fragments of a missing whole

15

Seianus pursued an anti-Semitic policy: four thousand Jews and adherents of Eastern religions were exiled from Rome to Sardinia in 19 to perish. All eastern influences were cast in a bad light, the images of Isis were thrown into the Tiber under Tiberius. And in AD 26 he sent Pontius Pilate to Judea. Having arrived there Pilate immediately was tough on the Jews, this provoked three revolts: to start off with he brought images of Caesar Tiberius into the holy city, according to some even within the grounds of the temple of the One. He also plundered the Korban, the temple’s treasury, money devoted to the Eternal, to pay for the construction of an aqueduct. And finally he had Joshu’ah han Nosri, God’s Anointed, who had entered the holy city as the Son of David and had purified the temple, crucified as a slave4. At the time that the Romans humiliated and executed the Jewish king of the House of David in the spring of 27, the power of King Herod’s grandson, Marcus Julius Agrippa, by the Jews commonly referred to as Herod Agrippa, grew in Rome. He was a grandson of Herod the Great. Seven years before our era his father, Aristoboulos, was killed by Herod. His mother, Berenice, fled with her three-year-old son to Rome and raised the child in the home of Drusus and Antonia. Drusus was the elder brother of Caesar Tiberius. Antonia minor was the grandmother of the future Emperor Caligula. Julius Agrippa received a Hellenistic education. He lived lavishly and from time to time had to flee the city to evade his creditors. Influential Romans, such as Capito, came to his aid and Antonia also lent him large sums of money. He followed Caesar Tiberius as a friend and advisor to Capri. In October AD 31, Tiberius re-seized power and had Seianus executed. On the 16th of March AD 37 Tiberius died on Capri and was succeeded by Caesar Gaius Caligula who was a close friend of Julius Agrippa. He bestowed him with some Jewish territories and the title of King of the Jews. Subsequently Caligula sent him to the holy land via Alexandria. In Alexandria, Agrippa by his defiant attitude stirred up the Alexandrians, they persecuted and murdered many Jews and proclaimed a 4

Flavius Josephus: Bellum Judaicum II, 169-177 and Antiq. Jud. XVIII 3, 3.

16

Chapter One

naked fool, Karabas, as king of the Jews in the summer of 38. ‘They dragged the wretch to the gymnasium and put him on a stage so that everyone could see him properly. They put a flattened papyrus sheet on his head to serve as a diadem and put a carpet on him as a royal robe. Someone saw a stem of an indigenous plant, papyrus, lying in the street and pushed it into his hand, which was supposed to represent his sceptre. (…) And the surrounding crowd cheered him, addressing him as Marin (…)5,’ an Aramaic word for lord or king, by which they intended to mock king Agrippa.

Gaius Caligula, around AD 40. He did not shave himself as a sign of mourning for his sister Drusilla. Louvre, Paris.

The Roman governor did not intervene, on the contrary, he encouraged the riots. Massacres of the Jewish population in Alexandria took place. 5

Philo Judaeus: In Flaccam II 25-40.

Fragments of a missing whole

17

A delegation of the Jews, including Philo of Alexandria, left for Rome to complain to Caligula. In May 40 they stood before the emperor for the first time. The devout Jews were appalled at the insulting and threatening brutality of Caligula and the clique of young men around him. Later in that same summer of 40, Caligula ordered a statue of himself to be erected in the holiest of holies in the temple in Jerusalem. In late summer, King Julius Agrippa arrived in Rome and succeeded in talking Caligula out of this unimaginable intention. In September, the Alexandrian Jews were at long last heard by the emperor. A few months later on January 24 AD 41 Caligula was assassinated. Following the news of his death more murder attempts against the Jews took place in Alexandria, whereupon the Jews sent two embassies to the new emperor, Claudius. Claudius had been proclaimed emperor in the Senate.

Bronze coin with Herod Agrippa and Herod of Chalcis honouring Caesar Claudius or indicating that they received their crowns from the emperor. (British Museum, London)

Claudius showed his gratitude by making Agrippa king over Judea, Samaria and Idumenea as well. Herod the Great’s kingdom was thus restored, and in the summer of 41 Agrippa I went to Jerusalem to rule as king of the Jews. However, he fell ill and felt his end approaching. Before his death, in the spring of 44 (or perhaps even later), he had the leaders of

18

Chapter One

the opposing party, from the House of David, killed. He had Simon and James nailed to the cross6. This rivalry stirred up riots throughout the Jewish world — in Judea, Greece, and Rome. In Rome, Caesar Claudius issued an edict in 49, expelling many Jews from the city. ‘The Jews who were stirred up, driven by Anointed caused constant uproar (...).7‘ Around that time, an envoy of God’s Anointed travelled to various Greek cities. Unrest and uproar arose wherever they came. In the very first city, Philippi, where their leader, Paul, was speaking, the magistrate took action after an accusation: ‘These men are Jews, and they are disturbing our city. They advocate customs that are not lawful to us as Romans to accept or practice.8‘ They were chased out of the city, but they repeated their insidious words in Thessalonica. They were also charged there: ‘These men who have turned the world upside down have come here also! (...) They are all acting against the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus.9‘ They went on to Corinth but were also banished there following the arrival of the proconsul Gallio. They also caused an uproar in the capital of Asia, Ephesus. Having been scorned and driven away from Macedonia, Greece, and Asia, they returned to Jerusalem in 55. It was the year that even the son of the high priest was murdered in broad daylight by the zealots. The magistrate imprisoned Paul for two years and then sentenced him to death, whereupon he appealed to the emperor. For in October 54 Caesar Claudius had died in Rome and was succeeded by the young Caesar Nero, who was assisted by Seneca and Burrus. There was hope for a better regime. In the autumn of 57, this Paul came by sea to Rome and this second trial was led by Afranius Burrus. In 59 this led to the confirmation of the original sentence and the beheading of Paul just outside the walls, ad aquas salvias. Following the death of the last Jewish king the Romans had returned to direct rule in Judea and the holy city of Jerusalem. Opposition against these foreign rulers grew fiercer and more murderous every day. In 62 things got out of hand, first in Jerusalem and two years later also in Rome. 6

Acts 12, 1-5 and Flavius Josephus: Antq. Jud. XX, 102. Acts 18, 2 and Suetonius: Divus Claudius 25, 4: Iudaeos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantis Romae expulit. 8 Acts 16, 20-21. 9 Acts 17, 6-7. 7

Fragments of a missing whole

19

After the unexpected sudden death of Festus, the Roman governor, and before the arrival of his successor Albinus, the high priest Hannan and the high priest of the people, James the Righteous, Ja’aqob Saddika, came into violent conflict. James the Righteous, the brother of God’s Anointed, entered the temple in full regalia as high priest. Hannan had him beaten to death in the square of the holy temple. When the new governor, Albinus, sent by Nero, arrived in Judea, he forced Agrippa II to discharge his high priest, Hannan, who had been appointed only three months earlier10. Divide et impera was the motto of the Romans. There was division and strife too among the Jews in Rome, between the followers of the House of Herod and those of the House of David. Moreover, the Roman Jews were also annoyed about the evil role the Romans played in all this. For the Jews the murder of the Righteous One, brother of God’s Anointed, was the last straw. Too many of their leaders had been executed: first the leader of the rebellion, Judas the Galilean; then the beheading of John the Baptist; the crucifixion of God’s Anointed; the deaths of Simon the Kèphas and James; the beheading of Paul – alternately by the Romans and the kings of the House of Herod – and finally James the Righteous. It caused the rebellion, the war and the fall of Jerusalem and the temple of God11. On the night of June 18, AD 64, the great fire of Rome was lit in the shops near the Circus Maximus opposite the Jewish quarter at the Porta Capena. The followers of God’s Anointed were blamed. Nero, Vespasian, and Titus believed this and took severe measures against the Jews. First came the great fire of Rome, then the brutal persecution of the followers of the Anointed in Rome by Nero. Then came the rebellion in Judea and Galilee and in Rome the call for the soldiers to follow Vespasian. Especially the tenth legion, with many soldiers from Rome and the surrounding area, would actively fight against the Jews. Young Jewish soldiers maimed themselves in order not to be sent against their own people. Mark, the evangelist, was known by the cognomen Kolobodaktulos the stump finger, the deserter12. 10

Flavius Josephus: Ant. Jud. XX, 197-203. Hegesippus quoted by Eusebius of Caesarea: Historia ecclesiastica II xxiii 19. 12 Marcus (...) qui colobodactylos est nominatus, in the anti-Marcionistic prologue of the gospel. 11

20

Chapter One

Inscription of the tenth legion, Legio X Fretensis in the crusader’s church in Abu Gosh, Israel.

During this war a revolt against Caesar Nero broke out. He committed suicide and four army commanders in succession became emperor. During this civil war due to arson, the temple of Jupiter Maximus Optimus Capitolinus burned down completely on December 19, AD 69. Less than seven months later, in September 70, the holy city was taken and the temple of the Eternal went up in flames. On the night of the ninth to the tenth of the month of Loüs, the Romans heard how the god himself opened the gates of his temple with a loud noise and left his house on earth13. That is what the soldiers said, but the Eternal is faithful. In December, the imperator Flavius Vespasianus returned to the capital of the Roman Empire as emperor. Together with his son Titus, he held a grandiose triumph in June 71, in which, alongside the leaders of the Jewish revolt and many, many Jewish prisoners of war, the torn veil of the temple, the golden table for the offered loaves, the golden seven-armed candlestick and the silver trumpets were blasphemously led through the streets and theatres of the city.

13

Tacitus: Historiae. V 13

Fragments of a missing whole

21

The triumphal arch of Titus in the Circus Maximus as it is depicted on the later arch on the Velius.

The pompous triumphal procession drew all inhabitants of Rome and nearly a million spectators watched the wretched Jewish prisoners of war being whipped on. The procession led through the Circus Maximus, where the triumphal arch of Titus had been erected on the spot where the great fire of Rome had been started five years earlier, directly opposite the Jewish quarter behind Porta Capena. An inscription triumphantly stated that Caesar Titus ‘subdued the Jewish people and destroyed Jerusalem.14‘

14 The text of the inscription was included in the Itinerarium of Einsiedeln, CIL 6, 944: Iudaeorum domuit et urben Hierusolymam.

22

Chapter One

Our Jewish brothers were sent to the mines to dig and die. Daily we saw them toiling as slaves rebuilding the temples, the one of Optimus Maximus the supreme Jovis Pater and on the temple of peace, that cruel peace, and at the nadir of cruelty, building the Amphitheatrum Flavianum, the Colosseum, where the last survivors would be fed ad bestias, murdered for the amusement of their rulers, as subjected slaves. No longer were we Jews allowed to donate the annual didrachm for of the temple of the Eternal in the holy city, but we were forced to pay the fiscus judaicus for our enslavement by the Lord of rulers. We Jews, we prayed and sang; ‘[We] will not fear the terror of the night, nor the arrow that flies by day, nor the pestilence that stalks in darkness (…).15‘ These were the plagues in Egypt with which the Eternal struck and saved us from slavery. This is what we sang about in slavery in Babylon, from which the Eternal delivered us. And now …? We sang ‘We (…) eat the bread of anxious toil,’ but trusted in the Lord whose House stands for Eternity16. But had He not left His House, the temple in the holy city, abandoned His land and people? Has his promise not been kept? The Eternal, the Faithful. What were we to tell our sons at the approaching Passover, the feast of the deliverance from slavery in Egypt? ‘Father,’ they will ask, ‘why are we celebrating this feast? Now, as we see our people daily in bondage, worn out and doomed to death. Now that the temple was destroyed and we have to build the temple of the vanquishers on the Capitol?’ But we Jews held on to the covenant and the promise: ‘He has torn us that He may heal us; He has struck us down and He will bind us. After two days He will revive us; on the third day He will raise us up, that we may live before His Presence.’ Thus said the prophet Hosea17.

15

Psalm 91, 5-6. Psalm 127, 1-3. 17 Hosea 6, 1-3. In the liturgy on Good Friday. 16

Fragments of a missing whole

23

Bronze sestertius struck in Rome after AD 70: the palm tree symbolizing Judea; the downcast weeping Jewish woman and the erect Roman soldier. The text: S C IVDEA CAPTA. (Bible Lands Museum, Jerusalem)

And Mark wrote about the cry in the wilderness and the voice that came, ‘You are my son, my beloved.’ About Joshu’ah, Nazorene to his oath, the ben Joseph of the House of David. He wrote about his life and suffering, about his dishonourable death on the cross as a disobedient slave and about the belief in him, spoken by a Roman. How he remained faithful to death, and how the Eternal, the Faithful raised him from the dead again. The Only One, the Living, the Present. .

CHAPTER TWO BEHIND THE SIGNS OF HER EXISTENCE

‘Wenn uns etwas deutlich wird, wird es mehrdeutich.’1

a. Learning to read Just as in September AD 70 in the war between the Romans and the Jews, the fall of the holy city and the destruction of the temple marked a dividing line between on the one hand the belief in the coming of the kingdom of God as a Jewish sect and on the other hand the new Christian belief that increasingly took on anti-Jewish traits, the murder of the Jews the Holocaust during the Second World War turned out to be a turning point in the view on the relationship between Jews and Christians. What once was considered as a mother’s loving connection with her daughter increasingly turned into dislike towards the end of the first century. And what two thousand years of persecution and hatred could not accomplish, did occur after Auschwitz: Christians and Jews had realized their deep connection, their shared roots and their deep kinship. Jesus and Paul, Peter and Mark were Jews. The dialogue between Jews and Christians, such as the one between Pinchas Lapide and Peter Stuhlmacher, began in the decades after Second Worldwar and often revolved around Paul: rabbi and apostle2. Studies on Paul appeared in which the image we had of him changed radically, as radically as the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel after the restoration was found to have changed. For me the studies on the letter to the Romans, such as by Jacob Taubes Die Politische Theologie des Paulus and Giorgio

1

M. Heidegger: Vier Hefte I und II, Gesamtausgabe. Band 99, Frankfurt am Main 2019, p. 57. ‘When something becomes clear to us, it gets several meanings.’ 2 P. Lapide and P. Stuhlmacher: Paulus rabbi en apostel. Kampen 1988.

Behind the signs of her existence

25

Agamben Il tempo che resta: Un commenta alla Lettera ai Romani were very important3. In the winter semester of 1920/21, still in Freiburg, Martin Heidegger had lectured on Paul. The main subject was the contrast between Law and faith, the Law of Moses and the faith in Christ. Heidegger indicated Galatians 2, 19 as the core of the debate: apethanen nomǀi dia nomou – ‘died through the Law for the Law.’ And Galatians 5, 11,’the scandal of the cross’ – to skandalon tou staurou: Das ist das eigenliche Grundstück des Christentums, demgegenüber es nur Glaube oder Unglaube gibt.4‘ What happened from the 1920s onwards was not only the breakthrough in theology by Rudolf Bultmann’s demythologizing of the New Testament. More decisive was that theologians and exegetes freed themselves from the tradition of doctrinal and ecclesiastical interpretations. In addition, historians, classicists, philologists and philosophers came with new methods and insights: especially seeing with different eyes, learning to read differently. I will here provide just one example, more will follow later. In the third part of his Histoire de la sexualité, Michel Foucault analyses the correspondence between Marcus Fronto and Marcus Aurelius5. Not primarily with a view on philosophical or political ideas, but with a keen eye for the frequent whining of the two correspondents about their ailments and illnesses. And who is willing to read or willing to try to understand Paul from such a point of view? Paul himself writes: ‘You know it was because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at first, and though my ‘miserable condition was a trial to you, you did not scorn or despise me (…).6‘ The translation, ‘because of a bodily ailment’ and ‘miserable condition’ gives no explanation in a spiritual sense, but the text is clear. The word sarx is used instead of sǀma, the ‘flesh’ instead of the ‘body’. 3

J. Taubes: Die Politische Theologie des Paulus. Munich 2003; G. Agamben: Il tempo che resta: Un commenta alla Lettera ai Romani. Turin 2000. 4 M. Heidegger: Phänomenologie des religiösen Lebens. Gesamtausgabe. Band 60, Frankfurt am Main 1995, pp. 70-71 ‘That is the real nucleus of Christianity, in variance to which there is only belief or unbelief.’ 5 M. Foucault: Histoire de la sexualité III, Le souci de soi. Paris 1984, p. 70 vv. 6 Galatians 4, 13-14.

26

Chapter Two

And astheneia, weakness, physical deficiency. This text did not come from Paul himself but was written about forty or fifty years later by Anonymous A, the principal editor of the first edition. As I will further clarify in chapter 8, the essence of the first edition of Paul’s letters: the treatise on the victory over death, was also written by Anonymous A7. And the comment about his deficiency is the key to that text. He explains in detail the canon of faith and then writes in verse 42: ‘So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. (…) what is sown in dishonour and weakness, it is raised imperishable (and) in power. 8‘ Here we find the same word – astheneia. The opening words of I Corinthians 15, ‘Brethren, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you’ are also the same as, ‘You know (…) that the first time I preached the gospel (...).9‘ It is a clear reference. The idiosyncrasies of a writer, in this case of a speaker, often betray him. The Anonymous A tends to sharpen his assertions, to make them more precise. He states something and then repeats it with: ‘I mean this (...)’ and says it again. We come across that peculiar word – legǀ de – in Galatians 3, 17; 4, 1 and 5, 16. And in the treatise on victory over death – where we recognise a later insertion in verses 15, 44-48 – the writer clearly betrays himself by: Touto de phèmi, adelphoi, ‘I mean this, brothers, flesh (sarx) and blood cannot enter the Kingdom of God (…).10‘ If this different way of looking at texts provides new options of ‘seeing’ the most important editor of Paul’s letters, this also applies to Paul himself of course. He portrays his life as en thlipsei, ‘in tribulation’, ‘fear and insecurity’. The word occurs more than twenty times in the letters. It was this constant complaint that opened my eyes to the truth of the trial before the proconsul Gallio in Corinth. We still read Paul mainly through the eyes of Luther, who saw Paul as Aurelius Augustine did. A totally different personality emerges when we look at him through the eyes of Michel Foucault.

7

I Corinthians chapter 15. I Corinthians 15, 3-7 and 42. 9 Galatians 4, 13. 10 This physical problem is also mentioned in II Corinthians 12, 5: ‘I will not boast about myself, except about my weaknesses, en tais astheneiais . Immediately followed by the wellknown and enigmatic words skolops tèi sarki, ‘I was given a thorn in the flesh (…).’ (12, 7) 8

Behind the signs of her existence

27

I learned how to read from H.J. Drossaart Lulofs in years of privatissima about Aristotle and Han Renckens in his tutorials on the Torah. Later mainly Sein und Zeit by Martin Heidegger; Wahrheit und Methode by Hans-Georg Gadamer; Les Mots et les Choses by Michel Foucault; De la Grammatologie by Jacques Derrida and Il tempo che resta: Un commenta alla Lettera ai Romani by Giorgio Agamben who taught me how Paul can also be read: with different eyes.

b. The text But which text comes before our eyes? The first story of the life and suffering of God’s Anointed was written down and read out in the spring of AD 72 in Rome. The man in the story had probably been crucified and died in the spring of 27, just outside Jerusalem. Almost half a century in time and in terms of distance more than three thousand kilometres separated event and text. Mark may have had an account of the life of Jesus that he used to compile his story. He also had his brothers in faith around him daily, and knew the questions that haunted the Jewish community at the approaching feast of the Exodus, the liberation from slavery in Egypt. Liberation? By Yahweh? The coming of His Kingdom? Salvation through God’s Anointed? Now? Now that Jerusalem was taken and its people massacred? Now? When 30,000 fellow believers were daily being driven and beaten to death in the streets of Rome? Now? When the holy temple, the House of the Lord, was destroyed? Now? At a time that Jewish slaves were used to rebuild the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus Optimus Maximus bigger and more beautiful than ever? Now? When a few months earlier in July 71 the emperor’s triumphus had shown the most sacred objects from the temple: the torn veil; the golden tables for the shewbread and the menorah to the people and mob? Now? When in shame was spoken about the ignominious death on the cross of God’s Anointed? Mark’s text was liberating. It provided hope and belief out of this cul-de-sac, a new beginning and future. Who was this Mark N.N. qui Colobodactylus est nominatus11. His full name is unknown, his first name was one the most common in Rome and the meaning of his Greek cognomen – stump finger – is uncertain. 11

V. Taylor: The Gospel according to St. Mark. Hampshire and London 1987, p. 3.

28

Chapter Two

Perhaps it was a man who mutilated himself to evade military service. This Mark was traditionally wrongly identified as being John Mark of Jerusalem, labelled as the right-hand man of Simon Peter, also as the man who wrote Peter’s memoirs, a collaborator of Paul, and as the first bishop of Alexandria. All of which cannot be true. To what extent can we rely on the text that has been handed down to us? Its reliability seems to be largely established by centuries of scientific study and the hundreds of antique papyri and parchments on which they were written. However, these documents lead us mainly back to Byzantine codices and texts from the fifth century and fragments of texts from the fourth. Centuries of silence went by before the first witnesses came forward. Can we learn something about the status of the text through reading, reading slowly and repeatedly? Certainly. At the beginning of the text is written.$7$0$5.21 – according to Mark. That was added in later years, at the bottom or at the top of the papyrus scroll. Then follows a title, which was also added above the text later on: ‘Beginning of the Good News of Jesus Christ, the Son of God.’ Not all manuscripts contain the addition: , the Son of God. Rightly so, because, as Albert Schweitzer pointed out, Mark did his best not to reveal the secret of God’s Anointed, ‘das Messiasgeheimnis’ - in Schweitzer’s words. The words appear six times in the text and each time Jesus remains silent about it and even imposes silence. The title is therefore not in accordance with the text. Mark still adhered to the original belief that is also formulated in the opening words of the epistle to the Romans: ‘Son of God (...) in power by his resurrection from the dead12. The text continues: ‘As is written in Isaiah the prophet: (...).13‘ Of course Mark did not write these words but they were spoken during the meeting by the preacher who led the service. The text does not continue with a quotation from Isaiah, but first with something from the prophet Malachi. Apparently, a later copyist followed the then well-known method of Rabbi Hillel and added what he considered to be a fitting, similar, or even more appropriate quotation. Anyone who intends to read 12 13

Romans 1, 4. Mark 1, 2.

Behind the signs of her existence

29

the original text of Mark must therefore delete that inserted quotation (1, 2b). Then he should note that the original ‘according to the prophet’ was considered to be wrong by later copyists and corrected to ‘according to the prophets’. The wording is a bit awkward: ‘Make straight paths and so John (the) Baptist appeared in the wilderness (...).’ We have only reached the fourth verse and already noticed seven pitfalls. The text appears to have been edited, improved and changed. Some of the changes of the text are clearly against Mark’s intentions. Well-known is the end of the gospel. Originally, it ended with: kai oudeni oudeni eipan ephobounto gar – and no one saying nothing, trembling. 14‘ In the decades that followed after the writing of this sentence the three other gospels came and reported appearances of the resurrected Anointed of God. With miraculous features: walking through closed doors; eating fried fish; not allowing himself to be embraced in the garden but then again allow his wounds to be touched in the hall; appearances in Jerusalem according to one evangelist, in Galilee with another and then with John a combination of the two. Texts about those apparitions were also added to the gospel of Mark. Even three different closing texts, all three contradicting the intent of Mark himself. If faults are apparent in texts by Plato or Cicero, they will be annotated as such or removed from the text. In this case however, the texts of the gospels were canonised in the fourth and fifth centuries and thus became untouchable, corrupt or not. Also irritating is the translation in the English Standard Version: ‘They said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.’ This contradicts the later reports in the gospels that they (the women) rushed to the apostles to tell them what had happened, and especially with what Mark actually writes. He speaks about the trembling that befell the women when they perceived the Presence of the Living God in the form of an angel. All that was left of this grandiose mystery of faith was frightened women doing what the Church wants to do – to shut up. Once the step was taken to add the texts about the apparitions, thereby nullifying Mark’s testimony of faith, the text had to adapt to Matthew’s rendering. Verses – such as 14, 28, and 16, 7 - about the apparitions - were inserted, and from the second century onwards, the 14

Mark 16, 8.

30

Chapter Two

oldest and original gospel was shoved to the background into second place. Augustine regarded it as a later excerpt of the gospel of Matthew: ‘Marcus eum subsecutus tanquam pedisequus et breviator eius videtur15.’ Many more changes in the text can be identified: the rebels became fishermen; the father, Joseph, disappeared, the son was made into a carpenter; the anointing was distorted; Simon became Satan; Jesus Bar Abbas appeared and so did Joseph of Arimatheia. The story covered up the record, the title, the titulus16.

c. Break and censure Any violation of a text leaves a more or less visible fracture line. A law of philology: censorship is obvious by any caesura. The fractures and cracks in the texts attributed to Paul are much deeper and more disastrous than those which are identifiable in the gospel of Mark. Although Paul is often regarded as the founder of the Christian faith, the attention given to him and his texts has largely disappeared behind the image and the writings as they only came into being in the third century. In the second letter to the Corinthians, a remarkable breach can be pointed out: ‘So I said goodbye to them and went to Macedonia (...)’ – ‘(...) for when we came into Macedonia, we had no rest, but we were harassed at every turn - conflicts on the outside, fears within.17‘ A break of no less than five chapters! What is that supposed to mean, what were the editors attempting to hide? Apparently a lot, because why this ‘we were harassed at every turn, conflicts on the outside, fears within’? The break is also betrayed by an extra, though minor shift, from singular to plural: ‘I’ said goodbye and (I) left – then ‘we’ came. The gap is filled with text material that clearly does not originate from Paul himself: discourses on the duties and authority of an apostle; repeatedly praising and commending oneself; being carried along in Christ’s triumphal procession: courageously carrying on, we carry a treasure in earthen vessels; being workers for God, the tent of our earthly

15

Augustinus: De consensu Evangelistarum. I 2 (4). Ch. Vergeer: Een Nameloze. Jezus de Nazarener. Nijmegen 2003 (3e); Ch. Vergeer: Het Panterjong. Leven en lijden van Jezus de Nazarener. Nijmegen 2000; Ch. Vergeer: Marcus. De man met de verminkte vingers. Budel 2010. 17 II Corinthians 2, 13; 7, 5; 16

Behind the signs of her existence

31

abode and the world is ours! All very nice but none of it is by Paul18. Where the apostle himself suffers total defeat, the later editor turns Paul’s defeat into a triumphant text on the apostolate. Whoever ignores this intensive and blatant intervention brings two completely dissimilar, contradicting texts together and in doing so makes Paul unintelligible and incomprehensible. Not only that, but by doing so Paul appears to be capricious and muddle-headed, it also prevents any chance of finding what really happened. Acts, chapter 20 provides us with a very different – though also veiled – story. The narrative starts off with the riots in Ephesus, as a result of which Paul was forced to leave the city and ‘said goodbye and set out for Macedonia.19‘ Please note, ‘he’, singular. He travels through Macedonia and Greece for three months, but: ‘Because some Jews had plotted against him just as he was about to sail for Syria, he decided to go back through Macedonia20. The harbour town itself in Greece where Paul’s life was threatened to such an extent that he could not return from there to Syria by ship but was forced to make a detour through Macedonia which took several weeks, is not mentioned, but Corinth is the most obvious. Paul makes this return journey in the company of many co-workers21. Perhaps it was not only Paul who was heavy-handedly expelled from Corinth, but also his local followers. In any case, the plural ‘we’ is used in the text after the break22. On his way back to Syria, Paul is forced to say goodbye to his followers in Miletus. Apart from being expelled from Corinth, he is no longer allowed to set foot in Ephesus. The farewell to his supporters there is dramatic: ‘They all wept as they embraced him and kissed him’ and they all knew that Paul was going to die: ‘What grieved them most was his statement that they would never see his face again. 23‘ Here we come to the crux of the texts of Paul. 18

Ch. Vergeer: Paulus. Kijken in Uw lezend gezicht. Budel 2012, pp. 53-101, item: The Letters of the Apostle Paul. Controversies and Consequences. Cambridge S.P. 2017, pp. 48-95; item: Geschreven en toegeschreven. De teksten van Paulus. Budel 2013, pp. 29-55. 19 Acts 20, 1. 20 Acts 20, 3. 21 Acts 20, 4. 22 I Corinthians 7, 4. 23 Acts 20, 37 en 20, 38.

32

Chapter Two

During the first forty years of his life Paul made a great career in the service of the leader of the powerful majority party, Gamaliel I; he was the confidant of the high priests and in charge of the persecution of the followers of God’s Anointed in Jerusalem, Judea and Damascus. Then there was a sudden break with these rulers; he joined the opposing party which he had been persecuting until then; but they distrusted him and he is banished to distant Cilicia. His fate underwent a second major change when powerful Jews, such as the Cypriot Barnabas, and Romans, such as the proconsul Sergius Paullus offered him their protection. For several years he took part in the Judeo-Christian community in Syria, but in Antioch he was also confronted with unwillingness and obstruction. Then follow the journeys and at first he seems to be successful: from the winter of 49/50 until the summer of 51 he was active in Corinth and in 52-54 in Ephesus. But this too leads to a fiasco: he is whipped out of cities: Philippi, Thessaloniki and Berea and ridiculed in Athens. After Paul had been active in Corinth for about eighteen months, the new governor, Junius Annaeus Gallio, arrived and immediately made short shrift of these (in his eyes) rebels and banished Paul from town and country. For two years he was able to teach daily in the sports school of Tyrannus in Ephesus24, but then a riot broke out and he had to flee from there too. Luke glosses over these things in his Acts, while Paul himself is much more explicit: ‘We do not want you to be uninformed, brothers, about the troubles we experienced in the province of Asia. We were under great pressure, far beyond our ability to endure, so that we despaired of life itself25.’ Huper tès thlipseǀs – ‘unbearable’, ‘beyond ones strength’ all forms of oppression. All that he had achieved had been swept away and at the sad farewell in the harbour of Miletus, Paul said: ‘Now I know that none of you among whom I have gone about preaching the kingdom will ever see me again.’ And: ‘I know that after I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare the flock.26‘ Everything seemed to have failed and destined to be destroyed. In Jerusalem awaited him only fierce hatred and hostility, assassination attempts, imprisonment and 24

Acts 19, 9. II Corinthians 1, 8. 26 Acts 20, 25 and 20, 29. 25

Behind the signs of her existence

33

condemnation, and in Rome the sentence was carried out; he was beheaded by the sword. Pauls despair is understandable and he expresses it strongly. In Greek it says oudemian eschèken anesin hè sarx hèmǀn: ‘our flesh has had no rest, our body could not relax for a moment.’ The next part of the sentence is: (…) all’ en panti thlibomenoi, ‘(…) but (we were) oppressed in everything.27‘ Paul writes that his body could not relax for a moment because of the oppression. The verb used is a form of thlibein, thlibǀ: ‘to press’, ‘to bruise’, ‘to oppress’, ‘to frighten. Possibly this is the sentence that Paul himself wrote; what follows is a rhetorical figure providing clarification, probably added by a later writer: exǀthen machai, esǀthen phoboi – ‘conflicts on the outside, fears within’. Although the sentence does give a nice Greek twist, it contradicts what Paul himself says immediately afterwards: he trusts in the faithfulness of God and is comforted by the coming of Titus28. The crux of Paul’s emotional outburst lies precisely in the word that the translation leaves out: hè sarx. It is not about having ‘no rest’, but about saving their lives. The text also gives hè sarx hèmǀn, whereas in Greek the nominative, hèmeis, would be more appropriate. Paul thus places extra emphasis on ‘(the flesh) our bodies’. They had not just been granted any ‘rest’, but they had apparently been severely beaten up in Corinth and had barely escaped alive. There had been attempts to kill him.

d. Text and signs Texts contain many signs, signs that contain the meaning of the text. The ‘letters of Paul’ are not letters. The sixteen chapters of the letter to the Romans in itself is about as long as sixteen to twenty-four genuine letters from antiquity. Also, most of the texts of what we call Paul’s letters are a) not by Paul and b) not letters. The composition of the Corpus Paulinum is extremely diverse. Large parts of the text were not written to be read, but preached. It is the difference between letter texts and texts such as homilies; sermons spoken and discussed, requests, editorial remarks and explanatory or inserted texts.

27 28

II Corinthians 7, 5. II Corinthians 7, 6.

34

Chapter Two

The preaching by Judas the Galilean, John the Baptist, Jesus the Nazorene, Simon the Kèphas and James the Righteous were always done orally. Paul’s preaching in Antioch, Ephesus, and Corinth also took place through sermons, addresses and conversations. ‘From where (…)’, ‘for what (…), ‘why (…)’. The first question a philologist will ask himself is: why was this text written? The answer is simple: it is due to the verdict of Gallio by which Paul was banned from town and country in the summer of 51 after working for one and a half year in the Corinthian congregation, and the heavy-handed manner in which he later on – around 54? – was once more expelled from the city. That was the reason why Paul was forced to respond in writing to questions of his followers. And why did his letters become fashionable enough again to be disseminated in an edited version half a century later, possibly in Ephesus around AD 100? Because after the destruction of the temple and the city in 70, the massacre in Jerusalem and surrounding Judea, after the large-scale pogroms in Antioch, Alexandria and other major cities, the original JudeoChristian ‘mother church’, including the first followers, relatives and envoys, apostles was gone. That left a void and a strong desire for apostolic authority. This was fulfilled wit the first edition of the ‘letters of Paul’, the Apostolikon, a collection of authoritative apostolic texts. That is why this study begins with a chapter outlining the situation of the genesis, the birth of Christianity out of a Jewish sect that was defeated and doomed to extinction. This is followed by a first meeting with Paul and subsequently the trial and the verdict by Gallio is demythologized and pointed out as the cause, the necessity of writing letters to Corinth. Once it is understood why the letters were written at the time and why they were subsequently edited and published, then the key is provided that gives access to their meaning. Paul wrote his notes to his Corinthian congregation in the years 52-54 in answer to pressing questions from the congregation he had been forced to abandon and could not be reached by any other means. They are notes that in answer to questions which are lost to us and only vaguely surmised by peri de – ‘regarding this or that’, ‘regarding (…)’, I am writing to you. The re-edited form of these letters half a century later had a completely different character and fulfilled a completely different purpose. After the fall of Jerusalem and the disappearance of the ‘mother church’,

Behind the signs of her existence

35

there was a great need for the establishment of a new apostolic authority. The collection of texts clearly indicates this purpose: -

-

Recognition of the great authority of the apostle, directly given by God; the inculcation of the core of the faith: a belief in God’s Anointed and his victory over death; the inciting of the contrast between the old Jewish adherents of the Law and the new believers in the freedom of Christ; the contradistinction between the new-minted faith and the old mother church of Jerusalem with its Arch-Apostles and the relatives; to ensure the continuation of the financial contributions.

Roughly speaking, it can be concluded from the above that of the first four ‘letters of Paul’, only one third of them (and perhaps only one-sixth) are really (fragments of) Paul s letters and the majority of this first publication consist of later texts by editors. Of the ten letters which were published later, none of the three pastoral letters, both letters to Timothy and the one to Titus, were written by Paul and hardly anything from his hand can be identified in the seven others. This brings us to the crux of this study: the attempt to see the first editors of the texts at work. What did they do with the texts; how did they do it and why and for whom did they do it? Paul’s letters to the Corinthian congregation were written in Ephesus in 52-54 AD. The first edition of these letters was edited, probably also in Ephesus, around AD 100 and contained what would later (not at the time) be called the letters to the Galatians, Corinthians I and II and to the Romans. In later years, two additions appeared: first the two letters to the congregation at Thessaloniki, the one at Philippi, first preceded by a preface (the letter to the congregation of Colossae) and ending with an epilogue (the letter of recommendation from the bishop, the letter to Philemon). The introduction was later reworked into a new introduction, the letter to the Ephesians. In about AD140 another supplements was added, containing the two letters to Timothy and the one to Titus.

36

Chapter Two

Finally came the letter to the Hebrews, also attributed to Paul29. In the summer of AD 144 an edition of Paul’s letters, edited by Marcion of Sinope, appeared in Rome under the title Apostolikon. We may justifiably call it the second edition. Moreover, this is the edition for which an attempt was made by Adolf von Harnack at reconstructing the text. This edition contained the letters to the Galatians, Corinthians I and II, Romans (with only ten of the later sixteen chapters), the two letters to the congregation of Thessaloniki, the letter to the Lacedaemonian, to the Colossian congregation, and to Philippi, concluded with the letter to Philemon. I would like to point out that in AD 144 in Rome, in addition to the first edition, that of Ephesus from around the year 100 containing the four letters of Paul (Galatians, Corinthians I and II and Romans) the first appendix, originated in Ephesus around 120/130, was also already known. But the later, second Appendix with the three catholic epistles remained unknown and the epistle to the Hebrews still had to be written and attributed to Paul. Apocryphal letters of Paul were also known and from them – such as a third letter to Corinth or a letter to the Alexandrians – the letter to the Lacedaemonians was included. It is also interesting that Marcion was familiar with and used the first introduction (the letter to the Colossian congregation) from the first Appendix, but apparently was not aware of the later revised version of the introduction, the letter to the Ephesians. Marcion was born about 85 at Sinope in Pontus on the Black Sea, the son of the bishop. He travelled extensively through the province of Asia and was a shipping magnate30. He will have been in Ephesus, the harbour town and capital of Asia, in the years that the letters of Paul were published there. In addition, Paul’s co-worker and leader of the Ephesian congregation, Aquila, also originated from Pontus31. Being very rich and erudite, accompanied by his followers, Marcion settled in Rome and was almost elected to be bishop there. But the times had changed. As a result of the gruesome war of 66-73 between Romans and Jews, the Roman policy, which had up to then been friendly towards the Jews, 29 G. Theissen: Fortress Introduction to the New Testament, Minneapolis 2003, pp. 131-143 30 Eusebius of Caesarea: Historia ecclesiastica, liber V, caput VIII, 3: ho nautès Markiǀn, Tertullian: Nauclerus. 31 Acts 18, 2.

Behind the signs of her existence

37

had turned into disgust and hatred. The Greek aversion to Jews had also intensified. By the closing decades of the first century it had become virtually impossible for a Jewish sect to establish a stable position, especially one whose members believed in God’s Anointed, one of their own and rejected the emperor, his reign and taxes in favour of the king of Judea, the Kingdom of God. While around AD 100 the first editors in Ephesus were quite succesful in turning the Jewish message of Paul into a Christian proclamation, Marcion, in the middle of the second century failed to do this in Rome. Using the writings of Paul and Luke he wanted to remove the Jewish god Yahweh and the Law of Moses from the Christian faith. But the tide had turned: after the desperate second uprising of 132-135, led by Bar Kochba, the Jews had been destroyed as opponents and no longer formed a threat to the empire. Jerusalem was no longer the Holy City with the temple of the Eternal, but was now a Roman army camp, Colonia Aelia Capitolina. Ruling there was the tenth legion, Fretensis, and the city was forbidden to Jews.

Coin AELIA CAPITOLINA dating from the time of Marcus Aurelius. (Museum Zürich, Switzerland)

Around AD 100 there was a precarious balance between the Greek, Jewish, Roman, and native inhabitants in Ephesus. Around AD 150 in Rome, governed by Antoninus Pius, the confident tranquility and peace, the PAX ROMANA of the Roman Empire, ruled the world. The Romans no longer feared the Jews; only the Greek philosophers showed their

38

Chapter Two

contempt. Epictetus, in his lectures given in Rome in about AD140, sneered at the Christians, ‘those Galileans who are accustomed to claim utmost nonsense and madness32. A few years later, on an inspection tour Marcus Aurelius would befriend the Patriarch of Jerusalem, Jehouda Nahasi and question him about the history of the Jews. Celsus worshiped the emperor-philosopher Marcus Aurelius but in the year AD 178, possibly in Alexandria, he wrote his fierce attack against the Christians Alèthès Logos.

32

Epictetus: Diatribai IV 7

CHAPTER THREE MEETING PAUL

a. The text as reader ‘Then he saw Paul coming, a man short in stature, balding head, crooked legs, strongly built, with fused eyebrows, a slightly protruding nose, graceful because he had the appearance of a human and at the same time of an angel.’ (a) The above is a report from the Acta Pauli quoted by Tertullian and possibly written around 170 somewhere in Asia Minor1. Here Paul was supposedly seen on the way from Antioch to Iconium ‘on his way to Lystra’. Since Lystra is not at all on the route from Antioch to Iconium, the suspicion arises that the author was not well informed about the exact topography. Was he informed about the person? Variants of this text describe Paul as suriarchès, Syrian in appearance. Not a really remarkable observation in itself: Paul was probably born about ten years before our era in Gischala, a small town near Damascus. The Acta Pauli were written about one hundred and thirty years after this alleged meeting. It is quite a double-edged description: first a typical anti-Semitic caricature, a small, bald man with crooked legs and with that almost nefarious feature, eyebrows grown together. And then a reversal, with the Greek word charis, which I translated as ‘graceful’ but which means ‘likeable’ or ‘endearing’. The typical Jewish nose is explicitly referred to and his angelic aspect mentioned. The context actually revolves around the meeting between Paul and Thecla. There is no mention of Thecla anywhere in the book of Acts. This woman next to Paul disappeared from history. She can still be seen in 1 E. Hennecke: New Testament Apocrypha. SCM Press Ltd, London 1975. Vol. II, pp. 322 vv.

40

Chapter Three

Paul’s cave above Ephesus, but there too later believers have scratched out her eyes.

Meeting of Paul and Thecla. Fresco in the cave of Paul in Ephesus dating from about 550. The eyes of Thecla have been scratched out by later church goers.

(b) There is another text, although it can hardly be regarded as a portrait, it shows a character trait nonetheless. In the second letter to the Corinthians, at the beginning of the tenth chapter, a sentence is quoted from a letter addressed to Paul: Paul, the man ‘humble when face to face with you, but bold toward you when I am away.2 ‘A man, seeming humble and embarrassed, but someone who uses to the point and strong language in his letters. The beginning of the sentence: autos de ego Paulos, ‘I, Paul’ is too firm an assertion which immediately arouses the suspicion of any philologist. The figure of speech, a piece of rhetoric, that follows – men tapeinos en humin, apǀn de tharrǀ eis humas – is not the style and kind of expression that is used by Paul. It seems to be a typical example of editorial intervention, a kind of commendation of the letters of Paul.

2

II Corinthians 10, 1

Meeting Paul

41

(c) But is it really possible to indicate traces of editing, editorial interventions and adaptations in the surviving texts? It would be very naive to assume that Paul wrote many letters, copies of which have come to us. If we want to learn something about how Paul’s texts have been cut up and distorted, we need to know more about the context in which that took place. Paul’s letters can be considered to be the oldest texts of the New Testament – after all, they were written in the fifties of the first century – but after they were written they were forgotten or even, as a result of the persecution, condemnation and execution of Paul and his followers, torn up. Before they reappeared about half a century later and in an edition that was extremely successful, a lot had happened.

b. No longer, never more (a) In September 70, the holy city of Jerusalem and the Temple were taken and destroyed by the Romans. The original ‘mother church’, the JudeoChristian congregation of the followers and relatives of Jesus the Nazorene, under the leadership of his relative Simon II bar Kèphas, was gone. The myth that the Christians fled Jerusalem to the safety of Pella was invented later and is untrue3. (b) In June 71, Vespasian and Titus held their triumphal procession in Rome celebrating the victory over the Jews. A million Romans saw the triumphal march through the arch of Titus, not to be confused with the later arch of honour on the Velia. It had been placed on the spot where the Jews had ignited the fire of Rome seven years earlier in the night of June 18, 64. (c) In the spring of 72, the first, and in a way, only, gospel was read out in a synagogue in Rome. This was based on an account of the life and suffering of Jesus the Nazorene, which Mark transformed into a plausible story for the Romans even after the horrific war. Mark could not conceal the shameful death on the cross and he also gave the causa poenae, the reason for the condemnation: the anointing as ‘king of the Jews’4. But Mark turns the report into a different story: an Apologia ad Christianos Romanos. The centurion in command of the execution was the first to 3 S.G.F. Brandon: The Fall of Jerusalem and the Cristian Church, London 1974, pp. 167-184: The Fate of the Palestinian Church. Item: Jesus and the Zealots, Manchester 1967. 4 Mark 15. 26.

42

Chapter Three

pronounce a credo: ‘Truly this man was the son of God.5‘ And the Roman praefectus who delivered the sentence was turned into a man trying to defend the innocence of the accused opposing the murderous Jews6. Completely unbelievable, ‘the very idea of such a situation is ludicrous in the extreme’, but it laid the foundation of two thousand years of Christian faith7.

Recently the Digital Urbis Roma Project managed to include four fragments with the fourteen previously known pieces of the Forma Urbi Romae showing the Circus Maximus (the letter C). On the left we see part of the Septizodium divi Severi, then the back of the circus with the seats and shops in the gallery. This is the place where the fire of Rome began. Opposite are the shops and houses of the Jewish quarter. The triumphal arch of Titus was constructed in the back gallery and indicated by three lines for its arches. (Stanford Digital Forma Urbis Roma project)

5

Mark 15, 38. Mark 15, 9-15 7 S.G.F Brandon: The Trial of Jesus of Nazareth, London 1971: p. 118. Ch. Vergeer: Een nameloze. Jezus de Nazarener, Nijmegen 203 (derde druk); Ch. Vergeer: Het Panterjong. Leven en lijden van Jezus de Nazerener, Nijmegen 2000. Ch. Vergeer: Marcus. De man met de verminkte vingers, Budel 2010. 6

Meeting Paul

43

(d) The story of Mark became decisive and was followed by Matthew, probably in Alexandria and Luke, perhaps in Antioch or Ephesus at the end of the first century. (e) Luke followed up his gospel with a book about the history of the early Christians. In this book, Acts, in the first part Peter and in the second part Paul were the heroes of the faith. The gospel of Luke, which originally began at 4, 31, was also supplemented with stories of the birth and youth of Jesus.

The re-used stone with the Pilatus inscription in Caesarea. The text of the inscription is: S TIBERIEVM NTIVS PILATVS ECTVS IVDAA E

(f) In these Gospels Mark is imitated and largely copied in the narration of Christ’s passion but no trace of Paul is yet to be found. Lucas also wrote about him in Acts without apparently knowing his letters. But the grandiose portrait of the hero of faith in Acts probably provided the impetus to bring Paul’s letters back out of the cold and to publish them. This may have happened for the first time in Ephesus around the turn of the first century.

44

Chapter Three

(g) Before we delve further into that revival of interest in Paul, let me make a concluding remark. Only through the writings of Acts and the stories about the youth of Jesus and the actions of John the Baptist which were added to the gospel of Luke, did historical interest in the origin of Christianity arise. But the Christian writings are the means of spreading the faith, and are not reliable historic accounts. I will give just one example. In 1961 an epigraphic testimony of the name Pilate surfaced for the first time at Caesarea Maritima. This main character of the passion is referred to in all Christian texts in Greek as hegemǀn, so as procurator, but he was praefectus. This was not a civil but a military rank. His appointment in 26 was not really the work of Tiberius, who pursued a conciliatory policy towards the Jews. Pilate owed his appointment to Seianus, the first to adopt a fierce anti-Semitic policy. For the assessment of the attitude of Pilate during the three rebellions and the trial against Jesus therefore of the utmost importance.

c. Fissures, shards (a) Do we actually still possess the correct text of letters written in the early fifties of the first century in Ephesus and which were published there about half a century later? Anyone who checks the Greek text in the widely used current edition of Nestle and Aland will find an impressive apparatus criticus at the bottom of each page. It contains the sources on which this text is based. Many hundreds of manuscripts and dozens of papyri. The earliest manuscripts are the Codex Alexandrinus dating from the fifth century, the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus, both from the fourth century. The papyri, usually containing mere fragments of the text, are often earlier and some date back to the third century. In addition, there are the works of early church fathers, especially from the fourth and fifth centuries, who quote from the texts, sometimes in a different variation than we know today. There are also early Latin, Coptic and other versions and translations of the text. The scientific meticulousness is impressive, absolutely necessary and still insufficient. Why is it insufficient? And, if so, are there other means to come even closer to the text? (b) The documents are witness of the status of the text no earlier than dating from the fourth or even the fifth century. But the texts themselves were written in the first century. I will give just two examples of what

Meeting Paul

45

happened between the writing of the scriptures and the first times witnesses mention them it. Above we referred to the original gospel of Luke to which the first chapters, before 4, 31, were added later on. But all witness accounts date from no earlier than two or three centuries later and thus include the supplemented text. Somewhere during those intervening centuries, an editor also intervened in Mark’s text to bring it more in line with Matthew’s gospel, adding, in a rather clumsy way, verses 14, 28, and 15, 7 about the apparitions in Galilee. Two blemishes on the text, which can be found in all available sources, because they date back to the second century, two to three centuries before the first for us available witnesses appeared. (c) In Paul’s letters too there were quite a few editorial interventions, which we cannot find anywhere in the apparatus criticus. I will give just four examples. At some time during the second or third century, and thus before our material evidence shows us, a copyist or editor took on the task of bringing Paul’s texts up to date, by means of generalising the instructions that Paul had written to his small congregation at Corinth and declaring them valid for the entire Church. Yet, a comprehensive ‘church’ had not existed at all in Paul’s time. This oecumenical tendency can be indicated in eight places. Paul does not write about Simon Peter, he does not use the name but the title of the high priest: Kèphas. Traces of this can still be identified in the variants and different versions in the notes, but not enough to reconstruct the actual text. Thirdly, the two fierce outbursts against women are well-known: they can be found in all available sources we have and yet they can be clearly recognized as being written by a later hand, an editor who wanted to correct Paul. Finally, there are glosses, comments written in the margin at some time that gradually entered into the text. Usually they are quite recognizable, but not in the Nestle-Aland editions, because they had already been added to the text in the first centuries. (d) An absolutely unique early testimony is the Papyrus P 46, usually named the Chester Beatty papyrus after the Dublin library in which most of it is kept. A small part of it is now in Ann Arbor, Michigan. The papyrus contains fragments of Paul’s letters and was probably written around 200. Günther Zuntz wrote a brilliant study on it, but the findings

46

Chapter Three

are unsatisfactory for our purposes if we are looking for the original text of the letters and the first editorial changes in them. Frustratingly. the texts have still too late a date: however early they might have been written the date is still too late; our quest is for texts written in the first century and edited in the second8.

d. Sequence of fractures (a) It will have become clear, through my arguments that there is a distance in time between the letters of Paul written in the AD 50’s or earlier and the first edition of those texts, which dates from the end of the first or the beginning of the second century, the editorial interventions and changes made in the second and third centuries and the text as we know it today, a text that can only be attested for by means of documents dating from the fifth, sometimes the fourth century. Those changes render the authenticity of the text uncertain and shaky, whereas at the same time those same texts are supposed to support faith, theology and authority. There is therefore a tendency to regard these cracks and fractures between the various stages of the texts as an insurmountable problem. It is not. (b) In the first place it is not because of something that should have been clear at first sight, but only because of something that became clear when a number of genuine letters of antiquity were discovered, in the Egyptian desert in particular. At that point we became aware that the ‘letters of Paul’ are compositions from several original letters supplemented with other types of texts. Theologians such as C.J. den Heyer did point out that many genuine letters are hidden within the continuous text of the first letter to the Corinthians (the letter of tears; the second canonical letter, etc.), and then attempted to determine the order in those vestiges of a correspondence9. (c) Recently, an emeritus priest in Brabant told me that he had posed the same question at the seminary about half a century ago: are all those letters from Paul real? The teacher had taken him out of the classroom, carefully closed the door and answered in the corridor: ‘Certainly, according to the Church of Rome, but that is not really true.’ 8

G. Zuntz: The Text of the Epistles. A Disquisition upon the Corpus Paulinum. Eugene, Oregon 2007. On Zuntz: Ch. Vergeer: Geschreven en toegeschreven. De teksten van Paulus. Budel 2013, pp. 133-151. 9 C.J. den Heyer: Paulus. Man van twee werelden. Zoetermeer 1998, pp. 146-151.

Meeting Paul

47

At present, it is widely held that seven of Paul’s fourteen letters are certainly not from his hand: the letter to the Hebrews was taken out first, followed by the three pastoral letters, both letters to Timothy and the one to Titus. And finally, the letters to the Ephesians, the second letter to the Thessalonians, and those to the Colossian congregation were also denied authenticity. (d) Elsewhere I have provided arguments that also reject the first letter to the Thessalonians and the letter – actually two letters – to the congregation at Philippi as being authentic letters. I have also given sufficient evidence to support my assertion that the letter to Philemon should no longer be accepted as as having been written by Paul10. (e) The authentic letters that remain are: the letter to the Romans, both letters to Corinth and the one to the Galatians. But textually, they too fall apart. If we take the letter to the Romans and accept professional studies concerning it, this ‘letter’ consists of: - A general introduction: 1, 1-17, added to the letter as a kind of hallmark; - Chapters 1-4: a homily by Anonymous A; - Chapters 5-8: an answer in a second homily by Anonymous B; - Chapters 9-11: continuation of the first homily, by Anonymous A; - Chapters 5, 1-11 and chapters. 12-14: letter fragments of Paul to the congregation of Corinth; - Chapters 15-16: are later additions11. All in all, the contribution of Paul himself is very limited, meagre even, because only his pastoral advice found a place in the letters, the extensive theological concepts originating from other, later writers.

10

Ch. Vergeer: The Letters of the Apostle Paul. Controversies and Consequences. Cambridge SP 2017, pp. 28-142; Ch. Vergeer: Geschreven en toegeschreven. De teksten van Paulus. Budel 2013 passim; and Ch. Vergeer: Wie was Paulus wel?! Op zoek naar zijn teksten, Budel 2016, pp.19-60. 11 M. Theobald: Der Römerbrief. , Erträge der Forschung Band 284, Darmstadt 2000, pp. 3-27; Ch. Vergeer: Paulus: Kijken in Uw lezend gezicht. Budel 2012, pp. 303-336 and Ch. Vergeer The Letters of the Apostle Paul: Controversies and Consequences. Cambridge 2017, pp. 290-322.

48

Chapter Three

e. A feast of fertility (a) Will we ever be able to meet Paul again by screening the texts, or is he completely out of sight? We are certainly creating more distance, but that in itself also provides new possibilities and approaches. There is space between the texts, the space of time. Anyone who attributes everything to Paul written in the fifties of the first century is confronted with countless enigmas and contradictions, absurdities and impossibilities. When we realise that large segments of Paul’s texts were partly edited, changed and corrected by others about 50 years after the genuine texts had been written, and then again in the second century, and that we can actually separate the Pauline wheat from the editorial chaff, we have the opportunity to really meet Paul, to understand how his texts were given different functions, were read and comprehended differently and adapted to a new situation decades after his death. (b) When were the genuine letters of Paul, nearly half a century after they were written and sent by him to Corinth, made accessible again? Perhaps only after the publication of the book of Acts, in which Paul was assigned a major role as a hero of the faith, but nothing being quoted from his letters as yet. This probably happened in Ephesus, the place where Paul stayed from 51 to 55 and successfully proclaimed the faith. Ephesus was also the place where possibly Luke wrote his gospel and the Acts of the Apostles. The place also where the fourth gospel, that of John, was written. After the fall of Jerusalem and the pogroms in Damascus, Alexandria, and Antioch, it was the capital of the new faith before Rome took over that role. (c) According to authoritative New Testament scholars, it happened as follows: o A first edition appeared around AD 100: the letter to the Romans 1-14, both letters to the Corinthians and the one to the Galatians. o That edition was successful and was subsequently followed with a supplement consisting of the fictitious letters to the congregations of Philippi and Thessaloniki. It was preceded by a preface, the letter to the congregation at Colossae. This preface was then replaced by a revised version, the letter to the congregation of Ephesus, and it ended with a letter of recommendation, the letter to Philemon.

Meeting Paul

49

Still later, a second addition was made with both letters to Timothy and one to Titus, clearly texts from the second century12. In his book, Gerd Theissen makes a distinction between the authentic Pauline letters and the Deutero-Pauline letters. I made a distinction between the letters written by Paul and the texts attributed to him only after his death. (d) We know little about those first series of editions created in Ephesus between 100 and 160. Of the second edition, edited by Marcion of Synope, published in Rome in the summer of 144 under the title APOSTOLIKON, we have the reconstruction by Adolf von Harnack and some recent studies13. That second edition provides us with a lot of information concerning the first. For us, in the context of our attempt to meet Paul, the order of the texts is important. In the first editions the order was: Galatians, Corinthians and Romans 1-14. It was not until late in the second century that the fictitious addressees were added to the text: to the Romans (1, 7 and 1.14), to the Galatians (1, 2 and 3, 1) and Ephesians (1, 1). The later change of address has been attested by the corrector of the Codex Sinaiticus14. It was not until the end of the second century that the order of these editions was established: first to the Romans, the capital Rome, then to the Greeks, and finally to the inhabitants of the hinterland, Galatia. (e) The title of the first edition of the text which appeared in Ephesus is unknown, but the second edition in Rome appeared under the title APOSTOLIKON, ‘missives’, ‘epistles’, ‘apostolic letters’. The current title ‘The Letters of Paul’ is incorrect: ten of the fourteen letters were not written by him but attributed to him only after his death. And even today we can read above the first letter to Corinth that it was produced by Paul and Sosthenes, whereas the second letter was written by Paul and Timothy. It is also noteworthy how in those texts singular and plural abruptly change several times: From ‘I’ to ‘we’. o

12

G. Theissen: Fortress Introduction to The New Testament. Minneapolis 2003, PP. 131-137. 13 A. von Harnack: Marcion. Das Evangelium vom fremden Gott. Darmstadt 1996. Pp. 40*-176*; J. BeDuhn: The New Marcion. Rethinking the “Arch-Heretic”. Forum, third series 4, 2 Fall 2015, pp. 163-179. 14 D. Trobisch: Paul’s Letter Collection. Tracing the Origins. Bolivar, Missouri 2001, p. 23; D. Trobisch: The First Edition of the New Testament. Oxford 2000.

50

Chapter Three

‘Missives’ are letters from envoys who are on a mission and sent for that purpose by a higher authority. That is also the purpose of the first publication of these texts. After the destruction of the Temple and the holy city of Jerusalem and the apostolic mother church of the relatives and early followers in Jerusalem and Judea, there was a great demand for something to hold on to for the followers of the controversial new faith.

f. The brittle text (a) And the text is also directed at this desire for something to hold on to. The letter to the Galatians begins with the supreme claim of apostolic authority: ‘sent not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead.15‘ Nowhere else in Paul’s epistles is this high, supreme claim of apostolic authority made, only here. This is the editorial heading at the beginning of the original collection of texts and it clearly shows the purpose of the editors: the acquisition of apostolic authority. The intervention of the editors is quite clever as it ties in with Paul’s own story about his conversion on the way to Damascus through a revelation of God. But the intervention, like all interventions, is also recognizable and leaves traces of forcible entry: for in the continuation of the text Paul does explicitly refer to his reception of apostolic authority from men, Simon the Kèphas and James, and the consent for his mission from Jerusalem. Also Paul does not refer to a revelation from or through Jesus Christ, but of a revelation from God16. Half a century after Paul’s death, however, the editors finish their introduction once again with a supreme and no longer Jewish, but Christian claim: ‘I did not receive from any man, nor was I taught it; but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.17‘ This solemn editorial introduction did not come from Paul, but it does clearly indicate what the aim is of the editors of the text: obtaining apostolic authority. It seems that the intervention is limited to the cited clause and that the opening sentence of the letter used was: 15

Galatians 1, 1. Galatians 1, 15. 17 Galatians 1, 12. 16

Meeting Paul

51

‘Paul, an apostle and all the brothers who are with me, to .18‘ This last part ‘to the churches of Galatia’ is a nonsensical address, certainly for Paul, as it would only decades later become common in an episcopal letter. To what extent the text block 1, 112 is by Paul or, in part from a later hand I will not discuss here. According to the first chapters of the letter to the Corinthians the text seems to have something to do with the several factions: those of Apollos, the Kèphas and Paul. Remarkable is the double malediction: anathema19. Where did Paul get the authority to pronounce a malediction? In the second edition of Marcion the verses 1, 10-12 were not included. (b) Paul’s own opening, however, is completely different in tone and content: ‘For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it.20‘ It is, and was at that time, one of the most explosive phrases of the New Testament. And it was also the beginning of a very remarkable text. It is often referred to as the autobiographical novella, a kind of account of Paul about his life. It has the connotation of accountability. Whether it is a letter text or another type of statement and justification remains unclear. The first words, èkousate gar, ‘for you have heard’ are not very suggestive of the later on suggested context of being a letter to the Galatians. A quarter of a century after the event in Jerusalem in the hinterland of Galatia, what would they have heard about that? The translation ‘my former life in Judaism’ is too weak: en tǀi Ioudaïsmǀi means ‘the education in severe Judaism, 21‘ the doctrine of the Pharisees. Following the Jewish rites and customs, the Law is put into contrast with faith in Jesus Christ. That is also the theme that is strongly put forward immediately after Paul’s texts. (c) The beginning of the letter to the Galatians and thus of the first editions of what is now called ‘the letters of Paul’ but which originally went out as ‘Apostolic letters’, was from the third century to the present day read as follows: - 1, 1-12 The Supreme claim to apostolic authority: conferred directly by God and ‘not from, nor by any man’. 18

Galatians 1, 1-2. Galatians 1, 8-9. 20 Galatians 1, 13. 21 Galatians 1, 13 and 1, 14. 19

Chapter Three

52

-

-

1, 13-24 An account of the first visit to the Kèphas in Jerusalem. Dated: ‘three years’ after the divinely conferred apostolic authority. 2, 1-10 An account of a second visit to the Kèphas in Jerusalem. Dated ‘fourteen years’ after the divinely conferred authority. 2, 11-14 An account of the controversy at Antioch where Paul openly rejected the authority of the Kèphas.

Any reader of these texts is inevitably given the following impression along: Paul, owing to the commission granted by God, speaks with authority, but his repeated attempts to be recognized in Jerusalem are met with resistance and resulted in an irreparable break: openly, face to face, he turns against James and Peter, the church of the Jews, of Jerusalem. Immediately follows: - Galatians 3, 1 – 5, 12, in the same style as the two homilies (Romans 1 – 4 and 9 – 11) of Anonymous A. An rather fierce plea, directed against the dead Jewish Law and in favour of the living faith in God’s Anointed. A rhetorical gem written in perfect Greek. (d) We will attempt to open these texts by means of simple questions. In the three clashes of Paul with the mother church of Judea and Jerusalem, the name of James is mentioned each time22. Twice as someone who agrees and the third time, it seems, a man of overriding authority. Who is he really? The first entry reads, ‘James, the Lord’s brother’. Then it would be reasonable to assume that the other two entries also refer to the brother of the Lord. There are several reasons that contradict this assumption. One: the entire passage of Galatians 1, 18-24 was still missing in the edition of Marcion23. It is a text that was inserted later in the second century in an attempt to reconcile the text of Galatians with that of Acts24. At that time, James the son of Zebedee had already fallen into obscurity, but James the Davidean, the brother of Jesus, was known quite well.

22

Galatians 1, 19; 2, 8 and 2, 12. A. von Harnack: Marcion. Das Evangelium vom fremden Gott. Darmstadt 1996, p. 70*. 24 Acts 9, 26-31. 23

Meeting Paul

53

Two: after the death of Jesus, perhaps in about 27, the mother church was led by Simon I the Kèphas, whom we know as Peter. Only after his death, in the spring of 44, was he succeeded by James the Davidean, called the Righteous, who led the congregation in Jerusalem and Judea until 62. He was murdered by order of the high priest when he intended to enter the holiest part of the Temple in full regalia as a counter-high priest. Three: there were already indications within the text. For example, the dating states ‘after three years’ which conflicts with the Paul’s text which reads ‘then, after fourteen years.25‘ This resulted in a scholarly debate about the ancient method of indicating time passed and whether or not we should add those three to the fourteen. Four: sentences, such as ‘In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie. 26‘ which comes immediately after the mention of James, the Lord’s brother. This will arouse the suspicion of any philologist: is it necessary for someone who writes to distant ‘churches of Galatia’ about a minor detail - fourteen years earlier - to emphatically state, even with an appeal to God, that it is the pure truth? Or do we recognize the later editor who wants to add authority to his intervention? The authenticity of text 1, 18-24 is doubtful. The James and John mentioned here are the two Zebedeans, who were, together with Simon Peter, put to death by Herod Agrippa I in the spring of 44. (e) So the authentic text of Paul continues after ‘I returned to Damascus’ with: ‘Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem (...).27‘ The words palin anebèn, seem to indicate that the going up again to Jerusalem meant once more, not a third time. Those insignificant words thus betray the fact that the second visit was inserted into the text later on. The considerations made above lead us to an even greater difficulty: the sequence in which the events took place. There is a preceding occurrence and then ‘after fourteen years’ a visit to Jerusalem and finally a conflict in Antioch. Is it certain that this is the correct sequence? Not at all; on the contrary. ‘Anyone who is aware that hidden voices can be heard in a text will also hear other sounds.28‘ 25

Galatians 1, 18 and 2, 1. Galatians 1, 20. 27 Galatians 1, 17 and 2, 1. 28 M. Mathijsen: Een bezielde schavuit. Jacob van Lennep. Amsterdam 2018, p. 86. 26

Chapter Three

54

(f) The editors placed the text about the breach between Paul and Peter at Antioch after the agreement they reached in Jerusalem. That is vicious and conclusive. The account now ends dramatically: despite shaking hands in Jerusalem, the men of Jerusalem – James and Peter – soon afterwards proved themselves to be untrustworthy. This enables Anonymous A to justifiably erupt into a fierce argument against the Jews and their dead Law, enemies of the liberating faith in God’s Anointed29. However: x

x

x

x

Previously (concerning the insert Galatians 1, 18-24) we noticed how later editors rewrote the text to bring it into harmony with the book of Acts. In chapter 8 of Acts the meeting in Jerusalem is described and in chapter 11 the preaching in Antioch. But Paul explicitly - and exceptionally - mentions ‘after fourteen years’ (since the revelation on the road to Damascus). The crucifixion of Jesus took place either in the spring of the year 27 or as late as in the spring of 30. Three of the four people involved died before the celebration of Pesach 44. That is exactly a span of fourteen years. All events, such as the conflict in Antioch, could only have happened before that time. The usual translation - I use the English Standard Version - is incorrect and somewhat misleading: ‘When (...)’ ( Gal. 2, 11), an indication of the time, ‘when’ with the suggestion or implication: ‘after’. However, the Greek text is hote de. But that is not a time indication at all, rather a word used recitatively, which in our language would be represented by opening quotation marks. And, more important, it says hote de, which therefore indicates a contrast with a hote men: which, however, is missing in the preceding text. Editorial interventions are trespasses into the text and, like any break-in, they leave traces of forcible entry and debris.

g. Always on the go (a) The importance of these opening texts of the edition and their included claims of apostolic authority for the compilers and subsequent editors can 29

Galatians 3, 15 t/m 5, 12.

Meeting Paul

55

be proved by the many interventions in the text. They are all fierce attacks on the Jews, the original congregation of Jerusalem and Judea. This is also the case with the comment: ‘Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery.30‘ Also the superfluous digression in 2, 6a: ‘What they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality (...).31‘ The intermediate statement must also be deleted: ‘On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised. (…) For He who was at work through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised (…)’ Then the repetition, for the third time, must be deleted: ‘(…) we should go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcised.32‘ Elsewhere I have discussed in detail this deletion of editorial additions and the arguments that led to it33. (b) Also in the part about the conflict at Antioch, a phrase, a spiteful phrase, was added: ‘And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.34‘ Whether Barnabas was indeed ‘led astray’ by their hypocrisy we do not know, but we do know that this kind of ugly anti-Semitism would be believed for many centuries. The Christian faith is based on this kind of written testimony, this patchwork, full of distortions and allegations. The real Paul and Peter and many others remain hidden behind insipid and shameful lies. The father was not an old carpenter in a village; nor was Peter was a simple fisherman and Jesus was no lovable country rabbi.

30

Galatians 2, 4. Galatians 2, 6b. 32 Galatians 2, 7-8 and 2, 9c. 33 Ch. Vergeer: Geschreven en toegeschreven. De teksten van Paulus. Budel 2013. 34 Galatians 2, 13. 31

Chapter Three

56

(c) The texts were invariably read as though: first, right in the heading of the letter, a claim to apostolic authority was formulated by Paul ‘not on account of men, nor by man’, but directly by a revelation from God; - this was followed by a first visit to the leaders in Jerusalem, where Paul was received with suspicion and exiled after a fortnight; - then there was a second visit by Paul to Jerusalem; there were difficult negotiations but some sort of agreement was reached; - this was soon after broken by Peter in a cowardly and treacherous way, whereupon Paul bravely opposes him and tells him face to face that this is not proper Christian behaviour. The end of the report is immediately followed by the vehement anti-Jewish discourses in which the dead Law is contrasted with the truth of the living faith. These are texts that still led Martin Luther to revolt against that other Mother Church. -

(d) Through the cleaning up of the texts and the removal of later deposits and distortions, the actual train of thought can finally be established: - In the opening lines Paul calls himself a simple envoy and is also speaking on behalf of all the other brothers. - He tells of his journey to Jerusalem to receive confirmation of his mission, his apostolate, from the leaders of the church of Jerusalem and Judea. And an agreement is reached and affirmed by ‘the right hand of fellowship’35.

h. Words as road signs (a) The conflict in Antioch remains: as it is now, concluding the text, it is extremely vicious. Certainly for the world of antiquity in which the giving of the right hand ‘as a sign of fellowship’ with ‘the Arch-Apostles’ the Kèphas and the two Zebedeans James and John, was considered a solemn signal of having come to an agreement, coming to concordia, on the basis of which Paul could, and was allowed to, act as an apostle supported by the authority granted him in Jerusalem.

35 Galatians

2, 9.

Meeting Paul

57

(b) The sting is in the tail: the manner in which Paul’s account of how he gained apostolic authority which enabled him to act in Ephesus and Corinth was obtained. As I mentioned earlier, it is uncertain whether this text has ended up in its correct place, chronologically speaking. In fact, no one knows. Even the most up-to-date and exhaustive studies fail to clarify what the conflict really is about36. About circumcision? About the Jewish dietary laws? The accusation that Peter first agreed with Paul and then in a cowardly way yields to ‘certain men (…) from James’ who had come from Jerusalem is quite vicious37. This misrepresentation is founded on four demonstrable distortions of the text: -

-

-

The first one I have pointed out earlier: this representation is based on the suggestion in Acts 15, 13, the mention of James, a man who in power and authority surpassed Simon Peter, the brother of the Lord. But here it is about James the son of Zebedee. Paul himself did not address Simon by his name but with his important priestly title, Kèphas. In the current Nestle-Aland text the title is used in Galatians 2, 9 and 14 but it is substituted three times with ‘Peter’ in 2, 7, 8 and 11. The editors thus diminished his authority just like referring to Pope Francis as Mr Mario Bergoglio could be said to have reduced the power of the Holy See in Rome. These editorial revisions led to the absurd text we now see in the bible: ‘James and Kèphas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me (...).38‘ Here we are supposed to read and understand: James, the mighty brother of Jesus, Peter put in second place and then John (which one?). In the second edition, the text of Marcion we find: Petros kai Iakǀbos kai Iǀannès. The title was already replaced by the name, but he still came first, ahead of the two sons of Zebedee.

(c) By means of extremely accurate digital analyses of the 94 versions and 1,624 variants of all available manuscripts, Stephen C. 36 M. F. Bird: An Anomalous Jew. Paul among Jews, Greeks, and Romans. Grand Rapids, Michigan 2016, pp. 170-204: The Conflict in Antioch. 37 Galatians 2, 12. 38 Galatians 2, 9b.

58

Chapter Three

Carlson recently came up with a new edition of the Galatians text39. And it contains a surprising discovery: in Galatians 2, 12 Nestle-Aland reads ȘȜșȠȞ, but the word is actually ȘȜșİȞ. It is just a little thing, a tiny line changing the Ƞ into an İ, but the difference is great: Nestle-Aland’s reading èlthon, ‘when they came’ suggests that it was the men sent by James who came. The corrected text clarifies with the word èlthen, ‘when he came’ that it was Peter who came. In the first version, Peter is a coward yielding to the pressure of James from Jerusalem. In the corrected version it is Peter whose coming is decisive because he immediately acts with authority. Only now do we really meet the real Simon Peter and Paul. ‘And always when I Nodded that I knew, He let the water quiver And it was erased. 40‘

Paul and Peter discovered in 2010 by means of laser technology in the catacombs of Thecla in Rome.

39

S. C. Carlson: The Text of Galatians and Its History. WUNT II/385, Tübingen 2015, p. 252. 40 M. Nijhoff: Het kind en ik.

CHAPTER FOUR THE TRIAL BEFORE THE PROCONSUL

a. Why did Paul write letters? From the second century BC onwards there are traces that indicate the spread of the Jewish faith among the other nations. What we consider as a beginning, the preaching of Christianity by the first apostles, stood in a Jewish tradition that had gone on for two centuries. The image that we traditionally associate with it is a man who travelling by pedes apostolorum through distant regions to many cities to proclaim the faith. That image is completely wrong. Paul was a kind of patriarch of sorts: when he is mentioned in Acts, he acts as a man of authority in the temple, a confidant of the high priest and Gamaliel, the leader of the Sanhedrin. He takes action against the early Christians, has them persecuted, imprisoned and executed. His powers extend over a vast area, as far as Damascus. Acts mentions his friends and protectors, members of Herod’s royal household, the Ephesian asiarch and a Roman proconsul. He imposes taxes on three important provinces: Achaea, Macedonia and Galatia. The wealthy governor Felix keeps him in prison for two years in an attempt to extort money from him. Nearly 500 soldiers are given the order to take him safely from Jerusalem to Caesarea. On his journey to Rome, as a prisoner, he takes command of the ship with several hundred people on board as a matter of course, and once ashore in Malta, the highest nobleman of that island hurries to welcome him. Paul was a rich, authoritative, and powerful man. He travelled by ship or on horseback with a considerable following, in possession of letters of credence from the Arch-Apostles in Jerusalem. Even more essential is the observation that he did not act as a preacher of a new faith, Christianity. Paul was a faithful, Law-abiding Jew who believed in the One and Eternal. Like all Jews, he yearned for the

60

Chapter Four

coming kingdom of God. Not only was that near, as many fellow believers passionately confessed, it had already come. The Eternal One had sent His Anointed, who after his crucifixion had been raised from the dead and raised to a throne. And, the third and most important: Paul was not the writer of what we know as ‘the letters of Paul’. Of the fourteen ‘epistles of Paul’ recorded in the New Testament, ten are not from his hand and the other four only partially. Only fragments of letters written by him were included in highly edited form within the text. The compositions of texts, letters, sermons, exhortations and recommendations, reports and apologias are nothing like ancient letters. Genuine letters of antiquity were shorter, such as the letter to Philemon1.

b. Possibly because … In December 1982 Susan Sontag published an autobiographical text, Pilgrimage in The New Yorker. It contains a vicious, hostile portrait of her mother, who had died a year earlier, and an account of her pilgrimage, a visit at the age of fourteen, to her idol Thomas Mann. In the recently published biography by Benjamin Moser this legend is disclosed as being a piece of fiction. When she met Mann, she was not fourteen as she claims but sixteen. She made up almost all of her conversation with Mann. What is especially incorrect is that Mann discussed with her the book he was working on – Doktor Faustus. That book had already been published before the real date of her visit, and she had already bought it, stolen it actually, had devoured it but misunderstood it. Benjamin Moser sums up the result of his investigations: ‘The facts were fake. But the shame was real.2‘ The Acts of the Apostles written by Luke, the first and only account of the early years of Christianity, contains an outstanding portrait of Paul and an account of his life and travels. But it was a fictitious account. It was written by someone, a Greek, supposedly Luke, and appeared perhaps about the turn of the first century and possibly in Ephesus. The writer had not known Paul, who lived half a century earlier, nor did he know his 1

Ch. Vergeer: Wie was Paulus wel!? Op zoek naar zijn teksten. Budel 2016, pp. 41 vv. 2 B. Moser: Susan Sontag, her Life and Work. New York 2019, p. 82.

The trial before the Proconsul

61

‘letters’, which had not yet been published or had not become generally known. Just as Susan Sontag had twisted what happened forty years after the event in an attempt to cover up her ineptitude, Luke was not concerned with historical facts from half a century ago but with the proclamation of the faith. Regarding the trials conducted against Paul, Luke only gives us reports that plead for his innocence and does not mention the apparent verdict – that Paul died in 59 by judicial beheading. Twice he has Paul appear before a Roman proconsul, and both times we are only told something like when ‘the proconsul believed (…) he was astonished at the teaching of the Lord,’ and ‘he drove them (the Jews accusing Paul) from the tribunal.3‘ Below is an investigation into the truth of that text, about the facts that are given and the facts that are concealed and what was intended to be concealed. The latter is of the utmost importance because it gives us the reason why Paul wrote letters. He travelled and spent weeks or months in a Jewish congregation, strengthening their faith, explaining the Law, collecting funds for the ‘saints’ in Jerusalem, and telling about the coming of the kingdom of God through the resurrection from the dead of God’s Anointed. All of this was done orally. His decision to write notes from Ephesus to the Corinthian congregation from Summer 51 to Autumn 54 is due to: o The edict of Claudius of 49 banishing Jews who disobeyed the Emperor and believed in God’s Anointed, one whom they considered to be King of Israel; the man sentenced to death by the Roman praefectus Pontius Pilate. o The arrival of the new governor of Greece, Junius Annaeus Gallio in Corinth in the spring of 52, vested with proconsular power and who took immediate action. o Gallio interrogated Paul and his co-workers before his tribunal and had them banished from Corinth and Achaea. o This meant that Paul, who, after a series of failures in Philippi, Thessaloniki and other Macedonian and Greek cities, had finally been able to work undisturbed almost eighteen months in Corinth, owing to the lack of Roman authority, was immediately expelled from the city. 3

Acts 13, 12 and 18, 16.

62

Chapter Four

This meant that Paul had to resort to writing letters to maintain contact from Ephesus, forced to do so by the verdict of Gallio.

c. The text as garden Just as a garden is normally a relatively small, often fenced off as part of a much wider landscape, the text offers only a limited opportunity to face what actually happened4. New Testament deals with canonized texts that were sacred and true in the eyes of many believers. These texts offer very few opportunities to establish what was historical truth and what fabrication and distortion. Facts that can confirm or gainsay these texts are only sporadically available and other sources, Greek, Roman, or Jewish, are also scarce. So are we at the mercy of these texts and should we take their word for it? Not at all. Sometimes we can confront parts of a text with other parts of the same text as witnesses. A really remarkable and colourful text is that of Acts, which describes how the Romans protect Paul from popular anger in the temple square and then intend to have him flogged. Paul prevents this by stating that he has Roman citizenship5. The commander, expressing his surprise, orders therefore that he should not be flogged. The commander himself had obtained citizenship only by digging deep into his pockets. Paul recounts that he himself had been a citizen from the day he was born. The commander is even worried because he had shackled a Roman citizen, contravening law and rule. All of this is in line with Roman law that strongly condemns the flogging of a civis before being tried. But it is related earlier in the same book of Acts that Paul and Silvanus, both Roman citizens, were beaten without trial and incarcerated in the Roman colony of Philippi6. That was apparently illegal. The magistrate might have viewed the flogging as a conviction. He expressed his regret at what had happened and was obviously well aware that even in Rome, despite the laws, civilians could often be beaten.

4

J. L. Borges: El jardin de senderos que se bifurcan. The eight story in El Aleph. Buenos Aires 1948. 5 Acts 22, 22-29. 6 Acts 16.

The trial before the Proconsul

63

But what is to be done with the testimony of Paul himself? He writes in his second letter to the Corinthians: ‘Three times I was beaten with rods’ (by Roman lictors)7. Words against words. Can these voices be united or do they really contradict each other? Who is speaking the truth here? It is not easy, often even impossible to determine where voices and counter voices are heard in the texts whether Paul had Roman citizenship or whether he was beaten several times by the Romans.

d. The trial before Gallio It gets even more complicated, more hopeless, when only one voice is heard. For example, we have only one story about Paul’s trial in Corinth. In Acts we read: ‘But when Gallio was proconsul of Achaea, the Jews made a united attack on Paul and brought him before the tribunal.’ The charge was: ‘This man is persuading people to worship contrary to the law.8‘ ‘Against the law,’ para ton nomon, ‘contra legem’ is the ambiguous phrase that the judge immediately picks up, even before Paul can put forward anything in his defence, by asking: What law is meant? If it is a Roman law, he will immediately consider the matter seriously, but if it is their law, that of Moses, they must judge for themselves. That is an understandable and also justifiable decision. Do we have any way of testing the validity of this story? If there is only one witness, we can do nothing. Unus testis nullus testis – ‘one witness is no witness’. And yet it is precisely this account of a trial that is the focal point in Acts, the crux around which the story revolves. Owing to fragments of an inscription found in Delphi, the trial before Gallio can be quite accurately dated, the summer of AD 519. This is remarkable because it is the only event in the life of Paul to which a date can be attached with any certainty.

7

II Corinthians 11, 25. Acts 18, 12 en 18, 13. 9 A. Dirkzwager: De datering van Gallio in het kader van de chronologie van Paulus’ reizen. https://logos.nl/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Paulus-reizen-brievenmetgezellen.pdf. 8

64

Chapter Four

Inscription with the name Gallio. (Delphi, Archaeological Museum)

When one attempts to look for the time sequence in the studies about Paul, one will soon notice that all dates usually remain rather vague and differ widely. Apart from the data, is the place also identifiable? In the forum in Corinth the place where Paul is said to have stood before Gallio is indicated. That would be the only identifiable place where we can really follow in Paul’s footsteps. But the text gives, epi to bèma, ‘ad tribunal proconsulare’10. And of course we do not know where Gallio had placed his tribunal. Acts is not primarily an historical record but a proclamation of faith. The theme is the grand journey, a triumphal procession of the Spirit and the faith from Jerusalem to Rome, from a Jewish sect to a world-wide religion.

10

Acts 18, 12.

The trial before the Proconsul

65

The bèma of the Roman colony Corinth. The place where Paul may have stood before Gallio.

The narrative in Acts, as in the entire New Testament, becomes increasingly averse to the Jews and is nowhere negative towards Greeks or Romans. This was a major problem, given that the origins of the faith lay in Judaism but its future in the Greco-Roman world. The first evangelist, Mark, solved that problem in the winter of 71/72 – shortly after Rome’s victory in the war ending with the destruction of the temple and the holy city – by turning things topsy-turvy on crucial points. Many examples of this can be given, but it is quite clear that it was the Roman praefectus Pilate who passed the death sentence on Jesus and had the execution carried out. The reason for the verdict was indicated in the titulus above the cross: King of the Jews. By some juggling with the facts here and there in the story, Marcus manages to exonerate the Romans from guilt, to impose the blame on the Jews and to have the very first creed spoken by the Roman soldier who was responsible for carrying out the cruel sentence. The author of Acts does the same. Not only does the main theme of his book turn away from Jerusalem and advancing towards the conversion of Athens and Rome, away from the Jews and their allegiance to the Law of Moses, and on to the Christian faith and the grace of the Spirit.

Chapter Four

66

The refrain of the story reiterates time and again that Paul first addressed the Jews, went to the synagogue and met with opposition but was welcomed by the Greeks and other nations. Halfway through the story, in the eighteenth chapter, the breach is put into words, fierce words: ‘And when they (the Jews) opposed and reviled him, he shook out his garments and said to them: “Your blood be on your own heads! I am innocent. From now on I will go to the Gentiles”. 11‘ In antitassomenǀn de (…) pros autous, the verb antitassesthai is used, to be harsh and hostile to someone or something. Then follow two spiteful, hostile expressions which, surprisingly, we also find in the antiJewish wording of the gospel of Matthew. ‘He shook out his garments’ is a scornful gesture and a serious threat: I already consider you to be worthless, and on the day of judgment you will turn to dust12. The other statement is even more threatening: ‘All the people answered: “His blood be on us and on our children”. 13‘ Misused by Matthew, to place the blame for the death of Jesus on the Jewish people instead of the Roman Pilate, who had pronounced the death sentence and ordered the execution. And just as Pilate washes his hands in innocence saying, ‘I am innocent of this man’s blood’, Luke also has Paul declare katharos egǀ, ‘I am innocent’. And Paul turns away from his own people and faith, leaves the synagogue, and ‘from now on I will go to the Gentiles’ – eis ta ethnè. ‘From now on’, apo tou nun. On that decisive point hinges the trial before Gallio, with the accusation of the Jews and the acquittal by the Roman. Do the words of Lucas give an accurate and true account of what happened? This is an obvious question raised by philologists and historians, but many theologians will dismiss it. After all, they are concerned with a canonical text inspired by the Holy Spirit, with which moreover traditionally many interests are involved.

e. To stand before the Romans First of all it is worthwhile to have a look at how Luke, in addition to the repeated aversion towards the Jews and the increasing focus on the Romans, reports the other trials Paul had to undergo. 11

Acts 18, 6. Matthew 10, 14 and 15. 13 Mathew 27, 25. 12

The trial before the Proconsul

67

Having arrived in Jerusalem Paul is threatened in the temple square and accused by Jews who want to lynch him14. The Romans come to his aid and save his life. This happens again on the next day when, at the end of a speech by Paul, the Jews begin to shout loudly: ‘Away from the earth with such a fellow! For he should not be allowed to live (…) throwing off their cloaks and flinging dust into the air.’ But again the Romans bring Paul to safety15. And for a third time, the Romans save his life as they want to see justice done and, because they want to know exactly what the Jews are accusing Paul of, they take him before the Sanhedrin16. ‘When it was day, the Jews made a plot and bound themselves by an oath neither to eat nor drink till they had killed Paul17.’ But the Romans bring him to safety with a military escort, of no less than 472 soldiers, so that he can receive a fair trial18. The trial is conducted before the procurator Felix, who questions Paul but finds no reason to condemn him. Shortly afterwards the procurator is succeeded by Porcius Festus, who continues the trial vigorously. He also has conversations with Paul and also allows the king and queen to be present to show their interest in the accused. At the end Porcius clearly states that the accused is innocent: ‘This man is doing nothing to deserve death or imprisonment.’ The king also says that Paul should be set free, but Paul himself has already appealed to a higher authority, the emperor19. This supreme Roman judge also grants him permission to come before the court, so Paul travels to Rome. There he preaches his faith and teaches ‘with all boldness’ ‘without hindrance.20‘ These are the words with which Acts ends. The whole course of events seems abundantly clear, or rather, is abundantly clear. But it is in fact a representation of facts that were in reality rather different. And the traces of this misrepresentation can be identified in the text, sometimes precisely because something is held back.

14

Acts, 21, 27-31 and 36. Acts 22, 22-29. 16 Acts 22, 30. 17 Acts 23, 12. 18 Acts 23, 23. 19 Acts 26, 31-32. 20 Acts 28, 31. 15

68

Chapter Four

What is not mentioned is that the situation in Jerusalem in AD 55 was very volatile21. ‘Things were getting worse in Judea, for the land was again full of gangs of robbers and impostors, who had agitated the masses22.’ In that year the son of the high priest had been murdered by the rebels in broad daylight in the streets of Jerusalem. In those weeks – for a moment an echo of seeps through in Luke’s account23 – the revolt of the Egyptian had just taken place, a raid of four thousand armed insurgents on the capital, this ended in a bloody battle that killed hundreds24. Flavius Josephus records that in an attempt to quell the rebellion, Felix had sent hundreds of cavalry and infantry to Jerusalem from Caesarea. The surprisingly high number of soldiers, 472 horsemen and infantrymen, mentioned by Luke, who Paul led from Jerusalem to Caesarea could be related to the soldiers returning to their barracks after the uprising had been crushed25. Not an escort or some sort of guard of honour in that case, but rather an indication that the Romans had mistaken Paul for someone involved in the Zealots’ riots. In Caesarea Palestinae, Paul was not given a fair trial at all. On the contrary, the procurator Marcus Antonius Felix, as Tacitus testifies: ‘by means of every conceivable barbarity and arbitrariness, administered royal power with the soul of a slave. 26‘ Tacitus also relates how Felix had the Jewish rebels mercilessly beheaded or robbed them of their money by means of trumped-up charges and faked trials. And he was supported by the governor of Syria and the court in Rome27. This wealthy scoundrel was not interested in a fair trial at all. Even Luke indicates between the lines that he kept Paul in prison for two years hoping to get a large ransom for him and therefore holding him as a pawn in the power game with the Jewish authorities28. As successor of this depraved man, a friend of Nero’s, the Roman knight Porcius Festus, came to power. This procurator was sent to quell the rebellion and so from the moment he arrived he took severe measures 21 Flavius Josephus: Antiquitates Judaicae XX 160: holè sunchunetai Hierousalèm. Acts 23, 23. 22 The words ‘imposters’ and robbers’ refer to the Zealots and the rebels. 23 Acts 21, 38. 24 Flavius Josephus: Antiquitates Judaicae XX 169-172. 25 Acts 23, 23. 26 Tacitus: Historiae V 9, 3. 27 Tacitus: Annales XII 54. 28 Acts 24, 26-27.

The trial before the Proconsul

69

against the insurgents. In the context of his instructions, he immediately reopens the trial against Paul. And he condemns him to death. Luke does not admit it in so many words, but Roman law is perfectly clear: an appeal to the emperor can only be made against when judgment is passed. Festus made short shrift of the accused and had him sent in chains to Rome where – and this too is held back by Luke – the appeal is dismissed and the sentence confirmed. As it is carried out by the sword that too can also clarify the situation: he was not condemned because of his religious views, but for rebellious acts against the state. This kind of misrepresentation and distorting can also be pointed out in the description of the first trial, in Corinth before Gallio.

f. Gallio Gallio is referred to as proconsul – Galliǀnos de anthupatou – but the trial took place in AD 51, and Gallio would not become consul suffectus until about 55. Some years later he underwent the fate of both his brothers, Seneca and Annaeus Mela and the latter’s son, the poet Lucanus, and was forced to commit suicide. Gallio was not a proconsul but, as governor, bore that title, which gave him more military and legal authority. As such, he was the highest judge Paul ever appeared before, apart from in the court of appeal, of course, because in a strict sense the latter did not constitute a judgment on the accused or the charge. In Rome only the formal judicial procedure was considered. This gives rise to my first observation. In the event of a market riot, would the proconsular governor really instigate a court hearing before him right away? That would be for the appointed magistrate to deal with. In the previous chapter of Acts we were supposed to assume that Paul, while staying in Athens, had to appear immediately before the Areopagus. I will postpone the answer to this observation for the moment in order to pay attention to the outcome of the trial. It seems as if everything fizzled out, the charge not even being dismissed but simply not taken into consideration, meaning that Paul could go about his business again. That was not what happened: after one and a half years of intensive work in Corinth, Paul’s work and domicile there came to an abrupt end. He went to Ephesus and from there on to Antioch.

70

Chapter Four

Bust of Seneca Antikensammlung Berlin

He has to flee, it seems, whereas the ESV translation insinuates otherwise: ‘Paul stayed [in Corinth] many days longer and then took leave. 29 ‘ In my opinion an incorrect translation that can also be found in most other translations, including also very well-known ones. The Vulgata: multos sustinuisset dies moltos; Luther: ‘Paulus aber blieb noch lange daselbst.’ The usually very reliable and precise Dutch Authorised translation reads ‘En als Paulus daar nog vele dagen gebleven was (…).’ [And when Paul had stayed there many more days (…)]. Only the Anglica authentica (King James Bible) remains a bit more vague: ‘And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while (...).’ 29

Acts 18, 18.

The trial before the Proconsul

71

However, the Greek text is prosmeinas hèmeras hikanas. Hikanos means ‘to reach a certain, set limit’, ‘sufficient’. So the translation would convey the meaning better if it read, ‘And after Paul remained a few more days, he took his leave’ (and left for Syria). ‘A few days’, for the simple reason that there was no daily available boat from Corinth to Caesarea Palestinae. He departed together with the couple Priscilla and Aquila, who we also encountered at the beginning of the report30. This concerns a Jewish man from Pontus, married to a Roman lady from the distinguished gens Prisca. He was a wealthy and distinguished Jew expelled from Rome by the edict of Emperor Claudius in 4931. Had this couple now been banished once more, together with Paul? The suggestion that a proconsul would take the trouble to deal with market turmoil instead of the local magistrate I already observed to be odd, unlikely even. Is it not more likely that Gallio, like Festus, wanted to take the situation in hand immediately upon arrival in his province? In Rome, the Emperor had issued an edict against the Jews and expelled them from the city. In that year, Gallio’s brother, Seneca, an anti-Semite, had already obtained extensive influence at the imperial court. On his arrival in the capital of Achaea, the proconsul was confronted with Jews recently exiled from Rome, as well as people such as Paul, who had been dragged before the magistrate in Corinth and earlier in the Roman colony of Philippi, where he had been beaten and thrown into prison and then banished from the city: ‘These men are Jews, and they are disturbing our city. They advocate customs that are not lawful for us as Romans to accept or practice.32‘ The same situation arose in Thessaloniki. There too, the clear accusation: ‘These men who have turned the world upside down have come here also (…), and they are all acting against the decrees of Caesar [sic!], saying that there is another king, Jesus.33‘ So this has obviously to do with the same decrees of Claudius that banished those Jews who believed in God’s Anointed, the man who was anointed King.

30

Acts 18, 2 and 18, 18. Acts 18, 2; Suetonius: Divus Claudius 25, 4; Dio Cassius: Historia Romana LX, 6, 6. 32 Acts 16, 20-21. 33 Acts 17, 6-7. 31

72

Chapter Four

Paul and his companions were also banished from Thessaloniki. The same happened in Berea34, after which Paul goes to Corinth via Athens. There everything seems to be going well, until the newly appointed governor arrives from Rome and immediately put things in order. Of course, it is not really possible to establish the truth about a trial that took place two thousand years ago and of which we have only one partial account. But the course of the trial does give reason to ask questions and we have to take them seriously: ƒ The idea that a proconsul of the imperium Romanum would preside over a trial immediately after a mere market brawl is quite unbelievable. ƒ That, heaving heard the serious charge: behaviour contra legem regarding religion, he would decide not to proceed with the case is ridiculous. ƒ The charge is in fact very clear: criminal, illegal worship. That is punishable. Gallio then asks a question about the nature of those laws, but does not allow anyone to give any answer. ƒ Whereas the accused had been banished from Philippi, Thessaloniki, and Berea, just as Aquila and Priscilla had been expelled from Rome, Paul was imprisoned all in all for years in Ephesus, Jerusalem, Caesarea, and Rome, and was also banished from Ephesus, would Gallio really have casually acquitted him in Corinth? ƒ Gallio had arrived directly from Rome, where his brother was involved in the imperial edicts against the Jews, and Paul had been accused in Philippi and Thessaloniki of violating these very edicts. Would Gallio, as proconsul, not impose a sentence? ƒ Whereas the text of Acts says that Paul was free to go after the trial, the wording hikanos also indicates that he had to run as soon as possible. Historians would certainly take seriously the hypothesis that upon his arrival in Achaea, Gallio immediately enforced Claudius’ edicts and banished Jews such as Paul and Aquila from his province. Theologians might have some difficulty with that.

34

Acts 17, 14.

The trial before the Proconsul

73

Still, my hypothesis may also solve some difficulties. For one thing it provides a reasonable answer to the question of why there are letters by Paul to the Corinthian congregation. I am even of the opinion – and have elaborated on that elsewhere – that Paul was only writing to that congregation35. In Philippi and Thessaloniki, Paul only stayed for some days, some weeks at the most, too short to establish a congregation to which he could subsequently address letters. The letters to the Romans and the Galatians are fictions of later date and if they do contain some authentic fragments, they were taken from the correspondence with Corinth. Paul, like the other Apostles, directed himself mainly to the people around him, gave them advice, and instructed them about the faith. Writing was only a tool in exceptional circumstances and became necessary only when Paul was suddenly expelled from Greece after having worked in Corinth for a year and a half. Perhaps we owe Paul’s letters mainly to Gallio’s verdict. Being forced to leave the city, Paul was never able to return and work in Corinth for any length of time. Hence the desperate tone in the letters, as in the so called Letter of Tears36. In the second letter to the Corinthians we find a gap of several chapters: between ‘so I took leave of them and went on to Macedonia’ and ‘when we came into Macedonia’ there was an account of his attempt to go back to Corinth. This culminated in the assault in the harbour of Corinth so that even leaving by ship was out of the question and he had to undertake the long detour by land37.

g. Another letter In Paul’s first letter to the congregation at Thessaloniki, we come across a strange passage. The letter is usually considered to be genuinely of Paul’s hand and sent to Thessaloniki. Earlier I gave numerous arguments to make it plausible that this letter – the first (the second is clearly not genuine) was

35

Ch. Vergeer: Paulus. Kijken in Uw lezend gezicht. Budel 2012, pp. 102-11; Ch. Vergeer: The Letters of the Apostle Paul. Controversies en Consequences. Cambridge 2017, pp. 96-105. 36 Partly in II Corinthians 10-13. 37 After II Corinthians 2, 13 the story is continued in 7, 5.

74

Chapter Four

composed of various fragments of letters sent to the Corinthian congregation fifty years after Paul’s death. First, the letter refers to Paul’s gloriously elaborate and exuberant proclamation in front of the brethren after the adversity in Philippi38. Where those ‘brothers’ are might seem to be evident only from the title ‘to the church of the Thessalonians’ and not from the actual text39. Not quite true, Acts tells us that Paul was only able to preach three times in Thessaloniki and was then expelled from the city. So he was there no longer than three weeks and this text cannot refer to him as being there. This is only appropriate for the sojourn and preaching for eighteen months at Corinth. Then Paul continues by saying that he only stayed in Athens. That, as far as we know, was the situation in the winter of 49/50 before he first went to Corinth. So, insofar as our knowledge depends on Acts, there appear to be two contradictory statements, but they are sentences that can be linked to Corinth rather than to Thessaloniki. The book of Acts is tendentious, that is, the writer intends to proclaim a certain truth, the spreading of the (from origin) Jewish faith into the entire civilized world, as far as Athens, yes, even as far as Rome. Despite this preconceived intention, the pattern, names, dates, places and people could broadly reflect the actual course of events. Concerning the journeys Luke tells us: - In the AD 40s Paul was active in Antioch and from there travelled through Asia Minor. - He crossed over from Troas to Europe in AD 49 and travelled through Philippi, Thessaloniki and Athens to Corinth. He worked there for a year and a half, but in the summer of AD 51 he hastily went by sea to Caesarea and Antioch40. - Later, around the year 54, he travelled over land from Antioch to Ephesus41 and then made another attempt to reach Corinth – by land, via Macedonia. That ended in failure; in the harbour he was molested and forced to return to Troas not by ship but all the way over land42. He was also banished from Ephesus and was unable

38

I Thessalonians 2, 1-16. I Thessalonians 1, 1. 40 Acts 16, 6 – 18, 22. 41 Acts 18, 23 and 19, 1. 42 Acts 20, 3. 39

The trial before the Proconsul

-

75

to enter the city43. Therefore the attack and the second hasty departure from Corinth took place in the early spring of AD 55. Finally In the autumn of the year 57 there was the eventful sea voyage from Caesarea to Puteoli and from there overland to Rome44.

That second journey from Macedonia to Corinth and back via Macedonia took three months45. That means that Paul could have been back in Corinth for only a few weeks. The text of the first two chapters of the first letter to the Thessalonians fits in exactly with the situation of Paul with regard to Corinth and is completely incompatible with the scant relationship with the congregation at Thessaloniki where he only preached three times on the Sabbath. The words are passionate and vibrant: ‘But since we were torn away from you, brothers, for a short time, in person not in heart, we endeavoured the more eagerly and with great desire to see you face to face.46‘ These words do not apply to his brief visit in Thessaloniki where he preached three times and where as far as we know he did not come a second time, but they do apply to Corinth, the city where he had worked for a year and a half and from where he was suddenly exiled by the Romans. The text contains unusual words, such as a form of the verb aporphanizǀ, which meaning is more intense than to be translated by ‘to separate’ or ‘to part. The phrases ‘to deprive’, ‘to leave someone orphaned’ are closer to its meaning. Prosǀpǀi ou kardiai, ‘torn away from you (…) in person not in heart’; apparently it was impossible to visit the brothers. The text then suddenly jumps from the first person plural to the first person singular: we wanted to come to you, I, Paul, again and again but Satan hindered us 47‘ The specification, ‘I myself’’ – egǀ men – ‘I, Paul,’ is surprising. Normally the author of a letter does not specifically mention his name in the letters as well, because is quite evident who the author is. 43

Acts 20, 17-38. Acts 28, 13. 45 Acts 20, 3. 46 I Thessalonians 2, 17. 47 I Thessalonians 2, 18. 44

76

Chapter Four

Could this be the hand of a later editor who wanted to emphasize that this text really originated from Paul himself? In any case, the translation in my Dutch bible ‘twice’ instead of ‘again and again’ is a mistranslation of kai hapax kai dis. The prefix kai means here ‘both’: both once and a second time. It indicates that the others wanted to come but I, Paul, wanted to come to you again and again. Kai enekopsen hèmas ho satanas, ‘but Satan hindered us’. The term chosen is derived from the verb enkoptǀ. It is a military term: putting up obstacles on a road to prevent the enemy from getting close. At the symbolic ‘Satan’, the devil, one wonders which actual enemy prevented Paul’s coming to Corinth? Was it the same military commander, the proconsul Gallio? His sentence, the banishment was held back in Acts, whereas the painful consequences of the banishment are glossed over in this letter. We are deprived of an important motive for writing the letters to Corinth but get an unexpected glimpse into Paul’s emotions by the distortions of the text half a century after his death.

B

CHAPTER FIVE THE FIRST EDITIONS

Unprecedented disappearance For an in-depth study of Paul’s letters Nestle-Aland’s Novum Testamentum Graece (28th edition) is indispensable1. It is the most authoritative text, based on hundreds of codices and papyri in Greek, Latin and some other languages. In this study and in the attempted translation of ‘The First Edition’ at the end of this book, this edition was obviously used. But not as the absolute authority. Many of the problems addressed in this study cannot be found in the Nestle-Aland edition, because we are dealing with changes in texts that were made between the fifties of the first century and the creation of the definitive, canonical, edition at the beginning of the fourth century. Between these years, a great deal happened to the texts about which we can hardly find anything in the preserved codices and papyri. The simple reason for this is that the editorial changes and subsequent editing of the first and second editions, including comments, clarifications, notes in the margins, and even whole tracts of text took place in the first few centuries, a period from which we have no original documents. In Alan Cameron’s outstanding study, The Last Pagans of Rome, no fewer than two chapters deal with the issues surrounding ‘Correctors and Critics’2. Our editions of Paul’s letters are to a large extent based on Byzantine and Carolingian copies of editions and fragments thereof dating from late antiquity. And it was during that period, as Cameron points out, that a lot happened to those texts. Classicists should read the bit in the second chapter of Last Pagans that deals with the different types of text 1

Nestle-Aland: Novum Testamentum Graece. Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 28th Revised Edition, Stuttgart 2016. 2 A. Cameron, The Last Pagans of Rome. Oxford 2011 pp. 421-497.

The First Editions

79

adaptations. Terms such as: emendavi, legi, recognovi, contuli, recensui indicate five essentially different techniques of editing and publishing texts. We will deal with all of these aspects below, but Nestle and Aland ignore them completely. But it is precisely this problem area that is fascinating and is often explored in an exemplary way. Let me give just one example for illustrative purposes. The first edition opens with an important document, the statement on which the apostolic authority conferred on Paul was based. The editors added a heading to it, the opening lines of the collection of texts, which we now know as Galatians 1, 1. We read: ‘Paul, emissary not from men nor through man, but through Jesus anointed and God the Father who raised him from the dead.’ A grandiose, somewhat bombastic title and a salutation that far exceeds the claims to authority made by Paul himself. Now, a note in the 28th Nestle-Aland edition does point out that there is a hiatus in the edition provided by Marcion. The words kai theou patros tou, ‘and God (the) father, who’. Since Adolf von Harnack’s reconstruction of the text provided by Marcion, it was believed that this ‘arch heretic’ who wanted to liberate the Christian faith from its Jewish origins had here deleted the Jewish God Yahweh, instead placing the emphasis solely on Jesus Christ. And in doing so had even stated that not God, the Only and Eternal One, had raised the dead Jesus from the dead, but that Jesus had risen from the dead of his own accord. Now the question is – something Nestle and Aland not only ignore but do not even raise or cannot raise – did Marcion indeed delete some phrase, sentence or paragraph that was included in the first edition, or, was something missing in that first edition which Marcion added later? Do those four words, with their supreme claim to conferred authority, have to remain or should they be put between brackets? Since there is no evidence one way or another, other arguments must be used. No argument, however, can be decisive. It is striking how exalted the acclaim to apostolic authority is: not because of the Arch-Apostles in Jerusalem and Judea; nor because of Jesus

80

Chapter Five

Anointed, but directly from God the Father. What is also striking is the order of Jesus, God’s Anointed and God the Father. Why this precedence of the son over the father, of Jesus over God? This is all the more remarkable when we notice that the first verse is a duplicate of the third. There it concerns the gift of grace – charis – and the peace resulting from it, and here in the correct order: God our Father and the Lord Jesus God’s Anointed. Here, moreover, phrased in the typically Jewish patros humǀn, ‘our Father’3. Jerome noticed the omission of the fragment ‘and God (the) Father, who (…)’ in the manuscripts with the text of Marcion and believed that this arch heretic had done this – deleted it – because he did not want to admit that the victory over death was bestowed by God (Yahweh, a Jewish God whom he had left in this new faith) and that therefore Jesus had vanquished death and rose again entirely through his own efforts4. However, that is an argument based on Christian dogmatics of the early fifth century and is completely at odds with what Paul himself (or as I point out: the Anonymous A) writes in the well-known 15th chapter of the first letter to the Corinthians (and is repeated in many other places in much the same words)5: a corpse can no longer come to life on its own unless it ‘was raised’ (passive form) from the dead by the Eternal, the Living One. Only then can the revived body arise (active form). The presented arguments indicate that Marcion did not delete anything; this later addition was simply not included in the texts available to him. It was not until the second century that the words ‘and God (the) Father, who (…)’ in verse 3 were incorporated into the text of the opening verse in a somewhat distorted way. Those who are willing to accept this idea will also be willing to reconsider the reproach made by Tertullian in his Adversus Marcion. Tertullian reproaches Marcion for deleting, in Galatians 3, 26 Pantes gar huioi theou este, the word ‘God’ as in ‘We are all children of God’, and replacing with Pantes gar huioi pisteǀs este. ‘We are all children of the faith’ (it was the Jewish Yahweh he was in fact deleting). Both possibilities can be argued, but in Nestle-Aland-28 the decision is simply 3

Galatians 1, 3. Jerome: Commentariorum in Epistolam Beati Pauli ad Galatas Libri Tres, 375. 5 I Corinthians 15, 3-5 et vv. J. Kremer: Das älteste Zeugnis von der Auferstehung Christi, Stuttgarter Bibel-Studien 17 Stuttgart 1967, pp. 39-47 all relevant texts from the Corpus Paulinum are dealt with. 4

The First Editions

81

made. However, by analogy with the opening verse 1, 1, the other alternative text is more obvious. Having read this search for the first edition of what would later be called ‘the Letters of Paul,’ it is a reasonable desire of readers to be presented with that supposed first edition. The search did of course yield something, but still quite insufficient to be able to present that first edition with any certainty. What follows here is a suggestion, a hypothesis. The line we follow is the chronological one. So we are looking at how the collection of texts was created. That extends from the AD fifties, when Paul sent his letters to Corinth from Ephesus, to roughly the turn of the second/third century, when the Corpus Paulinum appeared in its provisionally completed form. From all those years in which so many decisive events happened – in writing, addressing, editing, supplementing and correcting – there is not one shred of extant text on papyrus or on any other material. Only by making use of quotations from the earliest Church Fathers was it possible for Adolf von Harnack to extrapolate evidence about the second edition of what was in its time called the Apostolikon, a reconstruction more often than not based on allusions and what was omitted. The reconstruction given here in this study depends more on whispers and echoes than on existing messages and texts. Philosophy and theology have been closely intertwined for millennia, but theology is based on belief, philosophy on thinking. The latter creates distance, but also allows room for new ways of approaching, and being willing to accept new material and new methods. However, it is necessary that such an uncertain undertaking is at least attempted. Before we can open the Bible to read Paul’s letters, seven steps have to be taken.

1. The trial before the proconsul Summer AD 51 Corinth Having arrived at his place of office in Corinth in the summer of AD 51, the proconsul Junius Annaeus Gallio immediately took measures against – in Roman eyes – rebellious Jews. Paul was taken to court and was convicted and exiled, along with some co-workers.

Chapter Five

82

After having been at work for eighteen months, Paul’s activities in Corinth came to an end, and he was forced to do something that was eventually to be recognised as an act of global importance: from the end of AD 51 to the spring of AD 55 he was, while in Ephesus to write letters to his followers at Corinth. Once he attempted to travel to Corinth via Macedonia, but was assaulted in the harbour and had to escape over land. He was also exiled from Ephesus and his mission seemed to be a complete failure: he was recalled to Jerusalem to render an account of himself. Apparently the letters or copies remained.

2. The letters Autumn 51 – spring 55 Ephesus The letters may have been kept by his co-workers, friends or followers, or they may have reappeared later on. Paul only wrote a string of letters to Corinth in the fifties of the first century. He did not write letters to the Galatians or to Rome, but fragments of letters or statements, written by Paul, were, in later years included in writings which were attributed to him, and the above-mentioned Galatians and Romans as being the recipients. The Letters to Philemon, to Philippi, to the Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians, Hebrews, to Timothy and to Titus were not written by Paul himself but attributed to him decades after his death. During his life he was pretty much a failure – his missions in Corinth and Ephesus failed, he was imprisoned for four years in Caesarea and Rome and was beheaded in AD 59. Ad Aquas Salvias. And then, Paul himself was abandoned and forgotten by almost everyone.

3. The conflict in Ephesus Around AD 95 Ephesus Sometime during the nineties of the first century, a prominent member of the congregation of believers (we cannot call him anything other than the Anonymous A) spoke out about a hot topical issue at the time: the

The First Editions

83

relationship between the Jewish Law of Moses and the belief in Christ. About five sermons, three from Anonymous A and two from Anonymous B, are identifiable. The first of these homilies, by Anonymous A, begins in what we now know as Galatians 3, 1: ‘Brothers, you do not realize (...)’. Now we read in all manuscripts, anoètou galatoi. But to begin a letter to distant acquaintances with a slap in the face: ‘You stupid Galatians’, is very odd and it was not until the end of the second century that these texts were considered to be addressed to the Galatians. If we are looking for a Greek word that had the same number of letters which could be altered, then we could assume that the original word ‘brothers’ was changed into ‘Galatians’: *$/$7$, $'(/)2, Martin Heidegger refers to the hermeneutical circle in his remarks on reading and understanding texts and the world. In § 32 of Sein und Zeit he explains this as: ‘Vorhabe, Vorsicht und Vorgriff’‚ intention, caution and anticipation. We approach a text with intentions and then carefully scrutinise its contents in order to arrive at a presupposition. The first homily of Anonymous A (Galatians 3, 1 – 4, 26. With omission of 3, 6-9, and 3, 15-25): ‘Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the Law or by hearing with belief in God’s Anointed? (…) Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh? 6‘ The fierce tone remains and the choice is presented: are you now children of the coming kingdom by the flesh, or by faith and the Spirit? It is extensively argued that belief in God’s Anointed, and not the fulfilment of the rules and the Law, makes one an heir of the blessing. The Spirit, not the seed bestows this inheritance and makes us partakers of the blessing and being chosen. The speaker addresses the Jews first and tells them that being freed from the subservience of the Law they have truly become children of God. They may say ‘Abba – dad’ to God7. Then the writer addresses the other half of his audience, the Greeks:

6 7

Galatians 3, 1-3. Galatians 4, 7.

84

Chapter Five

‘Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that are not gods. But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God.8‘ Then, quite remarkably he reveals something about himself: ‘You know it was because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at first, and though my condition was a trial to you, you did not scorn or despise me, but received me.9‘ The speaker ends his homily by saying that the Law itself says what he is putting forward here. He then mentions Jerusalem and explains the difference between the earthly Jerusalem, which as all his listeners know was conquered and destroyed by the Romans in September 70, and the celestial Jerusalem. ‘But the Jerusalem above is free, and she is our mother.10‘ Apparently that was probably the conclusion, a slogan that would meet with approval. The second homily, by Anonymous B, is present in Galatians 5, 13 – 6, 9. Its theme is freedom obtained through belief in God’s Anointed. The short sermon ends with some admonitions. The third homily, by Anonymous A, is preserved only as fragments to be found in what would later-on be called Romans 1, 18 and 2, 2 – 3, 20 (2, 16 was not included). The beginning is a reference to the downfall of Jerusalem, struck by the wrath of God because of its iniquity11. Then it is explicitly stated and even repeated that both Jews and Greeks share in the honour and peace: God knows no partiality12. The Law is badly kept by the Jews, circumcision has its merits, but only when one is living in righteousness. As a chosen people, Jews have an advantage but the weight of sin is heavy and both Greeks and Jews are sinners. The fourth homily, by Anonymous B, is directed against these statements by the first speaker. The text was preserved in what would later be called Romans 5, 12 – 8, 38 (with omission of 6, 17b and 19; 7, 25b and 8, 3). Anonymous B gives a detailed account about sin and redemption: sin entered the world through the first man, Adam, and redemption through God’s Anointed. Anonymous B goes much further in his opposition to the 8

Galatians 4, 8-9. Galatians 4, 13-14. 10 Galatians 4, 26. 11 Romans 1, 18. 12 Romans 2, 10-11. 9

The First Editions

85

other speaker: baptism makes us new and belief in God’s Anointed delivers us from the Law. The freedom of the faith is emphasized, the gift of the Spirit and the love of God gives us the victory. Whereas Anonymous A is looking for a compromise between Jewish faithfulness to the Law and belief in God’s Anointed, Anonymous B appears to be somewhat more averse to the Jewish Law and further on his way to Christian belief in God’s Anointed, Spirit, and the love of God. The last homily, by Anonymous A, seems to be an answer to the objections and shifted views of the previous speaker. The text, or parts of the text, are to be found in Romans 10, 1–4 and 10, 12–16.

4. The first edition circa AD 100 Ephesus This edition appeared around the turn of the first century, probably in Ephesus. The motivation seems to have been the preceding debate and there are sufficient traces in the first edition that indicate that the two opponents, Anonymous A and B, also took part in its editing. The first edition became an odd combination – a wooden piece of iron – between on the one hand a current dispute about the relationship between the Jewish past and the present belief in God’s Anointed and on the other hand a collection of letters from several decades ago. The intention of the editors is obvious: It started off with the fierce arguments of Anonymous A, as can be found in chapters three through five of the ‘letter to the Galatians’. In order to provide these views with apostolic authority, a label was placed above the texts, the first verses of Galatians with the high claim of authority. This was followed by a statement by Paul himself, a text which has the appearance of being autobiographical, containing an account of the authorization of his mission by the Arch-Apostles and the ‘Church’ of Jerusalem and Judea. This was followed by a kind of pastoral interlude, the middle part with the well-chosen fragments of Paul’s letters to the congregation in Corinth. Here, too, the editors reserved an important place for themselves, which was filled by the theologically important texts about the last words of Jesus spoken at the Lord’s Supper which were always repeated in the

86

Chapter Five

congregation at the communal meals, and the text about the victory over death13. It ended once more with the arguments of Anonymous A and B, as we can find in the first fourteen chapters of the ‘letter to the Romans’, where only a few scraps of notes from Paul were included.

Galatians So the first edition originally began with what would later be the fourth letter, the letter to the Galatians. The second edition, that of Marcion, also kept this original order. The later reversal of the original order, made sometime around the end of the second and the beginning of the third century, blocked an important access to the texts for us. Right in the beginning we were led on the trail of an important dogmatic treatise, with the letter to the Romans and not, as originally intended, introduced into a collection of texts based on apostolic authority concerning disputes between followers of the Jewish Law and those who put their faith in Anointed first. What the text originally looked like, in that first edition of Ephesus around the turn of the first century, remains largely uncertain because even in the second edition, that of Marcion in Rome in 144, we still stumble over doubts and omissions in the text. But the larger picture is evident: The editors placed a resounding label as opening: ‘Paul, an apostle – not from men nor through man, but through Jesus God’s Anointed (…) Still missing were the words ‘and God the Father, who raised him from the dead.14‘ The text continues with the statement of Paul himself, which he had brought from Jerusalem and upon which his apostolic authority depended and from the time of his arrival in Ephesus validated his mission in the Jewish congregation. In stark contrast to the title, ‘Emissary, neither on behalf of men, nor by man’, he stated that he was an emissary of Kèphas and the Arch-Apostles James and John and that his preaching was by order of and in agreement with, the ‘Church’ of Jerusalem and Judea.

13 14

I Corinthians 11 and 15. Galatians 1, 1-5 and 1, 1b.

The First Editions

87

Paul’s statement consists of three fragments of text that had been carefully corrected and arranged15. Then followed what it was really all about: the first homily of Anonymous A, with the outbursts against the adherents of the Jewish Law, followed by the second homily16. A fragment of the first text was (only later?) removed and put before Paul’s statement17. This piece of text should be put back into place (before 3, 1) so that the text can be better understood: amazement that the believers so rapidly turned away from the gospel proclaimed to them. The speaker calls for unity; there is only one gospel. He also strikes a tone of authority, both 1, 8 and 1, 9 he ends with a formal malediction: anathema estai. Verse 1, 10 is likely to be a later editorial emphasizing addition. It emphasized three times what is also stated twice in verses 1, 11 and 1, 12: that the authority did not depend on one or more mortals. But there is more going on in this short text. In the edition of Marcion we find even more traces of editorial intervention. In the opening sentence the writer expresses his surprise that people are so rapidly lapsing from the faith he had been proclaiming. He uses a beautiful turn of phrase, en chariti eis heteron euangelion, (with the contraposition of en – eis): from joyful grace to other glad tidings. The intention is to show that the congregation is turning away from the proclamation of the author (the Anonymous A), but the later editors inserted: en chariti Christou, and turn grace into a gift of God’s Anointed18. The editors do the same by inserting in the next verse (1, 7) after ‘the glad tidings’ en Christǀi Ièsou, thereby attributing the proclamation not really to the apostle but to God’s Anointed. This all-important text, Paul’s own statement about the legitimacy of his apostolic mission and authority, often referred to as the autobiographical essay and as such a virtually unique text fragment from antiquity, is divided into three parts. It is unclear whether they belonged together and also whether the correct order was maintained or altered. They are the texts successively dealing with: 15

Galatians 1, 13 – 2, 14. Galatians 3, 1 – 5, 12 and 5, 13 – 6, 9. 17 Galatians 1, 6-12. 18 Galatians 1, 6. 16

88

Chapter Five

a. the first appearance of Paul, b. the meeting in Jerusalem and c. the conflict in Antioch19. The first block of text leads immediately to many questions, many of which cannot be answered. In the first place, two editorial interventions can be identified. After having related his visit to Kèphas in Jerusalem Paul says heteron de tǀn apostolǀn ouk eidon – none of the other apostles have I met.20‘ After which the sentence takes a different turn: ei mè Iakǀbon ton adelphon tou kuriou – ‘except James the brother of the lord’. However, as it concerns the first visit to Jerusalem, ‘three years’ (1, 18) after the conversion on the way to Damascus, (which I date in the year 29/31, and three years after the crucifixion of Jesus, which probably took place in 27), it can only refer to James, the elder, the son of Zebedee, and not to James, the brother of God’s Anointed, who only appears later on in a much more important role. The verse directly following is, for philologists remarkable, insofar as it is not a mere hint but a serious alarm bell: ha de graphǀ humin, idou enǀpion tou theou hoti ou pseudomai – ‘what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie.21‘ It is the same kind of phrase that the editors inserted in Romans 9, 1 before the third homily. There too we find that ou pseudomai – ‘I don’t lie or cheat’, an assertion that should arouse suspicion. So we will delete verses 1, 19b-20 as being editorial corrections. But there is more to it: we have no testimony relating to these verses in Marcion’s edition. It is possible that a single sentence in Tertullian is an allusion to the first part, but there is no reference to the second part22. Did this version of the text not yet exist in the time of Marcion? Was it written and attributed later? Or was it included in the first edition? But why then would Marcion delete it? There is no way of being certain about this, but we can surmise that the original text read: ‘Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Kèphas and remained with him fifteen days but I saw none of the other apostles. Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. 23‘ 19

Galatians 1, 13-24; 2, 1-10; 2, 11-14. Galatians 1, 19. 21 Galatians 1, 20. 22 Galatians 1, 13-17 and 1, 19-24. 23 Galatians 1, 18; 1, 19a and 1, 21. 20

The First Editions

89

To use the title Kèphas twice, instead of ‘Peter’ comes across as quite authentic as is the indication ‘after three years. So it seems, but we cannot be absolutely sure. The second piece of text is even more corrupt, if possible, and betrays more the hand of the editors who rewrote it. It is only a short text, ten verses in all24, but it has been an extremely explosive text since ancient times, and it remained that way right into the time of Martin Luther and beyond. Why? Because Paul openly and honestly acknowledges that he first forcibly persecuted the earliest believers and then made a full turn and became an envoy in the service of the ‘mother church’ of Jerusalem. The first part, that ‘he who used to persecute us is now preaching the faith’ obviously fell ill with the earliest Christians25. They were relieved that Kèphas sent that man into exile to distant Tarsus so they could finally live in peace26. The other part, the concordat concluded with the ArchApostles, the agreement with the Jews of Judea, his dependence as emissary of the authority of those men in Jerusalem, Kèphas, James and John. This role however disappeared in the decades after the Roman Jewish war, the destruction of the temple and the Holy City, as did the efforts of influential men such as Anonymous A to liberate the congregation of believers from the Jewish Law, precepts and customs and to educate the followers in the freedom of the faith. The short text thus became a mish-mash of authentic fragments intersected by editorial interventions. In a first overview, what we can extrapolate form this ‘collage’ of text is: First Paul himself is speaking and – exceptionally – begins with an indication of time (as also in 1, 18 with ‘after three years’ and ‘fifteen days’): ‘Then after fourteen years (…)’. It reflects the nature of the report, the statement: an attempt to list the events in a business-like and accurate way. It has the character of a written account and thus raises the question: for whom, when and why? He writes point-by-point, using a consequent and consistent turn of phrase so that a clear summary is created: 24

Galatians, 2, 1-10. Galatians 1, 23. 26 Galatians 1, 21-24. 25

Chapter Five

90

-

first the conversion on the road to Damascus in AD 27, from persecutor to preacher; - three years on the run in Arabia 27 – 30; - epeita meta tria etè – ‘after three years’, the visit to Kèphas, which lasted only a fortnight in AD 3027; - the leader of the Jerusalem congregation sends Paul into exile to Tarsus - epeita dia dekatessarǀn etǀn palin ‘Then after fourteen years I went up again’ to Jerusalem. It now depends on how we count (the ancient way allows for the fact that those three and fourteen should not be added up, but both should be counted from the same year, AD 27) the year 41. Kèphas, and also James and John, were put to death in Jerusalem in the spring of AD 44. Paul wrote that he went to Jerusalem in order to ascertain that his preaching was in accordance with the authority of the Arch-Apostles and that there was no danger that all his efforts would prove in vain28. He also writes that after fourteen years he went back to Jerusalem, accompanied by Barnabas (who, according to Acts, is the rich Jewish landowner from Cyprus who was able to reconcile Paul with the apostles of Jerusalem) and Titus. Apparently the circumcision of Jewish boys was a topic of discussion because Paul observes that no restrictions were placed on his companion Titus (an uncircumcised one). That is verse 2, 3, but then someone (the editor or editors) intervened and added an indecent and sharp attack: ‘Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Anointed Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery. 29‘ A verse that should be deleted. The actual text then continues: ‘To them we (Barnabas, Paul, and Titus) did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you [the congregation at Ephesus?]. And from those [of the faith community of Jerusalem and Judea] (…), 30‘ Here the editor intervenes again, or at least adds a remark: ‘What they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality. 31‘ This verse should also be deleted. This later interruption and discrediting interrupts Paul’s 27

Galatians 1, 18. Galatians 1, 2. 29 Galatians 2, 5. 30 Galatians 2, 5-6a. 31 Galatians 2, 6b. 28

The First Editions

91

sentence and spoils the benevolent tone. For verse 2, 6c continues with: ‘Those, I say, who seemed influential added nothing to me.’ For anyway, those important gentlemen did not impose (or enforce) anything on me. After which the editors vehemently intervened and turned the authentic text upside down. They come with a kind of solution that is formulated twice: Paul is an apostle to all peoples, Peter is an apostle to the Jewish people. The derogatory word peritomès (2, 7) is used, ‘circumcised’. A word that for Greeks meant a disqualification, a mockery. Moreover, here the word Petros is used twice, while Paul always (as in the very next verse 2, 9) uses the high title Kèphas. Verses 2, 7–8 should also be deleted from the original text as later corruptions. The real text continues unabatedly in a positive tone: ‘and when James and Kèphas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me (…).32‘ That is the crux of Paul’s statement, he went to request authorization for his works from the leaders in Jerusalem, and he obtained it and concluded a concordat33. The editors right away attempt to discount this (and now for the third time) by adding, the provision, Paul for the other nations, Peter for the circumcised34. A sentence that must also be removed from the text, but which, on the other hand, had a resonance lasting for over two thousand years. In Paul’s text the editors changed also the original order of names and title: in James, Peter and John. It read: Kèphas, James and John. Putting the name of James in first place in 2, 9 and inserting his name in 1, 19 had to do what was intended with the third part of the text.

32

Galatians 2, 9a. Galatians 2, 2. 34 Galatians 2, 9b. 33

92

Chapter Five

Chester Beatty papyrus P46 with the text of the first letter to Corinth 14, 34 – 15, 6. Someone unknown put in a number of markings possibly intended to improve the readability of the text, but this was not done systematically. In the eighteenth line a space was made; perhaps the copyist wanted to add something which was yet not quite clear. When he changed his mind he drew a line to indicate the superfluous word and at the beginning of the next line two dots to indicate that the word should be omitted. (Chester Beatty Library Dublin)

Whereas the first and second parts of the text were still connected to some extent by their indication of time epeita, the third part is unconnected with the other two. This created a major problem right from Late Antiquity, to

The First Editions

93

the Reformation and up to the present. After all, it seemed as clear as a bell to simply place the third fragment chronologically after the two others. And that was probably the precise intention of the editors. By placing the conflict in Antioch immediately after the concordat in Jerusalem, it thoroughly undermined the previously reached agreement. That had already been very successfully done by editing five of the ten verses, or rather, inserting them in such a way that the original text changed completely, from an agreement reached to a source of discord (pagans versus Jews) and an abuse of the authority in Jerusalem. First of all, we must cleanse the authentic text of later impurities and distortions. Verse 2, 13 is an anti-Semitic interpolation: ‘And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy.’ A venomous verse that should be deleted. Four authentic and quite valuable verses remain. In the fourteenth verse, Paul uses, as always, the high title Kèphas, which in the opening verse 2, 11 was changed to Petros. Just as it would not occur to us to address the Pope with ‘Hello Sir’, but would address him as Your Holiness or Holy Father, Saulos would not dare to say Shimoon, but he respects his highness and holiness with the title Kèphas. ‘Pretence’ and ‘hypocrisy’ – the words illustrate the villainous portrait of the vile imposters, the Jews, that would be used by Luther in anti-Semitic texts to justify pogroms. It captures the anti-Jewish atmosphere after the war from 66 to 73, the anti-Judaism of early Christianity. That both Jesus and Paul were devout Jews and not ‘Christians’ was ignored. Anyone who believes that a few decades after his death the real letters of Paul were published, naively ignores that he was mainly silenced by these editions. The original meaning of the short text was transformed by the insertion into the opposite: that the honest, upright, and steadfast Paul held out against those apostles of Jerusalem, Jews, deceivers, and hypocrites led by Peter who proved himself to be a coward. The text is vicious because it was placed immediately after the warm welcome and the ratification of the Jerusalem agreement and because Peter, at first agreeing to it and to sealing it with a joint meal between Jews and Greeks, cowardly gave in to pressure form James and the brothers in Jerusalem and welched on the agreement.

94

Chapter Five

A recent dissertation (2015) has shown that Nestle-Aland’s reading is incorrect: it does not say +/421but +/4(1. The difference is merely a tiny dash changing the ȅ into an Ǽ but it changes the text substantially. In 2, 12 the verse should not read ‘when they came’ [James’ men from Jerusalem], but ‘when he came’, that is, Peter, who came back from Jerusalem and immediately acted with authority and settled a dispute that had arisen. How could it be otherwise? Simeon the Kèphas was the undisputed leader of the early congregation of believers in Jerusalem and Judea from AD 27 to 44. James and John, the two sons of Zebedee, were his coworkers. Only after his death was he succeeded by James the Righteous, the brother of God’s Anointed, who was the leader of congregation from 44 until his death. This alteration of the text changes Peter from a coward to a man of authority. All the more fascinating is that Paul nevertheless dared to take a stand against him. In the illustration we see what is written in the text: ‘I told him face to face that his conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel.’ Later-on, during the Middle Ages and up to the present day, this same image was transformed into the Roman unity of the two apostle princes.

Peter and Paul, fourth century, Roman catacomb.

35 S.C. Carlson: The Text of Galatians and Its History. WUNT II/385, Tübingen 2015, p. 252.

The First Editions

95

Who inserted and when that dash making an E from an O, remains unknown. But this distortion in the text did fit in nicely in a changing world: it was no longer Jews who were in a fraternal dispute about ritual matters, it was a man who stood up against the dissembling and hypocrisy of the Jews and defended Christianity and its freedom. That is also the world and the theme of the subsequent argument of Anonymous A, which immediately follows, from 2, 15: a fierce argument against the Jewish Law and in favour of the Christian faith and the liberation achieved by it from the letter of the mosaic Law, which is lethal and leads to slavery. The transition from verse 2, 14 (the last of Paul’s own words) to 2, 15 (a text construed half a century later) is the transition from not only two different worlds, but of two increasingly antagonistic worlds. Nevertheless, that transition has been put together very skilfully. It is the very first and also the best transition and it is well glossed over. Paul reproaches Peter, ‘if you, though a Jew’ like me. Anonymous A begins with: ‘We are Jews by birth.’ Paul reproaches Peter for not living in the Jewish way and therefore can hardly reproach the Greeks. Anonymous A elaborates on this contrast between Jews and Greeks. But what the conflict in Antioch was actually about remains unclear. The two preceding fragments of Paul’s texts dealt with preaching and circumcision. Here the text seems to be about dietary regulations. The homily of Anonymous A does not begin until 3, 1. The text between Paul’s statement and the homily is extraordinarily vehement and interposed as a connection between the two disparate texts36. We can attribute that to the editors, but the rather characteristic mè genoito – ‘certainly not!’ perhaps indicates the author; it is one of Anonymous A’s filler words37. We also come across it in Romans 3, 31 and 11, 1. Possibly it is an indication that the main author of the first edition of ‘the letters of Paul’, Anonymous A, was also an important editor of the texts.

36 37

Galatians 2, 15-21. Galatians 2, 17.

96

Chapter Five

Corinthians The two letters to the Corinthians acted as a kind of pastoral interlude between the first and then the concluding primary discussion of the relationship between the Jewish Law and the belief in God’s Anointed. The first letter opens with a short editorial introduction, salutation and greeting and then gives the floor to Paul himself with a carefully chosen text: about the party strife in Corinth38. Not that the editors were all that much interested in the conflict half a century ago in Corinth between factions and opinions that had long since disappeared (such as that of the Anabaptist sect of Apollos of Alexandria), but it provided an authoritative background for the discord at that time in Ephesus. This is followed by a text about immorality39. It is not really a text from a letter and therefore not by Paul, but a lively discourse. From 7, 1 to 10, 13 there is a series of texts from letters from Paul with answers to questions he had apparently received. To grab the attention of the readers the editors added first a text about a case of incest in the Corinthian Jewish community. Then there are all kinds of cases, usually introduced with a simple peri de, ‘about this’ and ‘about that’. They concern: a case of promiscuity; trials before pagan courts; fornication and bodily care; marriage and the suppression of desires; unmarried people; dealing with women; buying meat that had been used for sacrifices in the temples; and finally rules for the use of sacrificial meat. All still topical issues in Ephesus half a century later. Twice, probably, the editors intervene into this series of texts. The ninth chapter is a wide-ranging discourse on apostolic ministry, possibly by Paul or using his phrases, but it is more likely, as I argued above, to see it as an editorial discourse. The editors also intervene by means of an inserted passage in which they prohibit participation in pagan sacrificial meals40. In the last chapters of that first letter, hardly any space was given to Paul’s letters. The theologically most important texts are recognizable as originating from Anonymous A: in chapter eleven there is a treatise on the last words of the God’s Anointed at the last supper41 and the even more 38

I Corinthians 1, 1-10; 1, 11 – 4, 21 apart from 3, 17 and 4, 17. I Corinthians 5, 1 – 6, 11. 40 I Corinthians 10, 14-22. 41 I Corinthians 11, 17-33. 39

The First Editions

97

important text (aptly placed here, right in the middle of the collection of texts) about the victory over death42. Fascinating contributions are also the texts of chapters twelve and fourteen. The source of these texts remains unknown. There are no traces of the three authors known to us (Paul and the Anonymous A and B). First there is a comment about the relationship between mind and body (12, 131), followed by a text on prophecy43. What is also quite remarkable are the two women-unfriendly texts, texts that reflect the emerging male-dominated governance structure of the young church, with men of authority such as bishops, priests and deacons, and an aversion to the Jewish sect in which married men and also women could still play a significant role. They are crudely shoehorned into the texts without any apparent effort to include them in the run of an argument; they appear abruptly and are clearly out of place44. Finally a practical text by Paul was included: rules for the gatherings of the congregation45. Chapters thirteen – the Praise of Love – and sixteen were still missing. The second letter to the Corinthians also shows a confusing coherence which is difficult to unravel, a composition in which the themes change rapidly and melodies are included and suddenly cut off, passages with larghetto that suddenly change into vivace. The editors again provided a salutation and thanksgiving46. This is followed by a series of fragments from Paul’s letters, arranged in such a way that the original order can hardly be determined. Paul writes about his troubled relations with the Corinthians and his attempts to visit them once more. He explains quite comprehensively why the promised visit did not take place and when he then goes on to tell how he is going on his way to them, the Corinthians, again, the editors abruptly cut off his report with: ‘So I took leave of them and went on to Macedonia ( …).47‘

42

I Corinthians 15, 1-58 with omission of 15, 44-46 and 15, 56. I Corinthians 12, 1-31; 14, 1b-19 en 14, 37-40. 44 I Corinthians 11, 2-16b and 14, 34-36. 45 I Corinthians 14, 20-33. 46 II Corinthians 1, 1-7. 47 II Corinthians 1, 8 – 2, 13. 43

98

Chapter Five

Paul’s narrative continues more than five chapters later (I have been pointing this out several times in this book, but it is a vital interruption of the text. It conceals Paul’s exile by Gallio and his unsuccessful attempt to return to Corinth.) In between, the editorial included numerous deliberations about the apostolate: servitude to the New Covenant; maintaining confidence in adversity; that preaching must be aiming at reconciliation, and that an apostle’s work requires the endurance of much sorrow48. Then again, amongst all this two authentic fragments of Paul’s letters were included both of them emotional outburst of Paul, which, without the missing context, cannot be placed or understood49. In 7, 5 the thread of Paul’s account is taken up again: ‘For even when we came into Macedonia, our bodies had no rest, but we were afflicted at every turn, fighting without and fear within.’ The interrupted narrative is continued50. Paul’s text ends with him expressing gratitude: ‘I rejoice, because I have perfect confidence in you. 51‘ The subsequent chapters, eight and nine, contain letters about fundraising, which were not included in the first and second editions and only added to the text later52. Although 10, 1 opens with solemn words Autos de egǀ Paulos parakalǀ humas (…) – ‘I, Paul, myself entreat you (…),’ there is no further text of him to be found, Where for naive readers a declaration like ‘I, Paul, myself’, might be a sure sign that Paul himself is really addressing the reader, it does arouse the suspicion of any philologist. The text continues with a kind of mime, an entre-act with folly. ‘Really excellent Greek!’ readers may have sighed with satisfaction, but for the Jew Paul this was unthinkable, certainly in matters of anything sacred and preaching. Folly is brought on stage and boasting about itself is exuberantly performed. It is something from antiquity, but not Jewish antiquity. Fortunately, Paul never had to read it, as it was not written and attributed to him until half a century after his death. There was no trace of

48

II Corinthians 2, 14 – 7, 4. II Corinthians 6, 11, 13 and 7, 2-4. 50 II Corinthians 7, 5-16 51 II Corinthians 7, 16 52 II Corinthians 8, 1-24 and 9, 1-15. 49

The First Editions

99

this tenth chapter in the text of the second edition, only a vague reference to the concluding verse53. Possibly the text originally continued after the end of Paul’s texts54 – following which chapters eight, nine and ten were missing – with verse 11, 1. The chapters eleven and twelve were certainly not written by Paul. It is a jesting, boasting defence of folly, interspersed with vehement outbursts against these ‘false apostles – pseudapostoloi – deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as emissaries of God’s Anointed.’ The tirade is refined in the next verse: ‘Satan disguising himself as an angel of light. 55‘ The words of an inspired man, an accomplished author expressing himself in elaborate and well-structured sentences in which no reference to any Jewish text can be found for two chapters. It is by someone living in the world around the end of the first second century, full of dislike towards the apostles of Jerusalem, filled with anti-Judaism, bordering on antiSemitism. The abusive tirade ends with a threat: ‘Their end will correspond to their deeds.56‘ A clear reference to the downfall of Jerusalem and the massacre in which the first congregation of believers came to an end. The word for ‘liar’, ‘deceiver’, in verses 11, 13 in connection with the false apostolic emissaries also appears in verse 11, 26, where it is associated with the false brothers. There we find it in an overview of the life of Paul, a biography that is supposed to be autobiographical, but which was clearly not written before the death of Paul57. The end too, the short thirteenth chapter, is a disquisition about folly. The editors close with a blessing that articulates the positions of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit in a way that did not become common until well after the time of Paul58. The re-paintings of The Ghent Altarpiece by Jan van Eyck, its retouches and restorations, the layers of varnish, dirt and added paint are all part of the history of this painting, but we are glad to see it brought back to its original state. This fifteenth-century painting that once hung in a quiet 53

II Corinthians 10, 18. II Corinthians 7, 16. 55 II Corinthians 11, 13-14. 56 II Corinthians 11, 11-15. 57 II Corinthians 11, 16-29. 58 II Corinthians 13, 13. 54

100

Chapter Five

chapel was in a far better shape than first-century texts that were frequently used and upon which so much depended: theological presuppositions, morals and beliefs, dogmas and ecclesiastical authority.

Romans And finally there is Paul’s very short contribution in what would later be called the ‘letter to the Romans’. In the first edition the text still encompassed fourteen chapters, of which most were devoted to the three homilies of, successively, Anonymous A59, Anonymous B60 and again Anonymous A61 62. The ‘letter to the Romans’ opened with introduction by the editors63. Three fragments of text are usually indicated as originating from Paul’s correspondence with the Corinthians: - Romans 5, 1-11 (without 5, 7) - Romans 12, 1-21 (possibly without 12, 3) - Romans 13, 8-14. So, the first short fragment of Paul’s letter is not to be found before the fifth chapter: Romans 5, 1-11 (with the exception of the gloss 5, 7). But was this written by Paul? It is a contemplation on the wrath of God, skilfully articulated with rhetorical sophistication in Greek, in a style that has little to do with that of Paul. Moreover, it contains no reference to the mosaic Law, prophets or psalms which Paul frequently did. The second text fragment by Paul in ‘the letter to the Romans’ contains some admonitions to the community64. Believers must first of all serve God and subsequently also be willing to serve in the congregation of believers. They are urged to treat one another with compassion and love and to maintain unity. The third fragment of text, possibly written by Paul himself, contains further admonitions, based on the consideration that through love the Law 59

Romans 1, 18 – 4, 25. Romans 5, 17 – 8, 39. 61 Romans 9, 1 – 11, 36. 62 Please note: I present here these three sermons in their completed form, as they are today. This overview shows how they were slowly concocted. 63 Romans 1, 1-17. 64 Romans 12, 1-21, possibly without 12, 3. 60

The First Editions

101

is fulfilled65. Then there is an exhortation to be vigilant66. This last fragment of text was still absent in the edition of Marcion whereas the first – 13, 8–10 – is present; this text block also illustrates the Pauline characteristic of basing the arguments on the Jewish scriptures – in three verses there are two quotations from the Law. Such references are absent in the other text block, which is also filled with a sense of eschatological doom that is unusual for Paul: hè nux proekopsen, hè de hèmera engiken. Beautifully worded, ‘the night is far gone; the day is at hand. 67‘ That beautiful verb, prokoptein, is not a word we would expect to find in Paul’s letters. But it was actually used by him, and even in a quite prominent place, in his very first lines in the first edition: kai proekopton en tǀi ioudaismǀi – ‘the steady advancing in Judaism. 68‘ Is it remarkable that the editors here use Paul’s first words to round off the arc and close the collection of texts with a reference to them? Possibly. A consideration of exegesis would also be possible. For Paul the kingdom of God had come with the resurrection of God’s Anointed, and the night of death had gone. The collection of texts ended with what we know as Romans chapter fourteen (except for the later added verses 14, 7–10). It is a concluding, conciliatory argument by the editors about tolerance and an appeal not to offend. This first edition concluded with the simple phrase: hè charis meta pantǀn hagiǀn – ‘Joyful favour to all the saints.69‘ Both chapters fifteen and sixteen were still absent in the first and second editions.

5. The first appendix Around AD 120-125 Ephesus Probably the first edition fulfilled a pressing need for renewed apostolic authority and was therefore quite successful and was soon followed by an 65

Romans 13, 8-14. Romans 13, 11-14. 67 Romans 13, 12. 68 Galatians 1, 14. 69 Romans 14, 23. 66

102

Chapter Five

additional series of ‘Paul’s letters’. It is possible that the editors of this collection of texts, probably published in Ephesus around 120, again made use of surviving letters from Paul. But Paul never wrote these letters to the congregations of Thessaloniki, Philippi, Colossae, and Ephesus any more than he wrote the little note to Philemon. These were all constructed long after his death as his name had to provide provenance and authenticity. Initially the appendix contained the letter to the congregation at Philippi and the first letter to Thessaloniki. Those letters were preceded by a kind of introduction, the fictitious letter to the Colossian congregation. Apparently the editors were not quite happy with this text because the introduction was rewritten, becoming one that was partly identical, and partly totally different in tone to the letter to the congregation in Ephesus. This letter was given that destination later on, in the edition of Marcion it was still named as a letter to the faithful in Laodicea on the Lycus, a town in the hinterland of Ephesus. The first letter to Thessaloniki was also partly rewritten so that a second letter could be included. That second letter was largely identical to the first and seemed to be a duplicate but which concerned the parousia, the presence of God’s Anointed and took a position contrary to the first letter. Attached was a short letter of recommendation from the bishop of Ephesus, the note to Philemon70.

70

The letters of this first appendix, none of them by Paul, I will not discuss in this book. I wrote about them in a previous study: Ch. Vergeer: The Letters of the Apostle Paul. Controversies and Consequences. Cambridge S.P. 2017.

The First Editions

103

Fragment of the Canon Muratori with the letter to the Laodiceans, codex J 101 sup.Bibliotheca Ambrosiana, Milano.

6. The second edition Summer AD 144 Rome The second edition, provided by Marcion of Sinope came about in Rome in the summer of 144. There is a, now outdated, reconstruction of this second edition, published by Adolf von Harnack in 1920/2471. More recently, but not really much improved is the 1995 edition by U. Schmid72. Both attempts cannot actually reconstruct the edition itself, which was lost, 71 A. von Harnack: Marcion. Das Evangelium vom fremden Gott. Neue Studien zu Marcion. Berlin 1920, 1024. Reprinted: Darmstadt 1996. See: Beilage III: das Apostolikon Marcions. Pp. 40*-170*. 72 U. Schmid: Marcion und sein Apostolikon. Rekonstruktion und historische historische Einführung der Paulusbriefausgabe. Berlin/New York 1995. See: Beilage I: Der Tekst der marcioniiischen Apostolikon, pp. 1/313 - 1/344.

Chapter Five

104

but used the references or quotations from it. Everything that is missing in the first edition may of course have been there originally, but any evidence for that is lacking. In this second edition, for example, the three begging letters of Paul are missing73. Von Harnack employed the simple hypothesis that the heretic Marcion deleted everything that irritated him and by doing so would lend the letters a more Greek and less Jewish appearance. Texts about fundraising for the saints in Jerusalem supposedly displeased Marcion and were therefore left out by him. According to Von Harnack they would have been included in the first edition, but were left out of the second; they were preserved somewhere and were subsequently included again in later editions. As I have pointed out earlier, since then a century has passed and Von Harnack’s thesis has been adapted with better understanding of and appreciation for Marcion as editor of the text of the Corpus Paulinum. Concerning the three begging letters I mentioned, there are three tenable possibilities: 1.

2.

3.

73

The letters were originally included in the edition of Marcion. After all, we do not know that edition directly, but only through quotations, references, allusions, etc. made by other authors. It is possible that those authors considered the fundraising to be of no theological importance and so did not refer to them. But these texts do not only deal with financial matters, they are also about faith and authority. It is also possible that these three texts were indeed deleted by Marcion for reasons of his own, but that they would have been included in the first edition. Perhaps, but as there is no trace or any reference to those texts during the first two centuries, this is like groping around in complete darkness. It seems more than likely that these three begging letters ‘of Paul’s’ were absent in both the first and second editions and were not added until later, in the second century. There are some arguments supporting this, apart from them not being included in Marcion’s text. All three were not included within the text but pasted at the end. All three begin with the same odd phrase that

I Corinthians 16, 1–9; II Corinthians 8, 1–24 an II Corinthians 9, 1–15.

The First Editions

105

appeared only after the second edition in Galatians 1, 2: hǀsper dietaxa tais ekklèsiais tès Galatias – ‘the churches of Galatia74. In the letters the names of Titus and Timothy are mentioned with esteem75. These are exactly the two names that serve as addressees of the letters included in the second appendix. Then the author writes that he expects the Corinthians to reimburse his travel expenses76, while everywhere else Paul vehemently emphasizes that he never, ever wants to be a burden on the congregation. We also come across the word grègoreite – ‘be vigilant’, which is quite typical in the works of the authors after Paul77. There is a lot to be learned from words by looking at them from all sides. It raises the question: are these begging letters therefore by Paul or by a later editor? There are three options: 1. The texts that did not appear until the last half of the second century are authentic letters written by Paul himself which had somehow been preserved. 2. The texts were written by others and attributed to Paul. 3. The texts were written and rewritten by using recovered originals written by Paul himself. To this question a definite answer cannot be given. However, we can observe that the three added begging letters are probably related to the three letters to Timothy and Titus of the so-called second appendix. When I play a suite by Dietrich Buxtehude from around 1700 on the harpsichord in the evening, I read in the introduction that BuxWV 229 even though it appeared under his name in all editions, at least six stylistic peculiarities can be identified that suggest that this suite was actually written by Nicolas Lebègue. Why are musicians quite pleased with this kind of critical note, yet theologians and exegetes not in the least (more often than not)? Everything that is missing in this second edition was interpreted as having been deleted according to the reconstruction made by Adolf von Harnack of these texts at the beginning of last century. The heretic Marcion was supposed to have scratched all Jewish-friendly texts from the 74

I Corinthians 16, 1. II Corinthians 8, 16 and I Corinthians 16, 10. 76 I Corinthians 16, 6. 77 I Corinthians 16, 13. 75

Chapter Five

106

first edition in his reissue. After a century of further studies concerning the Marcionite texts, led to a different conclusion: Marcion did not really delete what he disliked; he simply did not have all texts available. They were texts that either had not come into his hands, or they had not yet surfaced or they had not yet been written78. But it is clear that this second edition still used the original order of the texts, beginning with what later became known as the letter to the Galatians, followed by the letters to the Corinthians and the Romans. There was no mention of the Galatians and the Romans as addressees; that was added later. All this was still titled Apostolikon and not ‘Letters from Paul’. What is also missing, apart from numerous later alterations and additions, notes and clarifications in the margins, is the following: x x x

x

x

the beginning of Paul’s autobiographical account79; the beginning of the first homily of Anonymous A, with its reproach of the Galatians; the comments about Abraham together with the extensive discourse about him80 and the later added explanation ‘I mean (…)’ about the heirs of Abraham 81; the rather personal piece beginning with: ‘I am afraid I may have laboured over you in vain’82. The text continued with the words tekna mou – ‘my children’ in 4, 19; the long quotation from Isaiah and the associated consideration which were only added later83.

An informative new edition of these texts was made by John I. Clabeau84. The first letter to the Corinthians appeared right from the beginning more or less in the shape we know it. Only the sixteenth chapter, with the first

78

J. BeDuhn: The New Marcion. Rethinking the ‘Arch-Heretic’. FORUM Third series 4, 2 Fall 2015, pp. 163 -179. 79 Galatians 1, 10-24. 80 Galatians 3, 15-25 and 3, 27-29. 81 Galatians 4, 1-2. 82 Galatians 4, 11-18. 83 Galatians 4, 27-30. 84 J.I. Clabeau: A Lost Edition of the Letters of Paul: A Reassessment of the Tekst of the Pauline Corpus Attested by Marcion. Washington D.C. 1995.

The First Editions

107

begging letter and the added recommendations and greetings, are missing85. Much more is missing from the second letter to the Corinthians: - chapters eight and nine, the two begging letters; - chapter ten apart from the closing verse 10, 18; - chapters eleven and twelve (apart from some scant indications); - the end with the greetings86. Finally, in the letter to the Romans, the following passages are missing in the second edition: o the quotation from the Old Testament 1, 17b; o the first homily began with an observation concerning the wrath of God87; o the text on worship of idols and immorality88. o the entire ending as we know it from 3, 21 to 4, 25. (the text of the first homily continued from 2, 2, except 2, 16); o chapter four and chapter nine; o chapters ten and eleven apart from some bits and pieces89; o chapters fifteen and sixteen, with the letters of Tertius, (they appeared later in the second or third century).

7. The second appendix Around AD 155 Ephesus (?) The second appendix appeared sometime during the middle of the second century. It contains three fictitious letters attributed to Paul, to Titus and both letters to Timothy. The place of publication is unknown. This appendix was unknown to Marcion of Sinope when he construed his second edition. As I indicated above, it is likely that the three begging letters ‘of Paul’ were then also added to the Corpus Paulinum.

85

I Corinthians 16, 1-9 and 16, 10-24. II Corinthians 13, 10-13. 87 II Corinthians 1, 18. 88 II Corinthians 1, 18 – 2, 1. 89 II Corinthians 10, 5 – 11, 43. 86

108

Chapter Five

It should be noted that the three letters to Timothy and Titus, because of their content, are considered as pastoral letters. In particular the attention to finances, which is lacking everywhere else, stands out and corresponds to the subject of the three begging letters: such as in I Timothy the admonition against those who want to enrich themselves and fall into the snare of greed and – further on in the text – the exhortations to the rich and the dangers of wealth90. Apart from inserting three letters and adding on three letters, this editorial team is probably also responsible for including the two misogynist passages. In any case, the provisions made in I Corinthians 14, 34-35 are practically identical with I Timothy 2, 11-12. It is fascinating that financial matters, travel plans, ordinances about the Church order, and attitudes toward women are attributed to Paul nearly a century after his death, thereby misrepresenting the real situation of his own day and congregation. Instead a stick is fashioned that will be used for over two thousand years to drive women from any authority within the church that they in reality aided to establish. It is also remarkable that here for the first time the words apo theou patros appeared in the opening lines that were so markedly added in the opening lines of Galatians, and were still missing in Marcion91. Also noteworthy is that other and unique reference to Galatians with: ‘Though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and insolent opponent92‘ It is also remarkable that Paul would write about himself as being a martyr of the proclamation: ‘For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. 93‘ Either this was written from Rome in captivity and after his appeal to the emperor was turned down, or, what is more than likely, written in Paul’s voice by an editor decades after his death.

90

I Timothy 6, 9 and 6, 13. Galatians 1, 1. 92 Galatians 1, 13 and 23; I Timothy 1, 13. 93 II Timothy 4, 6ff. 91

The First Editions

109

8. The canonized edition Third century Asia Minor As late as the third century, much was altered in the texts of Paul’s letters. Paul himself had died more than two centuries earlier, but his letters were still being altered and extended. Violet Moller recently pointed out again that in antiquity there were no books as we know them94. Each manuscript was unique and different. The first thing Cicero did when he wanted to publish the work of Lucretius was to ask here and there and especially his friend Atticus for reliable versions, which could then be compared. In addition to the many versions of the text, there were many commentaries on the text. Readers wrote something about a text, added marginalia, additions, corrections, summaries, comments, and so on, some of which were later adopted and incorporated into some copies of the text. Much changed in and about the text, not only quantitatively but also qualitatively. None of these changes can with certainty be identified in the subsequently canonised texts that are still used as authoritative today. The recently published twenty-eighth edition of the texts of the New Testament provided by Nestle and Aland is an indispensable book and an impressive scientific achievement. But it is also a form of optical illusion. The version of Paul’s letters that we now know and use was not established until the third century. That means, before the earliest papyri and manuscripts that are extant and well after the thorough editing of them that we are trying to portray here. There are at least three groups of editors identifiable for that third century:

-1The first editors active in the third century went to work thoroughly, altering the whole scheme. It is certain that the first edition in Ephesus and the second by Marcion did not open, as it did later, with the letter to the Romans. This is corroborated by the Canon Muratori, the remarks of

94 V. Moller: The Map of Knowledge: How Classical Ideas were Lost and Found. A History in Seven Cities. London 2020, p 31 vv.

110

Chapter Five

Epiphanius and Tertullian, and the structure of the collection of texts itself95. The first and second editions did open with the letter to the Galatians (which was not known as such at the time), followed by the letters to Corinth and closed with the one to the Romans. As such it opened with the highest claim to apostolic authority (all other letters have a less resounding opening, and the letters of Paul himself will in all probability have been even more modest in tone): ‘Paul, an apostle, not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Anointed (…)96. Whether the claim reached even higher remains uncertain. The following words, kai theou patros – ‘and God the Father’, are missing in Marcion’s second edition. Whether these words were there before and were deleted by Marcion or whether this unprecedentedly high claim to apostolic authority directly from God was added only later on cannot be established with certainty. It is clear that immediately after this statement, this clarion call about the constitutus apostolus, comes of course the statement with which Paul arrived in Ephesus: his confirmation in that office by the Arch-Apostles of Jerusalem and Judea. The attentive reader will notice that the heading ‘apostle, not from men, nor through man’ by the editors contradicts Paul’s own statement about his mission through the authority of Simon, James, and John97. It is only through these texts that the opening question of the following argument is legitimized: by what apostolic authority can it be decided how the new faith in God’s Anointed can compare and contrast with faithfulness to the Law of Moses? About those three simple words, kai theou patros, three observations. Adolf von Harnack, the first to make a reconstruction of the Marcionite text of the Apostolikon, left them in98. He started from the premise that Marcion was be a fiercely antiJewish Christian heretic and that he would therefore have deleted mention of the Jewish God from the text so that Paul’s apostolic authority would 95 M. Theobald: Der Römerbrief, Erträge der Förschung. Vol. 294, Darmstadt 2000, p. 7. 96 Galatians 1, 1. 97 Galatians 2, 9. 98 A. von Harnack: Marcion. Das Evangelium vom fremden Gott. / Neue Studien zu Marcion. Berlin 1920, 1024. Reprint: Darmstadt 1996. See: Beilage III: das Apostolikon Marcions. ‘der kontextuell völlig unangebrachte “Ketzerschluss” ‘.

The First Editions

111

come directly from Jesus Christ and not from Yahweh. The most recent reconstruction of this text, by Ulrich Schmid, leaves the words in, arguing that Paul was a devout Jew who primarily relied for his revelation and authority on God who had revealed himself through his Anointed99. Personally I believe that there are sufficient indications in the text of the first five verses of Galatians to see that this flamboyant label never appeared above a letter from Paul but was put above the first edition by the editors half a century after the death of the apostle. The verses are riddled with Christian expressions and any believing Jew would have written ‘because of the Eternal, the Father, and His Anointed’. The other way round, giving first place to Jesus Christ and – kai – then as second adding God the Father would be blasphemous. God the Father is mentioned in both the third and fourth verses, and there in the first or only place: ‘Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ’. The words kai theou patros were copied from both verses and, irresponsibly included in the text of the first verse. It is not so much an addition as an aberration, a turn of phrase that fortunately Paul himself never saw, neither did he see the opening words: ‘Paul (…) and all the brothers who are with me, to the churches of Galatia.100‘ This formula is also missing from the sources of the text for Marcion, where we can only find charis kai eirenè – ‘grace and peace’. Paul did, however, sometimes write his real letters in collaboration with co-workers, but nowhere does he speaks out as a bishop on behalf of the faithful of a congregation; he also addresses his letter to a community known to him, in Corinth, and not, as only later ecclesiastical leaders were able to do, to all the churches of Galatia. By changing the structure and the order the editors force us to interpret the texts in a fundamentally different way. It is no longer a collection of texts with sermons and letters from various authoritative persons on the relationship between Jews and Christians. The fall of the Temple and Holy City had wrought immense changes; no longer were there meaningful differences between those who wanted to remain faithful 99 U. Schmid: Marcion und sein Apostolikon. Rekonstruktion und historische Einordnung der marcionitischen Paulusbriefausgabe. Berlin/New York 1995, p. 1/315. 100 Galatians 1, 1-2.

112

Chapter Five

to the Covenant, Election and Law, and those who wanted to hold on to the new faith in God’s Anointed, the Spirit and love. The starting point was now the new Christian world religion was started from, and universal, worldwide claims were made, starting from Rome, the Greek and the other parts of the Roman Empire, from the civilized world. By giving priority to the letter to the Romans (in which hardly any letter fragments from Paul himself can be identified), the emphasis was primarily placed on a theological foundation and justification of the Christian faith. Through changing the original order of the text the third century editors disconnected the original coherence of the text and thus made it incomprehensible. Behind this new order there was certainly a target in the change of direction, the bull-eye being the capital of the Empire and the world: Rome, the subsequent ‘rings’ being the important harbour towns in Greece: Corinth, and finally ‘to the churches in Galatia101‘. This resulted in a kind of universal appeal, Urbi et Orbi. In addition these newly appointed addressees were also included in the text: ‘To the churches of Galatia’ was still missing in the second edition and also the admonishment ‘O foolish Galatians102‘ are missing in all sources of the second edition. And en Rǀmè, ‘in Rome’ and tois en Rǀmè were also missing in the original text103. Owing to the editors putting the letter to the Romans first, another intervention was then necessary. For the new order of the letters contained another element, that of beginning with the longest text, following with increasingly shorter texts and concluding with the short note to Philemon. However, in its original form, the letter to the Romans ended at 14, 23. But the first letter to the Corinthians had two more chapters, sixteen. Therefore a letter from a certain Tertius was placed at the end, the chapters fifteen and sixteen. It was thought that this Tertius must therefore be Paul’s secretary and had written down his words. But it is quite clear that the text is a letter from Corinth to the church at Ephesus and not the other way around. The editors’ work was rather slap-dash in this letter; out

101

Galatians 1, 2. Galatians 3, 1. 103 Romans 1, 7 and 1, 15. 102

The First Editions

113

of the blue the text included a list of heretics104 and owing to all the cutting and pasting the letter ends three times105.

-2A second set of editors in this time was closely related to their predecessors; these are known as the ecumenical editors. Any directions originally meant for Corinth or Ephesus were extended to include all churches. Some examples of this: ‘To those sanctified in Anointed Jesus called to be saints together with all those who in every place call upon the name of Anointed Jesus.’ ‘This is my rule in all the churches (…).’ ‘(…) nor do the churches of God. 106‘ In the second edition, that of Marcion (Rome 144), much was still missing that – as was assumed by Von Harnack – had been deleted by Marcion or, where there was no obvious reason to delete something, had been absent in the previous edition. Two different sets of editors can be distinguished. Here I would like to point out that the first ‘board’ of editors consisted of several men. The second ‘board’ of editors consisted of only one editor and in what follows the word ‘editors’ should be understood as the form the text was given. Later editors provided additions: they assented in what the authors (Anonymous A, Anonymous B and Paul) had written and supplemented it with supporting texts, additions, quotations or considerations. This editorial was Jewish in character, most of the additions being quotations from the Old Testament. The other editor, one person, is more negative in character, replacing, modifying or improving the original texts, such as both misogynist texts or the chapter in praise of love. This editor is more Greek in character.

-3First we look at the additional texts, now in the new order: the letter to the Romans now takes first place. In the title of Romans in 1, 2 was added: ‘Which he promised beforehand through his prophets in the holy 104

Romans 16, 17-20a. Romans 14, 23; 16, 24 and 16, 25-27. 106 I Corinthians 1, 2b; 7, 17b; 11, 16c; 14, 33. 105

114

Chapter Five

Scriptures.’ The same applies to 1, 17b: ‘ (…) as it is written (…)’, followed by a quotation from Habakuk. The text on idolatry and morality (1, 19-32) is still missing in the second edition and was not added until the end of the second or the beginning of the third century107. Verses 2, 1 and 2, 16, both about the last judgment by God were also added. An extensive addition is the third chapter from 3, 21 and the entire fourth chapter. It deals with the far-reaching consequences of the preceding homily: only faith in God’s Anointed provides justice. The firm position is taken that only faith can save and provide righteousness. For, is God not a God only of the Jews but also of the Greeks? There is only one God after all108. The fourth chapter contains a solid substantiation for the foregoing through a treatise on Abraham, who was justified not by the Law (which was not given until five centuries later) but by faith. Chapters fifteen and sixteen are completely missing in the first two editions and were only added when the letter to the Romans was given first place, the place of honour. They contain a letter by a certain Tertius from Corinth to the congregation in Ephesus. Also an exhortation to maintain unity and an account of his missionary journey and his intentions for the near future. At the end there are two long lists of fellow believers at Ephesus. The first letter to the Corinthians can be found almost complete in Marcion. It concludes with the extensive and magnificent speech of Anonymous A about the victory over death109. Later, chapter sixteen was added, with the first begging letter and some comments about future travel plans, recommendations and greetings110. In the second letter to the Corinthians, chapters eight and nine with the second and third begging letters are not included. The Marcionite text of 4, 21-26 in the letter to the Galatians, was replaced by the current one. Which of the two is the original remains uncertain. Maybe neither. The quotation and subsequent verses 4, 27–30 are still missing in the second edition and were added later.

107

Romans 1, 19-32. Romans 3, 29-30. 109 I Corinthians 15. 110 I Corinthians 16, 1-23. 108

The First Editions

115

-4The more aggressive, corrective editing, more Greek in character, of course, contributed to removing the texts further away from the earlier sphere of Judaism and to take on a more Greek atmosphere. The entire ninth chapter of Romans is missing, also in the second edition. It is a later addition, the underlying theology of which also clearly reflects a later stage in the development of the faith: it concerns the relationship between Israel and other nations. God is completely sovereign and His will is inscrutable. Follow again by the example of Abraham, who owed his election not to human merits but only to the unfathomable will of God. Then there is the harsh conclusion: Israel, the Jews have not accepted and followed God’s Anointed, ‘Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense; and whoever believes in God’s Anointed will not be put to shame.111‘ Practically the entire tenth and eleventh chapters are still missing in the second edition112. It is the most vehement anti-Jewish discourse of the entire volume: Israel has not lent faith to the Anointed sent by God. Though Israel was not quite rejected by God, Greeks and Jews alike should be modest and have hope in God’s mercifulness. As I mentioned earlier, chapters eight and nine are missing in the second letter to the Corinthians. Also chapter ten, apart from the closing verse 10, 18. It is a clever rhetorical argument with first a defence against the accusation of weakness and then the contrary, a defence against the accusation of blatant ambition.

-5In antiquity books were far from finished when they were made public. Only then would they come across readers and authors who added comments and made changes. Cicero asked his friends if they had other, perhaps even better, copies of ‘the same’ text. Book pages nowadays have far narrower margins than was often the case in antiquity. In that space there was room for comments, changes, additions, improvements and adulterations, corrections and corruptions.

111 112

Romans 9, 33. Romans 10, 5 – 11, 32.

116

Chapter Five

As a result, there was no copy that was the same as any other copy. This gives us the fifth layer, the notes in the margin, the glosses. Quite a remarkable one can be found in the first letter to the Corinthians where Paul speaks about the disputes between factions in Corinth. There is disagreement and bad feeling between the followers of Kèphas, the official church of Jerusalem, those of Apollos, an Anabaptist movement from Alexandria, and those of Paul. A reader expresses his aversion of all this discontent, which had long been settled in his day, and wrote in the margin: ‘I follow God’s Anointed!113‘ My Dutch Catholic Willibrord translation goes even further in corrupting the text by adding the heading ‘the four factions’. Glosses can be found, but should be cleared from the text: - ‘For one will scarcely die for a righteous person, though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die.’ - ‘(…) you have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed.’ - ‘So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin.’ - ‘For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh. 114‘ Quite a special gloss is: Alètheian legǀ en christǀi, ou pseudomai, ‘I am speaking the truth in God’s Anointed, I am not lying! 115‘ Apparently, the inserted text of chapter nine on God’s calling of the Greeks and rejection of the Jews had met so much opposition that this authoritarian affirmation was necessary. We come across the same assurance in II Corinthians 11, 31. Item 10, 17: ‘So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of God’s Anointed.’ Item 12, 4: Possibly this comment about servitude to the congregation concerns a later gloss. Item 13, 5: a further editorial explanation or a gloss from a reader: ‘Therefore one must be in subjection, not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience.’ 113

I Corinthians 1, 12c. Romans 5, 7; 6, 17c; 7, 25b; 8, 3. 115 Romans 9, 1. 114

The First Editions

117

In the first letter to the Corinthians the following glosses can be found, written in the margin at some time and should therefore be cleared from the text: - The enthusiastic exclamation: ‘I follow God’s Anointed!’ - After the short philosophical statement mèden to heautou zèteitǀ. ‘Let no one seek his own good’, someone later added: alla to tou heterou ‘but the good of the other’. - The too succinct summary Diǀkete tèn agapen, ‘Pursue love.116‘ In the second letter to the Corinthians we can notice the following glosses: - ho de kurios to pneuma estin. Hou de the to pneuma kuriou eleutheria, ‘Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom.’ A very odd dogmatic slip of the pen for which we could blame Paul, but which he would indignantly reject. - Probably the same reader also raised a pedantic finger after the sentences about the relationship between God’s Anointed and God: kathaper apo kuriou pneumatos, ‘for this comes from the Lord who is the Spirit.’ - A comment that crept in later: dia pisteǀs gar peripatoumen ou dia eidous, ‘for we walk by faith, not by sight.’ - An important passage in the text where it matters whether we attribute these words to Paul or to another writer or, as I do, is considered to be a later comment that has wrongly entered the text. Hõste hèmeis apo tou nun oudena oidamen kata sarka, ei gar egnǀkamen kata sarka Christon, alla nun ouketi ginǀskomen, ‘From now on, therefore, we regard no one according to the flesh. Even though we once regarded Christ according to the flesh, we regard him thus no longer.’ This remark was at times used to claim that Paul once met Jesus in person117. Finally, there is another obvious gloss in Galatians 4, 25a, showing how far removed the later Greek readers were from the original Jewish texts: ‘Mount Sinai is in Arabia.118‘ Just like every Catholics in the world knows

116

I Corinthians 1, 12c; 10, 24b and 14, 1a. II Corinthians 3, 17; 3, 18c; 5, 7 and 5, 16. 118 Galatians 4, 25a. 117

118

Chapter Five

where Rome is, every Jew knew that the Law had been received on Sinai, but for Greeks that had already become Farawayistan. As late as the end of the fourth century, the Greek, Syrian and Latin churches used different criteria for the canonization of the texts of the New Testament. Concerning all the text editions and changes mentioned above nothing can be found in the superb and indispensable 28th edition of Nestle-Aland119, for the simple reason that the papyri and other finds, even the earliest found in the Egyptian desert sands leave us empty handed. The earliest available texts of the letters of Paul letters are in P46, a manuscript found at Fayoum together with P45 and P47. It contains the Alexandrian text of Paul’s letters. When it was written remains controversial, but it was most likely at the beginning of the third century. There is a fascinating study by G. Zuntz dealing with it, which mainly shows the near-finished version of Paul’s letters, but does not mention the many edits and changes of the text that were made in the century and a half that preceded this codex120. ‘What in Being and Time is called ‘Destruction’ means: removal of the concealments that an historical tradition has placed over tradition. Removal as the liberation of what remains121.

119

Nestle-Aland: Novum Testamentum Graece, 28-ste edition, in the apparatus criticus there are a large number of notes from Editio Critica Maior. 2012. See Also D. Trobisch: A Readers Guide to the 28-the Edition of Nestle – Aland: The Greek New testament. Society of Biblical Studies, 2013. 120 G. Zuntz: The Text of the Epistles. A Disquisition upon the Corpus Paulinum. Eugene/Oregon 2007. 121 M. Heidegger: Vigiliae und Nottorno. Gesamtausgabe Vol. 100, Frankfurt am Main 2020, p. 269, ‘Was in “Sein und Zeit” Destruktion heisst: Ab-bau der Verdeckungen, die eine historische Tradition über die Überlieferung gelegt hat. Abbau als Befreiung des Bleibenden (…)..

C

CHAPTER SIX FRAYS AND FRINGES

There are two ways of approaching, meeting or passing by Paul. The Judaic Law undoubtedly plays a major role in the Corpus Paulinum. The word ‘Law’ occurs 119 times. We do not know what Paul had to say about the Law. After all, he spoke Aramaic and would talk about the ‘Torah’. We only have the texts written in koinè that refer to ho nomos. Franz Rosenzweig and Martin Buber pointed out the profound difference in meaning: the difference between law and wisdom, the obligation dictated by the rules of the Law, and the instructions on how to live and act justly. Since we translate Torah as nomos, ‘law’, it was presupposed that Paul was referring to the Law as a set of imperative rules and regulations. That opened up the possibility that he saw a conflict arising between the letter of the Law and the freedom of faith. But such a conflict involving anti-Jewish opinions would simply be inconceivable for Paul. Moreover, the translation by ho nomos gave rise to a difficulty, which is already spoken out in the book of Acts by the proconsul Gallio: if it concerns violations of the law – then I will pass judgement – but it concerns your Law (of Moses) then I will let it be1. Pontius Pilate was also aware of this difference by condemning Jesus because he called himself King of Judea, but also by not making a statement about Jesus who called himself Son of the Father (Barabbas).

1

Acts 18, 14-15.

Frays and fringes

121

Codex purpureus Rossanensis, possibly made in Antioch around 550. A classically styled illustration of the trial of Jesus. Pilate presides over the court in the name of the consuls. (Museo Diocesano Rossano Calabrië, Italië)

So not only are the letters of Paul not about the Law or ‘a’ law, but about the Torah. There is also further confusion about the laws of the Romans and those of God. For two thousand years people have been disputing about Paul and the Law. Not surprising: in more than a hundred quotations quite a few contradictions are expressed. To date, the exegetes and theologians have are divided into two camps. According to some, Paul was a law-abiding Jew who adhered to the Law of Moses. According to others, Paul proclaimed the freedom of the faith in Christ, a faith that set us free from the letter of the Law that kills, the cause of sin. And there are many interpretations in between these two opposites. Anyone who believes that all letters in the Corpus Paulinum were written by Paul himself will never get out of these kinds of difficulties and absurdities. Those who are willing to consider that only a small part of the texts were written by Paul and most of it was attributed to him by others well after his death are able to observe that Paul was indeed a devout Jew and the Deutero-Paulinists were Christians who were becoming more and more anti-Jewish. Then we even have to take a step further: for Paul the Law of Moses was so self-evident that he hardly reflected on it in his letters. It was not a problematic item for him at all.

122

Chapter Six

Since Erasmus it has become clear that philology must precede theology: an adequate interpretation of the texts can only be made based on correct texts. Lumping everything together leads to absurdities. These can be seen all over the texts. Let us look for example at an interesting: Paul. The Pagans Apostle2. Erasmus already wrote: ‘I see how our apostle Paul made an effort to rid Christ of Judaism3.’ In her book, Paula Fredriksen writes that Paul claims to have been delivered from the Law of Moses4. But a few lines later she reminds us that the same Paul claims to have taken the forty-minus-one lashings five times5. But that is a punishment for offenses against the Jewish Law, not for those who would have freed themselves from it. Why lump real texts by Paul about his relationship to the authorities in Jerusalem with a fierce pamphlet about the relationship between Jewish Law and Christian faith6? A text that was not written until half a century after the death of Paul. In her exposition on Paul and the Law, Fredriksen points out that there are both vehemently negative texts and appreciative statements concerning the Jewish Law in the Corpus Paulinum7. That is true, and as a matter of fact, also quite odd. Such a shift might be possible in authors with an extensive oeuvre, in which developments can be identified over many years. Paul’s letters were written in a relatively short time period, between the years 51 to 55. One would really have to go to great lengths to reconcile all those clearly contradictory texts. Or one would have to accept that among the authentic fragments of Paul’s letters, later editorial additions and different opinions were included. Fredriksen shows that she is unwilling to consider the latter. At the end of her study she points out that all of Paul’s statements should be weighed as being directed to a particular target group. ‘All of his extant letters are addressed to gentiles,’ she states once more8.

2

P. Fredriksen: Paul: The Pagans Apostle. Yale U.P. 2017. Opus Epistolarum Des. Erasmi Roterodami, Ep. 541 To Wolfgang Faber Capito, Antwerp February 26 1517. 4 P. Fredriksen p 110; Galatians 2, 19. 5 I Corinthians 11, 24. 6 Galatians 2, 15 – 5, 12. 7 P. Fredriksen, pp 94-130. 8 P. Fredriksen p 130. 3

Frays and fringes

123

Hèmeis phusei Ioudaioi kai ouk ex ethnǀn hamartǀloi, we read in Galatians 2, 15: ‘We’ that is to say I, the writer of the letter and you, the congregation to whom I address it, ‘ourselves are Jews by birth’ true to the Law of Moses, ‘and not Gentile sinners.’ Hamartia is idolatria, worshipping many idols. And this is immediately followed by the most ardent part in Paul’s letters about the Law, the bearer of sin and death, the Law from which Christians were set free by their faith. Not only what Paul is writing but also to whom he is addressing it, is then comprehensible. Fredriksen points out that Paul’s texts can only be understood if we consider the audience they were intended for: his Gentile audience’9. Let us take a closer look at Paul’s audience. In the letters to the Romans and to the Galatians we find mention of the Law – nomos – 30 and 20 times respectively. Only four times in the letters to Corinth. Why this disproportionality? According to Fredriksen, Thessalonians is the earliest preserved of Paul’s letters and the one to the Romans his last piece of writing10. She founds this opinion on the account of the travels in Acts: the mission in Europe began in Thessaloniki and ended in Rome. That is no well-based argument, and with it all arguments and results of the last twenty years of exegesis and philology are unjustifiably ignored. The first twelve statements about the Law are to be found in the first homily on the significance of history for Israel. Someone answers that in a second homily, about the new life ‘in God’s Anointed’. This contains fifteen references to the Law. In a kind of sequel to the first homily, the author takes the floor again11. The word nomos is used twice more in it. Those are twenty-nine statements that are not by Paul but only one by Paul himself: ‘for the one who loves another has fulfilled the Law.12‘ The main source of the statements about the Law is the text that begins with Galatians 2, 15. No fewer than twenty mentions and most ardent in content: the Law as the cause of sin and death, the Law from which faith set us free. A text in which the same hand can be recognized as the author of the first and third homily included in the letter to the Romans. 9

P. Fredriksen p 129. P. Fredriksen p 132. 11 Romans 1, 18 – 4, 25 and 5, 12 – 8, 38 and 9, 1 – 11, 36. 12 Romeinen 13, 8 repeated by a later copyist repeated in the margin in 13, 10. 10

124

Chapter Six

Only the four statements about the Law in the two letters remain and these are to the Corinthians by Paul himself. All four are in the first letter and none of them of great importance. That is to say, Paul himself had no controversial views on the Law of Moses, but the texts around the turn of the first century reflect a fierce discussion about the status of the Jewish Law, and that discussion grew even more intense in subsequent centuries. But the standpoint taken by Fredriksen about Paul and the Law have nothing to do with Paul. In the Postcriptum, we read in summary: ‘Paul’s tireless and wide-ranging effort at pagan recruitment; his insistence on maintaining ethnic distinctions.13‘ But in Galatians 3, 28 a fierce argument is summed up with the slogan, ‘There is neither Jew nor Greek.’ This kind of confusion has harassed theologians for centuries. It is not Paul’s fault but that of later believers, of editors and other people who collated the Corpus Paulinum, including texts by him, but also texts that are different – often even contrary to Paul’s own views. The Corpus is not really a collection of letters by Paul, but a collection of rather heterogeneous texts, varying in time and points of view. In his third letter, whether authentic or not, Plato writes that he wrote several prefaces to his Laws. He later made changes in them and added passages. Moreover, he writes that he had heard that several others had also added and changed passages. ‘But,’ he writes, ‘anyone who is able to judge what is characteristic of me – to emon èthos – will have no problem deciding what is theirs and what is mine.14‘ That is the point: learning to recognize the voice of Paul himself in all those texts written by him or later attributed to him. As I wrote above, Paul himself hardly mentions anything about the Law, the Jewish Law of Moses. He knows and acknowledges it, lives according to it, and in his instructions to the congregation he relies on quotations from Deuteronomy, prophets, and scriptures. Of course, the coming of the king and the kingdom created a tension between Law, covenant and promise on the one hand, and faith in God’s Anointed on the other. Later in this book I shall deal with this famous text, a core text of the Corpus Paulinum, but of which Paul’s authorship was refuted15. It wasn’t 13

P. Fredriksen: Paul: The Pagans Apostle, p. 167. Platonis Opera, Ed. I. Burnet, Oxonii 317a. 15 See: Chapter 8 The victory over death. 14

Frays and fringes

125

Paul but an editor from around the turn of the first century who found the formula for this: a construction that remains extremely ambiguous. With the coming of God’s Anointed, ‘every rule and every authority and power’ is dethroned, invalidated.16 This author is no longer talking about the coming of the kingdom of God through the coming of God’s Anointed, but about the second coming of the Lord Jesus17. That second coming, the coming of the Kingdom of God, is the purpose, intention, intended completion, the end – telos – of the Law. For that abrogation, invalidation of the Law and all other dominions, powers and forces through the second coming, the writer uses the verb katargein. Hotan katargèsèi pasan archèn, kai pasan exousian kai dunamin18. Giorgio Agamben points out that Luther here translates katargein as ‘Aufheben’ and that Hegel picked up that word and used it as the word to set modern philosophy in motion19. ‘(…) a basic determination of philosophy with the double sense of receiving and ending it.20‘ Kat-argeǀ means ‘to leave alone’, ‘to halt’, ‘to put out of action’, ‘to set free’, ‘to let go’. Perhaps the audience in Ephesus at that time also thought of the Roman military title evocatus. Someone who was dismissed from service but still fulfilled important assignments, such as the Evocati Augusti21. The same words and idea about the abolition of the Law can be found in the first sermon included in the epistle to the Romans22. With which we have an important indication that this text, chapter fifteen of the first letter to the Corinthians (the core of the first volume of texts, including the important texts at the beginning – Galatians from chapter 3 –

16

I Corinthians 15, 24. Mark 1, 15. 18 I Corinthians 15, 24. See also: R. Bultmann: Christus des Gesetzes Ende. In: Glauben und Verstehen, second vol., pp. 32-58, Tübingen 1965. 19 G. Agamben: L’usa dei corpi, Vicenza 2014, p. 273. 20 G.W.F. Hegel: Wissenschaft der Logik, Werke in zwanzig Bände 5, p. 114: ‘(…) eine Grundbestimmung der Philosophie mit dem gedoppelten Sinn von Erhalten und ein Ende Machen.’ 21 Jerome translates in Romans 2, 6 katargèmen with evacuari. 22 Romans 2, 6. 17

126

Chapter Six

and the end, both sermons being recorded in Romans) was written by the principal writer of the Corpus Paulinum, Anonymous A. By far the most important writer of ‘Paul’s letters’ lived, preached and wrote a generation after Paul’s death and remained unknown. He does the same with Paul’s texts as he does with the Jewish Law, evoke and complete it, let it be heard and then contradict it. He remains hidden between the lines, the founder of Christianity: Anonymous A. Apart from all the problems raised by this, it also opens possibilities. It is noteworthy that the expression ‘the law of ‘God’s Anointed’ is used twice. The Law of Moses and the laws of the Romans, that is quite understandable, but what is really meant by ton nomon tou Christou? Had not the belief in Christ delivered us from the Law? We might consider it as a later, late, form of the formulation of the Christian faith against Jewish Law. But it can also be taken in a different way. Among the 119 entries of the word ‘Law’ this peculiar formula, ‘the Law of God’s Anointed,’ is used only twice. Once in Galatians 6, 2, there it is part of an ardent argument (beginning with Galatians 5, 13) in which Christian freedom is contrasted with Jewish circumcision. This is a text by Anonymous B written decades after Paul’s death. The second time it is found in I Corinthians 9, 21. In an earlier work I had already provided this text with a question mark: whether or not it had been written by Paul23. It again has to do with the same theme that is also broached in the other text: Christian freedom as elucidated here in connection with the other theme so important to the editor: the apostolic authority, forcefully and hostile put in contrast with the Jewish authority in Jerusalem. The verses just before the formula ‘the law of God’s Anointed’ are very much out of character and are acerbic, and don’t really fit the style of the upright Law-abiding Jew Paul. In addition, they are rhetorically worded: ‘To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law that I might win those under the law. (though not being myself under the law) To those outside the law I became as one outside the law < > that I might win those outside the law. 23 Ch. Vergeer: Geschreven en toegeschreven. De teksten van Paulus. Budel 2013, p. 134.

Frays and fringes

127

To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some.24‘ That is rhetoric, hollow and opportunistic, and a disgraceful blemish on the real Paul. I substituted verse 9, 21 with < >, it is the comment about being under the Law of Christ because it is a insertion in the text and a violation of the rhetorical structure. Anyone who is convinced that all the letters published over many centuries under Paul’s name had indeed been written by Paul himself will be unwilling to see the obvious difference in style between written and spoken text. Whereas Paul’s normal style of writing letters is to answer questions presented to him, the text of 1 Corinthians 9 starts off quite differently with a series of questions fired in front of an audience: ‘Am I not free? Am I not an apostle?’ and so forth in an outpouring of interrogative questions. In thirteen verses I count thirteen question marks, and there are some sentences with exclamation marks, real exclamations directed at listeners present. Characteristic of Paul’s style in his letters is his habit to refer to a text from the Torah or the prophets after every two or three sentences. Here, in a chapter of twenty-seven verses, there is just one short quotation: ‘You shall not muzzle an ox when it treads out the grain.25‘ The explanation is clumsy, almost comic: ‘Is it for oxen that God is concerned? It was written for our sake (…).26‘ The text of chapter nine starts off with three challenging questions: Ouk eimi – ‘am I not free?’ Ouk eimi – ‘am I not an apostle?’ Ouchi – ‘have I not seen Jesus our Lord?27‘ As the text that follows deals only with apostolic authority and the privileges associated with it, we may assume that the text began with the second question and that the first question was not put in until later by a reader or copyist. Be that as it may, remarkable is the claim to apostolic 24

I Corinthians 9, 20-22. I Corinthians 9, 9; Deuteronomy 25, 4. 26 I Corinthians 9, 9-10. 27 I Corinthians 9, 1. 25

128

Chapter Six

authority and the privilege attached thereto, by virtue of having seen – heǀraka – Jesus. So it says, quite blatantly: ‘Have I not seen Jesus?” Horaǀ, ‘to see’, to look at’, in Latin videtur. Paul never saw Jesus. He himself uses the formula: ‘But when He who had set me apart before I was born and who called me by His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son to me – apokalupsai ton huion autou en emoi – in order that I might preach him among the nations (…).28‘ A revelation from God. Not an appearance of a visible figure before Paul’s eyes, but a revelation – en emoi – ‘in me’. The scholia in the text are evident: apokalupsai (…) en emoi; revelare (…) in me, in mente mea29. Nor is it said in the well-known chapter fifteen of the first letter to the Corinthians, where the earliest formula of faith about the victory over death is expressed, that Jesus could be seen again, alive and well. It says ophthè, the passive form of the aorist of horaǀ with a dative: he showed himself, he became visible. It is God who effectuated something and presented it to a person. No man can see it with his eyes. Here the Jewish faith of Paul: only the One and Eternal, the Living One who can cross the line between life and death, has given way to a Christian content: Jesus Christ rose up from the dead and appeared to a number of people. Those people were able to claim apostolic authority based upon that appearance, that vision. The remainder of the chapter deals with the privileges of this apostolate. Whereas Paul himself, in the beginning of the epistle to the Galatians, derives his mission and authority from the agreement – concordia – with the Arch-Apostles in Jerusalem, here the text vilifies those apostles, followers and relatives of Jesus including the leader of the congregation Simon the Kèphas. The issue of taking sisters or wives on journeys and the funding of those journeys and visits is specifically brought up. Even though Paul wrote in the preceding seventh chapter that it was better for a believer not to marry, taking women on a journey and charging travel and

28

Galatians 1, 15-16. Scholia in Novum Testamentum, Ed. G. Rosenmüller, Norimbergae, MDCCCXXX, ad. Loc 29

Frays and fringes

129

accommodation expenses to the believers this sounds like a heavy reproach. It is also striking that instead of references to the Judaic Law, as Paul usually does, comparisons here are made first with soldiers going to battle, then with runners in a stadium and then also with boxers in the ring who fight for prize money30. ‘I buffet my body’: hupǀpiazǀ, a wrestling term, ‘to sock someone in the eye’. Anyone who believes that this is the language of the devout Jew Paul has a lot to explain.

Detail of the Gladiator-mosaic. Found just outside Rome in 1834. (Villa Borghese, Rome)

Anyone who tells lies ought to be aware that it is much more difficult to maintain them than the actual truth. It is the same with writing and attributing. Philologists do know that a real story is more solid than a fictitious one. Anyone who fakes something knows that and tries to add something extra to suggest an appearance of authenticity. And that is often

30

I Corinthians 9, 7; 9, 24-27; 9, 26.

130

Chapter Six

their downfall. The forger adds ‘real life’ details, which should provide certainty but more often than not cause the forger to be unmasked. Examples are: ‘See with what large letters I am writing to you with my own hand.31‘ Or: ‘I, Paul, write this greeting with my own hand. This is the sign of genuineness in every letter of mine; it is the way I write.32‘ And: ‘When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments.33‘ Similarly here. The writer is going on about apostolic authority and the associated privileges. In the allegations against the followers, relatives and apostles of Jerusalem, there is suddenly a rhetorical question: ‘Or is it only I and Barnabas who have no right to refrain from working for a living? 34‘ This is where the forger slips. After all, he attempts to instigate that Paul wrote this to the congregation at Corinth in about 53-54. But Acts gives a detailed account of the cooperation between Paul and Barnabas and their missions and journeys, and of their serious conflict resulting in the end of their cooperation35. That means a number of things, some indisputably, others formulated with hesitations. First, according to Acts, it is not true that Paul would be able to complain in the fifties of the first century about a situation that ended a decade earlier. What on earth moved the author to write ‘Barnabas and I’? That says something about the way of editing the first volume of Paul’s texts. The editors were focused on the apostolic authority and therefore they put the letter to the Galatians first; in this the opening lines contain an absolute claim to apostolic authority, followed by an account of Paul’s journey to Jerusalem where he received the authority from the ArchApostles to spread the faith. That text had already been extensively corrected, or corrupted, and transformed into a text in which the contraposition, the conflict between Paul and the apostles of Jerusalem under the leadership of Simon the 31

Galatians 6, 11. II Thessalonians 3, 17. 33 II Timothy 4, 13. 34 I Corinthians 9, 6. 35 Acts 15, 22-39. 32

Frays and fringes

131

Kèphas, is dealt with. That text also refers to the collaboration of Paul and Barnabas (in the year 44): ‘Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas (…)36‘ and ‘and [those] who seemed to be pillars (…) gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me (…) as a gesture of agreement37. It is in all likelihood a confirmation, or rather an extra indication that by the turn of the first century the editors in Ephesus did not yet have the text of Acts by Luke at their disposal. Just as there is no indication in Acts that the author was familiar with the text of Paul’s letters. Perhaps I ought to point out something else, perhaps a mere detail, but often truth is hidden in the smallest corners. The writer of chapter nine of the first letter to the Corinthians considered Paul to be very important and thus quite unabashedly writes ‘I and Barnabas’. The writer of Acts was more aware of the high rank and prestige of Barnabas and constantly refers to ‘Barnabas and Saul.38‘ Only after the visit to Cyprus – where Barnabas was a large landowner – to the proconsul Sergius Paul us and the abrupt change of name from Saul to Paul39, does the author of Acts change the order to ‘Paul and Barnabas40‘.

36

Galatians 2, 1. Galatians 2, 9. 38 Acts 9, 27; 11, 22 end 30; 12, 25; 13, 1 and 2 and 7. 39 Acts 13, 9. 40 Acts 13, 43 and 46 and 50 37

CHAPTER SEVEN A THORN IN THE FLESH

One of Paul’s most controversial texts is the testimony about himself: ‘(…) a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me (…).1‘ The word used here, skolops, is not found anywhere else in the New Testament. It is usually translated as ‘a thorn’ (in the flesh) but it really means a ‘stake’ or a ‘pole’ (from a palisade). Apparently this wording was impossible to consider for at least three reasons: The ‘thorn’ yielded several possible references to the Old Testament2, the palisade did not. A thorn can be stuck into the flesh, part of a palisade cannot. Not unless we are willing to consider obscenities such as that found in Apocolocyntosis Divi Claudii of Seneca (Paul’s contemporary) where we read about the ‘pumpkinifying’ of the deified Claudius. Or anal entertainment by inserting a pole. None of those three reasons makes any sense: both because there is no thorn but a stake or pole, and because there is absolutely no mention of ‘in the flesh.’ ‘En – in’ is missing in the text where tèi sarki is written. Therefore a dativus (female singular) which can be translated as ‘at’ or ‘on. ‘The verb used is edothè, aoristus passivum of didǀnai meaning ‘to give’ ‘to impose’ or ‘to lay on (someone)’. There has been quite a to-do from the early church fathers onwards: Tertullian, Jerome, Cyprian and which continued right up from Luther to Freud. What was the meaning: a phallic symbol, struggles of ‘the flesh’, lust and sexuality? Perhaps an allusion to the epilepsy by which Paul might be inflicted (after all, he did fall off his horse)? A psychological or spiritual explanation does not appear to be an obvious choice because of the

1 2

II Corinthians 12, 7. Ch. Vergeer: De doornenknaap. Middelburg 1996, passim.

A thorn in the flesh

133

explicit ‘moi (…) tèi sarki – me (…) the flesh’, with the connotation of ‘my soft flesh, my unhardened body’. If we were to translate skolops with ‘stake’, ‘pole’ or ‘fence post’ the Latin equivalent looms up: sudis (plural sudes) a pole sharpened at both ends. A Roman legionary had to carry such a pole while marching with the objective to enable the rapid erecting of a palisade to protected the camp at the end of the day. The diabolical messenger (whatever or whoever may here be referred) ‘laid a fence post on my unhardened body.’ The text is part of a fierce and skimping argument about the authority with which the apostle is invested to preach the gospel, sharply opposing ‘those super-apostles.3‘ The entire argument is a mimos or satire, a mockery, and a glorification of folly. It is loaded with manufactured rhetoric such as: ‘when I am weak, then I am strong.4‘ This is not Paul writing it in a letter from the early fifties to the congregation at Corinth, but the Anonymous A is speaking here in Ephesus at the turn of the first century. It is the man who, very much unlike Paul, finds his comparisons and clarifications in Greek city life: soldiers, runners and boxers. Here too he depicts what everyone in Ephesus would be able to observe every day – and which Paul had no regard for – soldiers, marching and carrying heavy loads which were hanging from a wooden stake which would be used to construct the palisade. In this way he symbolized his evangelical, apostolic task for his listeners: a heavy task, a heavy burden for a warrior for Christ. Ludwig Wittgenstein points out in his Philosophical Investigations that the meaning of sentences is not totally found in what they put into words, the ‘Meinungen – meanings’ but in ‘das Hinzunemende, Gegebene – the ‘given’ that had to be accepted ‘ or the ‘Lebensform – way of life’. The audience shared the daily life of Anonymous A and had seen the passing soldiers burdened with their imposed loads, the palisade, and the audience understood that the preaching of Christ, because of the many persecutions, was an equally heavy burden. This is not a vague and incomprehensible complaint of Paul about some ailment but, with this analogy comes from the spiritual leader of the 3 4

II Corinthians 12, 11. II Corinthians 12, 10.

134

Chapter Seven

congregation who clarifies the troubles of the prosecution that hinder the preaching. I also would like to mention that in the sentence ‘Tris ton kurion parekalesa – three times I pleaded with the Lord about this’5, the devout Jew Paul meant in the first decade of the first century the Lord God, Yahweh, whereas around the year 100 the, possibly, Greek Christian Anonymous A meant Christ the Lord.

5

II Corinthians 12, 8.

CHAPTER EIGHT THE VICTORY OVER DEATH

This chapter has to do with the well-known fifteenth chapter from the first letter to the Corinthians. Perhaps I should first quote a short line, dating from 1932, by Ludwig Wittgenstein. ‘It is clear to me that the disappearance of a culture does not mean the disappearance of human dignity, but only of certain means of expression of this dignity (…).’ Michel de Montaigne has shown us that in a text a voice and a tone can be heard that is more meaningful than its words. The tone, according to Montaigne shows us something that remains hidden under the words. This is also the case in this fifteenth chapter: its tone is extraordinary and rises up above the preceding fragments of Paul’s text like a beautiful aria after some insignificant recitatives. Moreover, the importance of the text cannot be overestimated, dealing as it does with the core of the Christian faith, the resurrection. Anyone who reads those texts with care and attention will notice that here a stronger voice rises up and a different, higher tone is struck. The beginning, gnǀrizǀ de humin adelphoi, sounds like a compelling demand for attention from the congregation. It is the manner in which Paul too sometimes tries to get attention. But the sequel, a long and beautifully constructed, well-balanced sentence, is immediately very un-Pauline. In fact, the entire text, that 15th chapter, is of a different order. Among all those practical and pastoral exhortations and instructions there is suddenly an absolute climax, a first-rate theological text, well thought through, structured and formulated. Paul, in his counsels and regulations, constantly quotes the Law and the prophets. Of course, prescriptions are based on the scriptures and are just an explanation for a Jewish congregation who wants to submit to them. Here is a text that stands on its own, primarily because it detaches itself from its context and

136

Chapter Eight

also because it does not seek support in quotations from Law and prophets. It is a testimony pronounced with authority. It clearly does not fit into the text of a letter from Paul to the Corinthians. These are invariably mere short letters or excerpts from letters. Here follows an unusually impressive discourse of no less than fifty-six verses. Let us first look at how text and context relate. Chapter fifteen is the penultimate chapter of the first letter to the Corinthians, the preceding chapters are twelve and fourteen, chapter thirteen being about Love, ‘Charity’ in the King James Bible, which was included much later. The fourteenth chapter is a text dealing with various practical subjects: what to do with those among the congregation who behave as though they possess gifts of the spirit, who will might start to prophesy and suddenly speak loudly out in ecstasy? This is followed by some regulations for the meetings. This text was later supplemented with a hostile anti-feminine text1. So the transition to the remarkable text dealing with the victory over death comes without any transition and after a break in the text. Neither is it continued any further: chapter sixteen starts again with another breach in which the later added collection letter was inserted, and then continues with some practical announcements about travel plans and some requests. The text of chapter fifteen comes as a complete surprise and it does not fit at all within the surrounding context. That text is beautiful and develops a notion in a consistent manner. It also reaches a magnificent conclusion with justifiably well-known sentences and formulations: the voice that seems to whisper; ‘Behold, I tell you a mystery, we shall not all sleep (...) in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet (...) and we will be changed, (...) Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is your victory? O death, where is your sting? 2‘ One of the most beautiful and also one of the most important texts of faith. But is it also a text written by Paul? The sentence that follows it and seems to be organically well connected to it is certainly not by Paul: ‘The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the Law.3‘ That would be an 1

I Corinthians 15, 33b-38. I Corinthians 15, 51-55. With quotations from Isaiah 25, 8 and Hosea 13, 14. 3 I Corinthians 15, 56. 2

The victory over death

137

intolerable idea for the Law-abiding, devout Jew. But it is a recognizable idea for us: it is the theme that is prevalent and the tone that is struck in the letter to the Galatians as well, from 2, 16 and then in the entire third chapter. Perhaps we should learn not only to read a text, to read it carefully and re-read it slowly, but also learn what to do with it. It is the same with people: you can bump into each other but that is not having real contact with each other. In a text we also come across words and meanings, but contact with that text must be more intensive. A good reader should not only pay attention to a text but learn from the text itself in order to become more and more attentive. Therefore, before we continue reading, I shall first of all try to point out some aspects of that text. The text is consistent, that is, it develops a thought and allows it to grow with trunk and branches. First comes an old tradition about the victory over death of God’s Anointed. From it sprout the following considerations: the relationship of the old body of flesh and blood to the risen body; that of life and death; that of God’s Anointed to Adam; that of the old man (Adam) to us and that of the Law (death) to our faith. This indicates a command of language and thinking which is not apparent to that extent in the texts of Paul himself. The course of the argument is only interrupted once, probably by a later elaboration of a reader. The verses elaborate on the difference between a natural and a spiritual body4. Here suddenly terms are used – ‘sǀma psuchikon (...) sǀma pneumatikon – a natural body (...) and a spiritual body’ which deviate from the concepts used in the rest: the perishable and the imperishable flesh, sarx. Also a philosophical vision is put forward which could not be shared by Paul or Philo: ‘But it is not the spiritual that is first but the natural, and then the spiritual.’ Even more remarkable is that suddenly a man appears in this text who appears to know Greek writers. ‘If the dead are not raised, “let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.”5’ That is a quotation from the prophet Isaiah6, but it is also the pagan wisdom of the street hodie tibi, cras mihi 4

I Corinthians 15, 44-48. I Corinthians 15, 32. 6 Isaiah 22, 13. 5

138

Chapter Eight

and carpe diem. And the following verse states: ‘Do not be deceived “bad company ruins good morals.” 7‘ That is a quote from the comedy Thaïs by Menander8. That is quite remarkable in Paul’s letters where only quotes from the Jewish Law, psalms and prophets can be found. The text is about the victory over death. But is it Jewish, Christian or, in fact, Pagan? As long as we were convinced and without hesitation assumed that this text was from Paul, and even one of his most important texts, we considered the points it contained to be Christian. But they are not and neither did they fit in with Paul’s convictions. Paul was a devout Jew who believed in the One and Eternal, Yahweh The man Jesus, that man of flesh and blood, was for Paul not the issue, but, that it was precisely that man Jesus, who was crucified as a criminal by the Romans, was God’s Anointed and allowed to bear the title Son of God. His earthly mission seemed unsuccessful, but after three days the Living God resurrected him from the dead as an accepted sacrifice and took him up on the right side of His throne. Paul and Mark, both Jews, were well aware that a person who once passed the border of death could never return to life of his own accord. Only He, the Living God who had created and established life and death and its limits had the power to raise a person up from the dead. Therefore, in the in the oldest traditional formula presented in this chapter concerning the victory over death9, was the important, essential, distinction was made between: a. first the dead was raised – passivum – by the Living God – ‘egègertai tèi hèmerai tèi tritèi kata tas graphas – was raised on the third day (just like a sacrifice) according to the scriptures,’ b. only then could he rise again – anastasis. That is the Jewish, strictly monotheistic belief in the Omnipotence of the Living One and His victory over death. The later Christian interpretation, laid down in the Nicean Creed, states (something Paul did not believe in; see, for example Romans 1, 4) that Jesus is God and that he himself, through his own strength and power, rose again from the dead. And what about the faith that was expressed in this fifteenth chapter?

7

I Corinthians 15, 33. Menander: Thaïs, verse 218. 9 I Corinthians 15, 3-7. 8

The victory over death

139

The proponents of this new faith had to search for a new vocabulary in order to express, explain and record just what it was that had made such a staggering impression: the creed had after all indicated that a person who had died on the cross was brought back to life after three days! On close inspection this text contains three layers and interpretations. It begins with the oldest known formula of faith in which the Jewish faith had resided - the victory over death by God’s Anointed10. But despite this Jewish basis on which he relies, the writer himself formulates the Christian interpretation. First he still says, ‘Christos (...) ek nekrǀn egègertai, – God’s Anointed (...) has been raised from the dead,’ resulting in, ‘anastasis nekrǀn, – the resurrection of the dead.11‘ And then he repeats this in the following verse. But in 15, 42 he already interprets the resurrection in a Christian way: ‘So is it with the resurrection of the dead (...) – Houtǀs kai hè anastasis tǀn nekrǀn.’ Perhaps even more important is the next step which is taken here: the author is not only talking about the victory over death by the Living God and through Him of God’s Anointed, but extends to the conviction that all believing Christians can conquer death. This was fifty years after Paul’s proclamation of death on the cross and the victory over death by the Anointed: ‘so is it with the resurrection of the dead (...).’ What is most remarkable is the third layer in which the writer understands this belief, which was no longer Jewish but Christian, in a Greek way. For Jews and Christians, the victory over death is not a natural occurrence but totally depending on the Almighty, the Eternal. Plato, on the other hand, explains in his Phaedo that everything in nature is born, grows and flourishes and decays, withers and perishes, but it is precisely because of dying does it regain its strength and life once more sprouts out of death. In chapter fifteen the victory over death is understood in the same way: ‘Si le grain ne meurt.’ ‘What you sow does not come to life unless it dies.’ As with all seed, so it is with flesh, the body12. In the explanation there is no mention of God’s Omnipotence but time and again the seed and the sowing – ho speireis – are referred to. That, the overwhelming life of

10

Idem. I Corinthians 15, 12 and 15, 42. 12 I Corinthians 15, 36-43. 11

140

Chapter Eight

nature, the germination of the seed is the starting point of the victory over death. The writer does not use either the Jewish phrasing, ‘was raised by God’, nor the Christian idea of the resurrection, but simply the pagan idea: we all die, pantes apothnèskousin, and will then return to life, pantes zǀopoièthèsontai. When they heard this, did all Greeks nod in agreement – that is how it was, and did the Jews and Christians, the believers, frown in disbelief? I would like to make another observation concerning the text. As we have seen, it has no context, it stands as a solemn explanation in between all kinds of petty daily matters and regulations. But the intention, not of Paul but of the editors, is clear: this text, the fifteenth chapter, comes right in the middle of the whole compilation of texts. The text about victory over death is the centre, the highlight of the collection. Here it is no longer a Jew who is writing or speaking, but a Christian, a Greek, a scholarly Greek who, a few lines earlier quotes from a comedy by Menander. By heart apparently, because he writes Phtheirousin èthè chrèmata (…) while the meter obviously requires chrèsth’. Both the expression of his belief and the choice of words are not those of Paul but of a believing Christian, a Greek living decades after Paul’s death. He neither writes about the Son of God but about Adam as the first and God’s Anointed as the last. They are humans who can naturally overcome death through faith. ‘For as by a man came death, by a man has also come the resurrection of the dead.13‘ The way in which all this is formulated into words is also not the style of a text for a letter, it is the style of a spoken text, of someone who addresses an audience gathered before him. Full of questions and direct, challenging remarks and gibes: ‘But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised?”‘ Or, ‘For some have no knowledge of God. I say this to your shame.’ Exclamations such as ‘aphrǀn – fool!14‘ The quotation from Menander is introduced with the characteristic ‘mè planasthe – do not be deceived.’ We shall have a closer look further on. 13 14

I Corinthians 15, 21. I Corinthians 15, 35; 15, 34 and 15, 36.

The victory over death

141

The author, whether or not within the later fiction of ‘a letter from Paul’ to the congregation in Corinth, writes, unconcerned about his trouble in Ephesus15. The Greek gives ethèriomachèsa en Ephesǀi. That is a form of the verb thèrio-machein, ‘to fight with animals’ or more figuratively, ‘to make a beastly effort’. In Ephesus, that is. For the congregation in Ephesus the ending too is connected to these major efforts. First with the narrative concluding with the sting of death: ‘and the power of sin is the Law.16‘ And then: ‘Therefore, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord knowing that in the Lord your labour is not in vain.17‘ Here Yahweh is not meant with the words ‘Lord’ and ‘him’ – 15, 57 is quite clear about it – but Jesus Christ. This has nothing to do with the Jewish teachings of Paul to the Corinthians in the fifties, but is about the spreading of Christianity around the turn of the first century in Ephesus. I will now return to that characteristic exclamation as an introduction to the verse from Menander: ‘mè planasthe – do not be deceived!’ An exclamation of the same nature and meaning and as powerful as the one I pointed out earlier about mè genoitho. The outburst of inspired speakers, who want to elicit rhetorically induced contradiction. Planaǀ means ‘to lure away’, ‘to mislead’, ‘to be fooled’. It is an expression that is never used anywhere by Paul. We do, however, find it several times in letters later attributed to Paul, such as those to Titus or to the Hebrews. It appears only in Galatians 5, 7 and earlier in the same first letter to the Corinthians18. Elsewhere I have pointed out the many similarities between the final chapters of Galatians, from 2, 16, and the homilies in the letter to the Romans19. But this mè planasthe in I Corinthians 6, 9 stands right in the midst of what are considered to be authentic letter fragments by Paul. But these powerful characteristic exclamations should stimulate us to be aware and pause in our reading. 15

I Corinthians 15, 32. I Corinthians 15, 56. 17 I Corinthians 15, 58. 18 Galatians 5, 7 and I Corinthians 6, 9. 19 Ch. Vergeer: The Letters of the Apostle Paul. Controversies and Consequences, pp 134-136 Cambridge 2017. 16

142

Chapter Eight

As Ludwig Wittgenstein says in his Vermischte Bemerkungen: ‘Where others walk on, I shall stand still.20‘ Lento, slow and thoughtful is the motto of the philologist. Certainly, all of the foregoing in the letter seem typical of Paul and are not really from his hand. He deals with questions submitted to him regarding lawsuits before pagan courts. Being a truly devout Jew, he expresses his horror of Jews who ‘dare go to law before the unrighteous instead of the saints’. Do those brothers not realise that ‘the saints will judge the world?’ We holy Jews ‘we are to judge angels’. He then asks if there are wise men in the Jewish congregation who can judge and condemn judgments. Sad that Jews litigate against Jews ‘before the unrighteous’. And then, with Oriental exaggeration: ‘why not rather suffer wrong’ and ‘why not rather be defrauded’ instead of asking for justice from the Gentiles21? All this is thoroughly Jewish, pious and Law-abiding. And then the text swings around and actually turns against the Jews. The antiJewish tendency, so recognizable from the hand of the later editors, intervenes: ‘But you (Jews) yourselves wrong and defraud – even your own brothers!’ And then that ‘mè planasthe, do not (be) deceive(d)!22‘ Followed by a spectacular rhetorical demonstration of anti-Jewish vilifications: ‘sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, homosexuals, revilers, thieves, greedy, misers, drunkards, swindlers (...).23‘ An enumeration which immediately brings to mind the quite similar antiJewish tirade in the beginning of the letter to the Romans24. But to hold Paul responsible for all of this would be quite unfair. Goethe’s motto that preceded his Dichtung und Wahrheit was: ‘ho mè dareis anthrǀpos ou paideuethai, Without tribulations no human being is well educated.’ Goethe does not say so but it is a quotation from Menander. In the conversations with Eckermann, Goethe talks about Menander three times, and each time full of admiration and praise. He 20

L. Wittgenstein: Vermischte Bemerkungen. Frankfurt a. M. 1987. I Corinthians 6, 1-7. 22 I Corinthians 6, 8 en 9. 23 I Corinthians 6, 9-10. 24 Romans 1, 24-32 21

The victory over death

143

lived too early to know more, because only after his death did more texts of Menander, mainly written on papyri, come to light in the Egyptian desert. Menander lived with the prostitute Glycera near the harbour of Athens, Piraeus. Of his Thaïs, the play about the most expensive prostitute in antiquity, only seven verses and some fragments of text have survived. But the comedy was very popular in the time of Paul, especially with Roman poets such as Ovid and Propertius. And also, apparently, with that other, unknown Greek in the harbour city of Ephesus. Menander followed classes in philosophy and psychology at the Lyceum in Athens given by Theophrastus, the successor of Aristotle and a close friend of Epicurus. He wrote dozens of comedies which were quite successful and in which we come across the entire enumeration of ‘brothel clients, idolaters, adulterers, boy prostitutes, paedophiles, thieves, misers, drunkards, slanderers and swindlers’. I am willing to accept that a scholarly Greek, skilled in writing and familiar with rhetoric, would appreciate such literature. But that a devout Jew, even averse to ‘non-believing’ judges, would visit comedies about prostitutes and paedophiles and enjoyed them to the extent that he quoted them in his letter, I am unwilling to accept. Do we know who this believing Greek, competent in rhetoric was? Possibly we have three indications. The fifteenth chapter begins with: ‘Now brothers I would remind you (...).25‘ Traditionally it is assume that this ‘I’ is Paul. But his name is mentioned nowhere. And then we also ignore the fact that at the head of this letter two writers, Paul and Sosthenes26, are mentioned, although the text repeatedly shifts from the first person plural to the first person singular and vice versa. Whether it is Paul or someone else, an editor or whoever, who is writing here – how can we find out? Every author and certainly every editor has his own singularities and vanities. Traces of insertions in a text are almost unavoidable and even less so in an edited text than in the event of burglary in a house. It is conspicuous that this writer is a lover of the theatre and able to quote Menander. He also uses the phrase we have already mentioned, theriomachein to typify his ‘beastly’ arduous work27. 25

I Corinthians 15, 1. I Corinthians 1, 1. 27 I Corinthians 15, 32. 26

144

Chapter Eight

In Ephesus, the capital of a Roman province, there were many theatres where slaves and gladiators had to fight animals. Ad bestias was a verdict and an entertainment. After the Jewish War, the Emperor Titus sent many thousands of prisoners of war to the Syrian theatres where they found their death in battling with animals. Do we really accept that at nightfall the devout Jew Paul would enjoy this kind of abominable spectacle? Would a resident of Ephesus, a distinguished Greek who had adopted the new faith do so? These are mere speculations, but the author says something more about that ‘beastly’ hard work: ‘I worked harder than any of them (...).28‘ That phrase, perissoteron autǀn pantǀn ekopissa indicates the author. The same construction with the same words is also found in the conclusion of the second letter to the Corinthians: ‘I have worked harder than (...) – en kopois perissoterǀs29‘, directed against ‘those super-apostles’ and ‘false apostles’30. In the first quote in I Corinthians it is also strongly directed against other apostles, eite oun egǀ eite ekeinoi, ‘them or me’. In my study of this autobiographical fragment, I made it plausible that this text too was fictitious, not written by Paul, but later attributed to him. And probably by the editor who also wrote the second homily in the letter to the Romans31. Elsewhere in this book I called the man who wrote the second homily (Romans chapters 5 to 8) and who intervened decisively as editor from Galatians 2, 16, the editor-in-chief. Those who are really convinced that they are reading letters written by Paul will never be able to see the connections made here. But I shifted the direction, the research method and started to read the texts in a completely different way. I am no longer looking for letters or fragments by Paul himself but for the manner in which the editors edited those available texts. By highlighting idiosyncrasies in the texts, the individual character of the authors become apparent. Claiming that we are getting a grip on the different texts and authors, would be exaggerating, but we do begin to understand a little more that 28

I Corinthians 15, 10. II Corinthians 11, 23. 30 II Corinthians 11, 5 and 13. 31 Ch. Vergeer: Wie was Paulus wel?! Op zoek naar zijn teksten. Budel 2016, pp. 73-91 [Who was Paul?! Looking for his texts] (untranslated). 29

The victory over death

145

demonstrable links could and should be made between different texts, which indicates that the meaning of those texts come to be seen in a different light. My second argument also deals with such a striking similarity. Even more so, there is even a direct link between this text and that of the second homily and the texts and views adopted in Galatians from 2, 16. The style of the text, including the atmosphere, is clearly that of addressing an audience. Unlike Paul’s letters, which were written replies to written questions, replies to people quite some distance away. In this sort of communication it would take at least five days before a letter reached Corinth, where it would be read out in front of the congregation and then discussed. The outcome of this confabulation would be transcribed and sent to Paul. But here, in chapter 15, where someone is actively preaching in front of an audience there is a flurry of questions (See verses 15, 19 to 15, 35). These are all rhetorical questions, addressed to an audience, the members of which are eagerly listening to the speaker’s argument. In 15, 36, a rhetorical exclamation follows answering those questions: ‘you fools!’ Something which can be said to an audience, but would be quite offensive if one puts it in a letter to people who are unable to respond with a disapproving grumble or gesture of incomprehension. Quite characteristic of a spoken dialogue is the phrase ‘touto de phèmi, adelphoi – I mean this, brothers.32‘ That is what we still do in a conversation and never in writing: we say something and then realize that the audience does not yet fully understand our point. We add: ‘Well, actually, what I mean is (...)’ It is the lively style of a speaker and not of a letter writer. Confidence in our resurrection demonstrated in this chapter is surprising and actually quite remarkable. The explanation given by the author concerning the last judgement is also worthy of our attention: the victory over death is followed by judgment. The writer does not speak of Christ’s resurrection as a unique event. On the contrary, he is actually ‘the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep’33. 32 33

I Corinthians 15, 50. I Corinthians 15, 20.

146

Chapter Eight

The text says Aparchè Christos which is usually translated as ‘each in his own order’ as though it was a translation of prǀtos aneste Christos. The meaning is painstakingly clear: ‘hekastos de en tǀi idiǀi tagmati – each in his own order –Ap-archè Christos – God’s Anointed the first yield.34‘ The resurrection from the dead of God’s Anointed is by no means unique, it is merely the beginning, the starting point of our own resurrection from the dead. First there will be the Second Coming of Christ. ‘Then comes the end – Eita to telos.’ God’s Anointed will ‘destroy every rule and every authority and power. (…) He put[s] all enemies under his feet.’ And finally: ‘The last enemy to be destroyed is death35.’ In support of this statement, the prophets are cited, where the original ‘He’ and ‘Him’ references to Yahweh are here transposed to Christ. It is an instrument that we often see at work in Paul’s letters as we know them: by using a linguistic peculiarity, he enables the shift from the Jewish God to the Christian God. This vision of the end of times is worded in a way that is hardly Jewish and also hardly Christian with a pantheistic conclusion: ‘that God may be all in all – hina hèi ho theos panta en pasin.36‘ Here too we find a perception that rather reflects Greek philosophy than one that can be based on Jewish or Christian faith. The following sentence does not only ask us questions but is a riddle: ‘(…) what does it mean when people are baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not resurrected all, why are people baptized on their behalf?37‘ No one has as yet been able to explain what could be meant by being baptized ‘on behalf of the dead’. The Greek text is huper tǀn nekrǀn, which does not mean ‘on behalf of the dead’ at all, but ‘above the dead’. Is it possible that what is meant by huper nekrǀn is that the baptism of life took place above the graves of the deceased believers? Perhaps it is an indication of the custom known in Latin as refrigerium, the rejuvenation of the dead by eating a meal at the grave. Tertullian uses the term refrigerium interim. In Rome we know frescoes 34

I Corinthians 15, 23. I Corinthians 15, 24-26. 36 I Corinthians 15, 28. 37 I Corinthians 15, 29. 35

The victory over death

147

depicting this custom, for example in the necropolis ante Porta Laurentina. This was not unusual in earliest Christianity but was above all a normal custom within a long standing pagan tradition. When we look back at the remarks made here regarding the fifteenth chapter of I Corinthians, the conclusion is obvious that this is not a letter text written by Paul in the fifties of the first century to the Corinthians, but a text composed around AD 100, addressed to the Ephesian congregation of believers. And that was quite a different congregation than the one in Corinth half a century earlier. This was not a small, merely tolerated Jewish congregation, but a larger religious community with more Greeks than Jews who were treated with suspicion and hostility by the former.

CHAPTER NINE THE LAST WORDS

For the last two thousand years there has been a high degree of certainty about the words spoken by Jesus at the last supper. All over the world these words are repeated daily in worship. In chapter eleven of the first letter to the Corinthians, Paul prescribes how to celebrate the lord’s supper: ‘For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.” In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the lord’s death until he comes”.1‘ If we assume that it was Paul himself who wrote this it must have been written in Ephesus about AD 52-53 and addressed to the congregation in Corinth. And he invokes the tradition ‘received from the lord’ and then passed on orally to the Corinthians. Later on the evangelists come and use roughly the same words in their gospels. According to Mark writing in the winter of 71/72 at Rome: ‘And as they were eating, he took bread, and after blessing it broke it and gave it to them, and said, “take; this is my body.” And he took a cup, and when he had given thanks he gave it to them, and they all drank of it. And he said to them, “This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many. Truly, I say to you, I will not drink again of the fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God.” 2‘ All that has been considered to be the rock-solid truth and yet on further scrutiny collapses like a house of cards. 1 2

I Corinthians 11, 23-26. Mark 14, 22-26.

The last words

149

It starts off with the assurance of a direct source: Jesus himself. But in that same text, Paul himself says that he had never met Jesus3. It is also quite certain that Paul was originally an opponent, a persecutor and adversary of the Nazorene. The author himself questions the oral proclamation: after all, he begins this narration after having described how the meal is celebrated in the congregation. That is all wrong, is his verdict. The testimonies of Matthew and Luke and a fortiori that of John rely on the first and only version of the Passion given by Mark. There is nothing in Mark’s Gospel that refers to Paul, to his preaching or letters. It was not until the beginning of the second century that attempts were made to explain that Mark might have been Paul’s assistant4. This is where the links in the chain come apart. But there is a more fundamental objection. In the authentic texts of Paul’s letters, he mainly gives pastoral advice and instructions, saying hardly anything about Jesus (only twice in fact). In I Corinthians 15 the victory over death and the resurrection of God’s Anointed is spoken about. It is not a text from the fifties and written by Paul but was spoken and written by Anonymous A around the turn of the first century. The same is the case with the other text in I Corinthians 11 about Jesus’ words spoken at the last supper. The text of the eleventh chapter of I Corinthians begins in a way that is very similar to Paul’s actual notes: ‘But in the following instructions I (…).5‘ This is followed by harsh criticism about the way in which the meal of the lord is celebrated. Then the tone changes from giving instructions into an official declaration, a proclamation of faith6. Egǀ de (…) paredǀka humin. ‘I’, said with raised voice, ‘have revealed to you what I myself received apo tou kuriou, ‘from (or because of) the Lord.’ Chapters eleven and fifteen of the first letter to the Corinthians differ from Paul’s usual letter texts. Other than giving directions about how to behave and about pastoral care, they are telling something about Jesus and his actions.

3

I Corinthians 5, 16. In texts – not written by Paul but attributed to him later on: II Timothy 4, 11 and Colossians 4, 10. 5 I Corinthians 11, 17. 6 I Corinthians 11, 23. 4

150

Chapter Nine

Nowhere else does Paul say anything about the life and actions of Jesus; only in these two chapters is something said about the words at the last supper and about the death on the cross, the entombment and the resurrection from the dead. Both texts have the same structure; they begin with an appeal to apostolic tradition. He is preaching to them what in his turn was revealed to him, ‘by God’s Anointed.’ As I explained in the previous chapter on the victory over death, chapter fifteen of I Corinthians is not a text written by Paul himself – far from it – but by an anonymous author who was active after Paul’s death. The Anonymous who speaks in Galatians 2, 15 betrays himself straight away after two verses by his trademark outcry: mè genoito, ‘certainly not!7‘ He uses this outburst twice more, at the beginning of the first homily recorded in the so-called ‘letter to the Romans: 3, 4 and in 3, 31. These are texts by the same speaker: the Anonymous A. A speaker? Certainly, unlike Paul who writes short notes in letter style, a speaking style is clearly identifiable here. Always, he begins with Ti oun, or Pou oun or Ara oun, questions that are supposed to be asked by his audience and are then refuted by him. He often plays a game of question and answer, which can be done in front of an audience, but is odd and unusual in a letter. Anyone who believes and maintains that everything was written by Paul will never be able to derive the meaning of those texts. Examples abound: whereas Jews and Christians emphasize charity and fraternity, the Greeks are more obstinate and adopt a more self-centred ethic. So when we read a directive such as ‘let each one test his own conduct,8‘ it has more the character of a Greek philosophical tract than a pious JudeoChristian consideration. The verb, dokimazein, used for ‘to search’, ‘to investigate’ ‘to test’ is remarkable and apart from the example above only used in Romans 12, 2 and I Corinthians 11, 239. All three appear in texts that I consider to be by Anonymous A, including the one discussed here about the last words at the lord’s Supper. Further on in the same text a consideration is expressed: What was sown

7

Galatians 2, 17. Galatians 6, 4. 9 Ibid. 8

The last words

151

in the field of the Spirit will live, what was sown in the flesh leads to decay10. This is also the explanation given in 1 Corinthians 15 about the victory over death, by the same author. The misuse of indicative pronouns in Dutch seems to be typical of people under 40. In the way Greek is used here, such as in the second sentence where the anonymous author uses ean mè, but where a well-educated Greek would put alla, an alarm bell sounds11. In the entire Corpus Paulinum this is only used once elsewhere, in Romans 14, 14. Is that alarm bell a warning: look, there he is again? It is invariably assumed that Jesus acted first and that the memory of his life, deeds and sayings were preserved. Only later, decades later, was it given a theological basis by Paul in his letters, especially those to the Romans. But it was probably the other way around: The life of God’s Anointed and his actions were a brief incident, quickly forgotten. But the longing for salvation remained, as did the expectation of the coming kingdom of God, not in heaven but here, here and now on earth. Even before Paul or Mark were writing, Caesar Claudius issued his edict in AD 49 against Iudaeos impulsore Chresto cassidue tumultuantis Roma expulit, ‘the Jews incited by the Anointed who constantly caused violence, he expelled from Rome.12‘ Acts also mention this imperial edict13. But not only in Rome did the militant supporters of God’s Anointed caused disturbance. When in that same year Paul was active for the first time in Greece, the accusation at Philippi, according to Acts, was: ‘These men are Jews, and they are disturbing our city. They advocate customs that are not lawful for us as Romans to accept or practice.14‘ And a week later in Thessaloniki: ‘These men who have turned the world upside down have come here also.’ And then, appealing to the emperor’s edict: ‘and they are all acting against the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus.15‘

10

Galatians 6, 8. Galatians 2, 16. 12 Suetonius: Divus Claudius 25, 4. 13 Acts 18, 2. 14 Acts 16, 20-22. 15 Acts 17, 6-7. 11

152

Chapter Nine

In the first forty years after Jesus’ life and passion there is nothing to be found about this in Judeo-Christian texts, apart from in the above-given references to the disturbance in the world, as far as Rome, about the pretension that there is a king greater than the emperor. It was not until the war between Romans and Jews (66-73) that the first and in a sense only story about Jesus came into the world and probably in Rome by a young Jewish man, Mark. He tells a story in which he manages to reverse the truth and reality of the Nazarene, the young Davide who, surrounded by militant followers, was anointed as king of the Jews and crucified by the Roman rulers as a disobedient slave. This story became the anti-Jewish story of the man hated by the Jews, Pharisees, Herodians, and finally even by all the people. Only a Greek woman and a Roman army officer believed in him. Mark did not yet know anything about Paul’s writings because his letters had not yet been published. Paul does not say anything about Jesus the Anointed because he did not believe in that young man but only in God’s Anointed. He believed in the One and Eternal, the Living God who was also able to raise the dead back to life. Nor did the Anonymous A know the gospel of Mark, because he does not refer to it, but explicitly, in both passages, to what was related to him personally. This Anonymous described the words of the Last Supper and the death, burial and resurrection from the dead of God’s Anointed towards the end of the first century. Together with Mark’s gospel it is the earliest testimony of the renewed interest in the life and suffering of the Nazorene, more than half a century after his death.

CHAPTER TEN THE FOUR CATEGORIES

The first edition of what would later come to be called "the letters of Paul" appeared about AD 100 and probably in Ephesus. The title may have been Apostolikon and the collection of texts, ‘dispatches’, began with what we now know as the beginning of the letter to the Galatians The text began in medias res, straight to the point of conflict: the relationship of covenant and promise given and made to Israel and the coming of the Kingdom of God through His Anointed. It was the relationship between Jew and Christian, Law and faith. An unknown man, the Anonymous A, preached a homily about this in the congregation at Ephesus. In this sermon (Galatians chapters 3 - 5) authority, apostolic authority, is given by preceding it with an account of the way in which Paul was invested with apostolic authority in Jerusalem. The contrast, which had become partly poisoned by hatred and hostility, reflected the atmosphere and situation after the fall of the holy city, Jerusalem and the Temple, the persecution and mass murder of many Jews, the disintegration of the authority of the mother church of Jerusalem and Judea and the pogroms and massacres in Antioch, Damascus, Alexandria and elsewhere. Anonymous A first sharpens the contra-positions; he is well educated in rhetoric: the Jewish Law of Moses is the writing that leads to death, faith in God’s Anointed brings eternal life1. But the Anonymous, through his reflections on Abraham also found and offered a solution. Many centuries before the Law of Moses (around 1300 BC) the covenant had been made between Yahweh and Abraham, the father of the nations. First, it is stated in two fierce pieces of text (Galatians 3) that faith and not the law is the way leading to life. And then (in Galatians 4) there is the redeeming formula: faith in God’s Anointed changes everyone into the 1

Galatians 3, 15-21.

154

Chapter Ten

Children of Abraham. For this a slogan is given: ‘Now you, brothers, like Isaac, are children of promise.2 ‘Previously, the preacher had used a rhetorical formula: ‘There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Jesus Anointed.3‘ These words resounded down the ages. The text gives the absolute negation ouk instead of the relative rejection mè, and Ouk eni Ioudaios instead of Ouk enesti. So not quite grammatical Greek. What is striking is Ioudaios – Hellèn, Jews are contrasted with Greeks. That is not the contrast normally used among Jews, the people against the gojim, the nations. It is a Greek who is speaking here. As also the case in the second contrast: doulos – eleutheros, slave and free. And then also arsen - thèlu, neither male nor female. It is not the intention of the speaker to eliminate the aforementioned contradictions (for man woman that would be impossible, for slave – free man unthinkable and also Jew - Greek was not an issue either) but to express their reconciliation or solidarity. Anonymous A is concerned only with unity: ‘you are all one in God’s Anointed’ is the conclusion of these contradictions. This, pantes gar humeis eis este en Christǀi4 is what this editor is all about because of the partisan strife that he then deals with in his texts: from I Corinthians 1, 10 onward. Anyone who does not naively read ‘the letters of Paul’ as if the originals still existed but is willing to look at the way in which the later editions came about, is only then able to judge what is said in the texts. In the year 50 and the spring of 51 Paul did not write primarily to his followers in Corinth out of concern for the growing differences between the preaching from Jerusalem (by envoys of Simon Kèphas), from Alexandria (by Apollos) and by Paul himself. It was not until half a century later that the party disputes in Ephesus had run so high that his apostolic authority had to be called upon to defend ‘unity in God’s Anointed.’ The passage about the unity of the several factions apparently made a big impression because it was followed up. When the first edition (Galatians, the letters to Corinth and Achaea and the one to Rome) was 2

Galatians 4, 28. Galatians 3, 28 4 Galatians 3, 28. 3

The four categories

155

about a quarter of a century old and apparently successful (or was totally unsuccessful) it was followed by an appendix, a second volume: the fictitious letters to Philippi and Thessaloniki, preceded by an introductory letter to the Colossian congregation and concluded by a letter of recommendation to Philemon. The original introduction was replaced by an entirely new and grandiose introduction, the letter to the Hebrews. 5 But the original introduction began with the same appeal and exposition of the unity in God’s Anointed, the four categories: ‘Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian or Scythian, slave or free, but God’s Anointed is all, and is in all. 6‘ This repetition of the same formula and wording may indicate some continuity in the editorial teams. But there are, after nearly a quarter of a century, significant differences. The closing sentence was stated more absolutely: ‘Christus est omnia in omnibus’. Also, the order Jews – Greeks is reversed: the Greeks come first, then the Jews. Moreover, this dichotomy is immediately followed by a hateful depreciation: peritomè kai akrobustia, ‘circumcised and foreskin (owners)’. The dichotomy of male female disappeared. Apart from the growing aversion towards the Jews, the latter aspect is also characteristic for the beginning of the second century. The organization of the church was increased and ruled by men, bishops, priests, preachers. Women were increasingly pushed to the background, powerless and of subservient. At the same time, the two antifeminine texts were included in the letters to the Corinthians, in which the women were harshly and literally silenced in the congregations7. What is remarkable here is the confusion arising from a possible dichotomy – ‘barbarian’ and ‘Scythian’. Since there are no prefixes in Greek, we are unable to establish whether this meant ‘barbarian or Scythian’, or ‘barbarian and Scythian’. The other three pairs are opposites, but Scythians were, in the eyes of Greeks, barbarians. They lived in southern Russia and the Greeks were familiar with the Pontic Scythians. They lived in the Crimea, where Greek colonies that traded with Ephesus and Corinth were also located. It will be clear that in the fifties of the first century, Paul was still exclusively addressing the Jewish communities and 5

See a.o. G. Theissen: Fortress Introduction to The New Testament. Minneapolis 2003, p. 135. 6 Colossians 3, 11. 7 I Corinthians 11, 2-16 and 14, 34-38.

156

Chapter Ten

some curious Greeks and not, as was the case one century later, barbarians and Scythians who were also involved in the growing church. Only by following these stages of the editorial adaptations are we able to gain insight into the development of early Christianity. The second collection of texts, the appendix, shows how Christianity was already fanning out in Thessaloniki and Philippi – cities from which Paul had forcefully been expelled after a few days – Ephesus, where Paul had worked for two years, had caused a popular uproar and from which he was subsequently banished – and Colossae of which nothing is known. The editors further expanded the proclamation of the faith by stylising into letters a number of preserved notes originally addressed to the Corinthian congregation. These recreated letters were then addressed to the capital of the world, Rome, to the main port of Greece, Corinth and to the hinterland of Ephesus, a remote region of Galatia. When editing texts into a letter to the Romans, they did not take the trouble to address them to Romans and Latins, but persisted in writing ‘Greeks and barbarians’, ‘first to the Jew, then to the Greek;’ ‘Jews and Greeks alike’ and ‘there is no difference between Jew or Greek’ in addressing Roman citizens8. Here it is indispensable to distinguish between: - Paul writing to the Jewish Corinthian congregation in the fifties of the first century; - the Anonymous A who delivered sermons in Ephesus around the turn of the first century to a congregation where there were increasing tensions between Jews and Greeks which had to be calmed and assuaged; - the editorial transformation of both these layers of the text into a ‘letter to the Romans’ in the first decades of the second century. Once Christianity had reached the capital of the world, Rome, referrals such as ‘barbarians and Scythians’, ‘the churches of Galatia’, ‘as far as Illyria9‘ and ‘to Spain10‘ are colourful and quite appropriate for the situation of the second century, but wrong and unreal for Paul in the previous century.

8

Romans 1, 14; 1, 16; 2, 9, 2, 10, 3, 9; 10, 12. Romans 15, 9. 10 Romans 15, 24. 9

D

CHAPTER ELEVEN A CRACK IN THE SELF-EVIDENT

The burden of the past is heavy, too heavy to alter its course after two thousand years.

-1About the year 100 the book Acts of the Apostles with the first account of the origin of Christianity appeared. The story is related with verve, the fiery Spirit pushing the faith from its confines in Jewish Jerusalem to the capital of the world, Rome - ‘(…) you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.1‘ This direction, from being a Jewish sect to a universal Christian church, from Jerusalem to Rome, became the foundation of any further interpretation. A representation of things as fundamental as it was disastrous. a. The New Testament does not bear witness to the beginning, in Jerusalem nor the end, in Rome. The two letters of Simon Peter and that of Judas are of much later date. Martin Luther called the letter of James already ‘made of straw,’ hollow and meaningless. The gospels about Jesus the Nazarene were written half a century and even a whole century, after his death and sufferings by people who had neither known him nor would have understood his language. The first gospel, written by Mark, was written in Rome; the three others, Luke, possibly in Ephesus, or Antioch, and Matthew, in Alexandria and the last, John, probably in Ephesus. b. The story of Acts ultimately culminates in a kind of triumphal procession by Paul towards Rome. In reality, he was taken to Rome as a condemned prisoner to be beheaded after two years of 1

Acts 1, 8.

A crack in the self-evident

c.

159

house arrest. There is no trace of him preaching in Rome nor of any support that the Judeo-Christian congregation could have given him. ‘At my first defence no one came to stand by me, but all deserted me. 2‘ The two referrals to ‘in Rome3‘ were not added until later, and it was not until the third century that the letters were given the fictional order of Rome, Corinth, Greece and the churches of Galatia in the hinterland. Paul never wrote a letter to the Romans. The fundamental distortion created in Acts is especially fatal and has been so for nearly twenty centuries – for a correct assessment of Paul. He is continually characterized as a man of two worlds, a foot in both Jerusalem and Rome, between his Jewish upbringing and his Christian vision, between faithfulness to the letter of the Jewish Law and to the freedom of faith in Christ.

-2The earliest Christian text is Mark’s story of the life and passion of Jesus the Nazarene, first read out in the spring of 72. In his gospel the link with the origin of the belief is abruptly severed: -

2 3

The blame for the death sentence pronounced by the Roman governor is laid on the Jewish people and their high priest. The anointing of Jesus as King of Israel is defiled by having it done by a leper. The Jews ridicule their Anointed of God, on the other hand, a Roman centurion recognizes him as a Son of God. The position of the Jew, Ioudas, is changed from being a leader to being the traitor. Simon, the Rock, is abused as Satan and branded as a threefold repudiator. The father, Joseph, is deleted from the story.

The ‘last words of Paul’. II Timothy 4, 16. Romans 1, 7 and 1, 15.

Chapter Eleven

160

-

-

The fervent support given by the Jewish people is suddenly silenced in the story of the passion and switched to the cry ‘Crucify him!4‘ The ‘putting of his own (Jewish) people first’, is replaced by praising the deep faith of a Greek woman5. On the other hand the Jewish relatives and fellow citizens are condemned for their unbelief6. The Jewish man Jehushu’ah ben Pandera is transformed into Jesus Christ.

The earliest church in Antioch, east of the ancient town. Facade in front of the caves of Peter.

4

Mark 15, 13. Mark 7, 27-29. 6 Mark 6, 4-5. 5

A crack in the self-evident

161

-3The Christian faith originated neither in Jerusalem nor in Rome, but in Ephesus around the turn of the first century: - There the memory of Paul was kept alive. - It is the place where the first edition of his letters was made. - An edition in which significant new leaders of the congregation played an important part with different texts. - This was followed up by two additions containing for the most part apocryphal letters from Paul. - Relatives of Jesus, such as his mother, lived in Ephesus. - Ephesus is where Luke probably wrote his gospel. - He also wrote the book of Acts there. - John the Evangelist worked there, and wrote the fourth gospel. - The circle around John provided texts such as the Praise of Love. - Ecclesiastical and apostolic authority were restored there after the fall of Jerusalem and the massacres in Antioch and Alexandria.

-4Michel Foucault taught us a lot about the close bond between spirit and authority, people and power. Once, when I was in Heidelberg, followers of Hari Krishna walked through the scorching heat of the main street, dancing and singing. The lyrics were not the content of their proclamation of their faith, the power of their proclamation rested in the monotonous singing. Five centuries earlier, Martin Luther realized that the reform of the Church and the Christian faith was empowered by the voice of the people. Not the fragile polyphonic Gothic church music, nor the Gregorian chant, but the united singing of the congregation provided momentum and fire to the Reformation. More than a thousand years earlier, when Bishop Ambrose of Milan struggled for months in 385-386 with the imperial court and army by occupying the San Lorenzo by his flock day and night, he realized that that unequal battle could only be won by having the people singing: singing the Ambrosian antiphons, in unison and thereby encouraging each other turned out to be an effective means of warfare, a way to give the people a voice, one voice. A means of grabbing power This was also what happened with the first publication of what would later be called the letters of Paul (Galatians, I and II Corinthians and a shorter version of Romans), using the exalted tone of the opening words and various longer texts, for the restoration or the establishment of

162

Chapter Eleven

apostolic authority. In the supplement published twenty or thirty years later remarkably enough, songs were included. Such as the lofty hymn with which the volume opens7, the song about the coming of God’s Anointed8, the hymn to the Anointed, Creator and Redeemer9 and, further on in the text, the six-line song originating from the circle around John the Evangelist, about He who has come in the flesh10. The singing of hymns and songs have more to do with the establishing of a church community with authority than with the first proclamation of the faith. And its temporal context has more to do with the decades after Paul than with his own time.

-5One rarely find lyrics of a song in letters. When it has to do with a wellknown song or anthem, quoting the first line is usually sufficient. we sing. Those songs and hymns were absent in the short letters of Paul’s answers to questions from and instructions to his Corinthian congregation in Corinth They were included in the bundles of texts with sermons, letters, money-raising issues, directions on ecclesiastical matters, autobiographical and pseudo-life parts, travel accounts, formulas of faith, and also songs and hymns.

-6The normally used title ‘Letters of Paul’ is fundamentally wrong not only were most of the letters not written by him, but attributed to him, but also because for more than one reason there is no question of them being ‘letters’. In antiquity much shorter notes were written than the bulky compositions which are supposed to be one letter to the Corinthians or others. These ‘letters’ are compositions, created out of different types of texts, including fragments of authentic letters by Paul. But to any attentive reader it will be soon evident that in addition to letter fragments, text of a totally different nature were included. Not written letters texts to be preached, sermons, homilies and lively discourses. 7

Ephesians 1, 3-14. Philippians 2, 6-11. 9 Colosians 1, 15-20. 10 I Timothy 3, 16. 8

A crack in the self-evident

163

Normally a letter is short and business-like, it answers questions, referring concerns and problems. In the first letter to the Corinthians there are examples of the short notes contained therein: ‘Now concerning the matters about which you wrote;’ ‘Now concerning the betrothed (…);’ ‘Now concerning food offered to idols (…)’11. But there are also many texts that clearly indicate that they relate to the spoken word. Take, for example, Roman 6, 1-2: ‘What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? Certainly not! – mè genoito How can we who died to sin still live in it?’ This is the diathribè style, a speaker who challenges his audience, puts words in their mouths, utter exclamations, even does not shy away from strong language and then mentions strong counter observations.

-7It is a curious and serious mistake: for many centuries considering texts to be letters, while they quite often and quite obviously are not. Both the traditional naming, once given, quickly gelling into self-evident, is to blame for this, as well as the one-sided theological interest that focused mainly on what (as was assumed) Paul wrote. In the absence of a regular postal service in antiquity, delivery often depended on waiting for a good opportunity. Or on the delivery by a trusted person, such as that of the deaconess Phoebe, who takes Tertius’ letter from the port of Cenchrea to Ephesus12. With favourable winds that would take about twenty-four hours, with headwind it might take days, and in winter it could even take weeks. In all likelihood, on arrival letters will have been first read and discussed by the leaders of the congregation and then read out in the gathering on the day of the lord. Perhaps it would take several weeks before a reply was written about how the directions had been received and what results it had gained. But on the other hand how lively and direct are the spoken texts, rife with accusations and arousals, quasi playful. And full of challenges. Too often a sermon in antiquity is understood as being the same as we know it:

11 12

I Corinthians 7, 1; 7, 25; 8, 1. Romans 16, 1.

164

Chapter Eleven

in a church, from up high in the pulpit by a priest, spoken over the heads of the people, over the seated believers. But in antiquity the situation was practically the other way around. In the churches and synagogues there were no pulpits, nor were there chairs or pews for the congregation. That meant that the priest was the only one sitting on a seat and the people standing around or walking back and forth. As late as in the sermons of Augustine held in Hippo and Carthage around 400, we see how some believers throng around the speaker and listen or shout out their approval or disapproval; others walk away to have conversations of their own. The situation is excellently sketched by Peter Brown: ‘During the sermon, the preacher interacted with his audience in the most face-to-face manner possible.13‘ An outstanding and shrewd speaker such as Augustine clearly indicates how a sermon also turned into a dialogue. The believers are standing or walking around, they gather around the speaker and show approval and disapproval. The speaker addresses the whole audience or specially selected persons, walks up to them or braces himself, raises his voice or lowers it. ‘Stop that blether!’ some of the believers call out on January 21, 404 during Augustine’s sermon. Preaching is talking to the people, contesting with them. The essential difference between a written text and the spoken language is one of the main points of interest in Jacques Derrida’s philosophy, as is clear in his Éperons. Les Styles de Nietzsche14. Friedrich Nietzsche, who was a philologist and only later became a philosopher, was a master in the art of excruciatingly slow reading. The ‘letters of Paul’ were generally read by those who derived support and encouragement for their faith from them. Or they contained statements that lent themselves to be the subject of a sermon. Reading in this way yields a lot, but it is only by slower, more careful reading and rereading of the Greek text that the difference between Paul’s sometimes clumsy notes and the often blazing, lively, mocking and rhetoricallytrained style of some of the speakers becomes apparent. Paul says of himself that he is a bad speaker and ‘I who am humble when face to face before you.15‘ Tapeinos en humin, ‘lowly’, ‘insignificant’, 13

P. Brown: Through the Eye of a Needle, Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 A.D. Princeton 2012, p. 340. 14 J. Derrida: Éperons: Les Styles de Nietzsche. Paris 1978. 15 II Corinthians 10, 1.

A crack in the self-evident

165

‘dejected’. ‘Humilis sum inter vos,’ says the Vulgate. ‘Modest et timide inter alios’ would have been more apt. Paul himself says he has no proficiency in speaking, that he has not had any Greek rhetorical training and this is quite clear from his short letters with mainly simple straightforward sentences.

-8Texts vibrate and agitate. They shake us, wake us up. They are not fixed works but roads that can be followed. Of course we have to determine what is the correct text, the correct reading of the text. But when we believe we understand texts and have come to grips with them, they start to vibrate and writhe and resist. I will give just one example: a.

b.

c.

d.

e.

16

We read Paul’s letter to the congregation of Philippi. We read there, in the second chapter, an admonishing text about the humble life in Christ. And we take the text to heart. Then we notice that in this prosaic text suddenly a voice is raised and a hymn can be heard16. A text by Paul and a song of the congregation. The hymn contains remarkable lyrics: God’s Anointed is not God but almost like God. He has taken the form, but in content he differs from the God. Whatever the precise meaning of those verses, they convey a different Christology than Paul’s. Philippi was the first larger city Paul visited in Europe in AD 49, and that was the reason why the letter to this congregation was considered to be possibly Paul’s earliest text. But if he included a hymn in it, which we may assume to be generally known enough to be sung, then that hymn had to be older than the letter. Therefore closer to the life and passion of God’s Anointed, and perhaps even dating from the forties or even thirties of the first century! Which generates an interpretation of the statements about the still imperfect divinity of Christ: during his life and by his contemporaries, first followers and believers, he was known as a human being, as a very special person, especially above all through his election as the Anointed of God, the much beloved

Philippians 2, 6-11.

Chapter Eleven

166

f.

g.

h.

i.

j.

17

son, raised from the dead. For the strictly monotheistic Jews, the absolute equality of God and His beloved Son was of course unthinkable. A next step is reached when it is recognized that the two letters which were merged into the letter to the Philippians were not written by Paul about 49 but is a text from about 120, attributed to him. The hymn that was first considered to belong to the earliest history of the faith then turns out to be a hymn that was sung in the congregations of Ephesus and environs in the beginning of the second century. The song is Greek and has nothing to do with the ‘mother church’ of Jerusalem and Judea. But then those remarkable lyrics – hos en morphèi theou ‘he who is in the form of God’ and to einai isa theǀi. ‘being nearly God’ – stand in a totally different light. They are no longer a testament of the very earliest stage of Christology but indicate that even in the early second century the believers did not yet recognize the complete divinity of Christ and did not consider the Son as the second person of the divine trinity. Let us take the next step: then the attention is not so much focused on the dogmatic content of the text as on the way in which it is presented. Alongside the text, the writer and its readers are the editors and the first audience for whom the texts were intended. Only then do we understand the intention and meaning of the text. The letter calls for a united struggle to proclaim the gospel17. To that aim the editors insert a song among those texts. A song that was meant to be sung congregationally and thereby strengthening unity and determination. Without considering the intentions of the editors, who gathered, chose, edited, composed and presented the texts to the congregation, the intention and meaning of the Corpus Paulinum cannot be understood. The first time the editors gave room for a substantial text by Paul himself at length is in I Corinthians 5 where a series of notes and excerpts from letters are included. They start off with: ‘It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among

Philippians 1, 27-30.

A crack in the self-evident

167

pagans, for a man has his father’s wife.18‘ That is a demonstration of skilful editing: 1. everyone is talking about it, 2. it is even worse than among pagans, 3. incest. (It is not explicitly stated, but it is suggested that his father’s wife is also the perpetrator’s mother.) By choosing to open the series of excerpts from letters with this incident, one of many that Paul deals with, everyone’s attention is immediately focused. It is more in tabloid style and does scant justice to Paul’s preaching. The audience are eagerly listening and the rest of the writer’s admonitions, about sacrificial meat, quarrels with the neighbours, and so on, are also taken to heart. What I have given here is an example of a method, a step-by-step taking apart of a text. The concept of taking apart – but then in an ontological sense – emerges in Martin Heidegger’s Sein und Zeit. In Michel Foucault’s work both modes of deconstruction appear: archaeology and genealogy. I was inspired to do so by the book De la grammatologie by Jacques Derrida19. It involves a disruptive way of reading focused on the difference between voice and writing. To read with suspicion and mistrust, slow and attentively, cautious and rethinking. It is a form of disassembly. Martin Luther already used the term ‘destructio’ to indicate the necessity of excavating and uncovering the theological and dogmatic layers that cover and bury the truth and reality of the texts. Sigmund Freud used the term ‘Abbau’ to indicate how one first had to penetrate through the layers of the wounded and tormented mind in order to get to know someone. Just as after many years a painting can be covered up under layers of dirt, varnish, blemishes and repainted parts and has to be carefully cleaned, repaired and restored, the same applies to texts from almost two millennia ago.

18 19

I Corinthians 5, 1. J. Derrida: De la grammatologie. Paris 1967.

CHAPTER TWELVE EPHESUS

It is clear that even in the second century, Paul’s letters were far from being regarded as complete. Many and important parts of the texts included in the current ‘editions’ were still missing. Not only are the two closing chapters of the letter to the Romans absent, but about half of the text of Romans. The three ‘begging letters’ in the letters to the Corinthians are missing, but also more, much more. Not until the third century did the editions of Paul’s letters approach their present volume and stature.

Roman writing materials inkwell; the stylus; seal box and sealing ring are originals, the other objects are replicas. Found at Verulamium (St. Albans) (Verulamium Museum St Albans, England)

Ephesus

169

Ephesus is the city where Paul worked for a considerable time. He stayed there from about 49 to 55. In the present-day, partly excavated Ephesus, there is still much to see that Paul must have seen. He will have seen the state agora with the Prytaneion, the basilica and the Odeion and the trade agora near the harbour with the gate of Mazaeus and Mithridates and while on that square he will have read the time of day on the large sundial that was quite new then and is now in the museum of Ephesus. The paving stones of the Harbour road and the Curet road are still the same as the ones the apostle walked along. When he arrived Asia’s magnificent and largest theatre was being restored. According to Acts 19, this building would figure in Paul’s life. First century Ephesus was the capital of the Roman province of Asia and an important harbour town with about 200,000 inhabitants. Through its harbour it was in easy reach, a few days sailing, of Corinth and other Greek ports. Caesarea could be reached in a week and Jerusalem in two more days. The excellent Roman roads had opened up the hinterland, Galatia. After Rome’s war against the Jews (66-73) and the destruction of Jerusalem in September 70, fierce pogroms also took place in Damascus, Antioch, Alexandria and many other cities and regions. The original faith community of Judea and Jerusalem and its leaders, the relatives and early followers of God’s Anointed was massacred. There was a great need for authority and new security for the persecuted Jews and believers. Jerusalem was gone and Rome was as yet not part of the world of the new faith. Possible contenders as leading cities, such as Antioch and Alexandria, had also been eliminated by persecution and massacres. Ephesus, a metropolis, harbour town and capital of an extensive hinterland, was the strongest contender. Paul became the figurehead, not because he was so much more important than the many other emissaries and envoys, but because he had worked in Ephesus for many years. In AD 54 Ephesus was hit by a major earthquake. Perhaps the disturbances that arose as a result had to do with Paul’s departure from the city. ‘And [he] had discussions daily in the sports

170

Chapter Twelve

school of Tyrannos. This went on for two years (…)1.’ There were several gymnasia in Ephesus. The gymnasium at the Harbour road is now partly excavated with a palaestra accessible from the Marble road. Now, a large, broken piece of marble lies on the road in front of it, an omphalos. This was found in an as yet unexcavated building next to the sports school. It is a building with an apse in one of the walls. Possibly a synagogue. If so, it is the only synagogue known to us in Ephesus up to now2. Apparently, copies of Paul’s letters and accounts had been preserved in Ephesus. About half a century after they were written and sent to Corinth, Paul’s letters reappeared and parts of them were used, along with many other texts, in an edition of the scriptures. The editors of that edition subsequently provided two further additions, letters which were later recovered or written later and attributed to Paul. Important followers and co-workers of Paul had also been active in Ephesus, such as Timothy of Lystra. The wealthy and influential manufacturer couple Aquila and Priscilla3 and the later Bishop of Ephese, Onèsimos of Colossae. It is probable that Luke also worked in Ephesus writing his gospel and the earliest history of the Church, Acts of the Apostles. In Ephesus his tomb is still being pointed out. Acts tells the story of Peter being active among the Jews and Paul among the Greeks. In doing so it uses the same breaking point which forms the core of the letter to the Galatians. John and the circle around John also worked in Ephesus, responsible for major innovations in the faith of the of origin Jewish sect: the Logos doctrine, the doctrine of the incarnation and especially the ethics of fiery love. Very soon the gospels of Mark and Luke were also in circulation in Ephesus. The respect for Paul remained alive in Ephesus. As late as the fifth century, images of Paul and Thecla of Iconium were placed in the cave of Paul and venerated. Therefore most of the New Testament came about in Ephesus. In Ephesus on the Agora Tetragonos are still the remains of the famous library of Celsus which once owned 12,000 scrolls. This library

1

Acts 19, 9-19. Ö. Özeren: Efeze. Istanbul 1998, p. 84. 3 II Timothy 4, 11. 2

Ephesus

171

was founded by Tiberius Julius Celsus Polemaeanus, governor of the province of Asia and consul in the year 92. Between 114 and 122 this library was constructed by the son of Celsus, Tiberius Julius Aquila. His cognomen may indicate that he was related to the well-known gens Aquilia. It is uncertain what connection existed between the Aquila, in whose home the Christians gathered and the one who ranks first in the list of the notables of the Ephesian community of faith in Tertius’ letter to the congregation at Ephesus4. There may be another underlying consideration as to why Ephesus made claims to apostolic authority in the early Christian church. In addition to Paul, John and Luke, the Davideans may also have been present in Ephesus. Just outside Ephesus, the house in which Mary is said to have died and where John is said to have lived is still pointed out. That tradition dates back to the Byzantine era. But there is an earlier tradition that points to another place. In 431 the Ecumenical Council was held in Ephesus, where it was proclaimed that Mary was the Mother of God. According to the notes of this council, Mary had lived in Ephesus in a house that had once stood on the site of the council meeting. The mother of God’s Anointed was forced to leave Jerusalem and Judea when King Herod Agrippa I had fiercely persecuted the rival royal house of the Davideans in the spring of ‘44, just before his own death. In those weeks before Pesach in the year 44 AD James and John, the two sons of Zebedee, and Simon Peter were killed. In Ephesus, near the harbour still stands the church of the Holy Virgin. It was rebuilt in the tenth century on exactly the same spot where its predecessor, the double Church of the Virgin had stood since the sixth century. And that in its turn had been built on the spot where the council of 431 and also the later council of 449 had taken place. Excavations have revealed that this first church had been built partly in and partly on top of the Museion. Inscriptions on the walls confirm that teaching and trading took place there. Did the house of Mary once stand there, a mere stone’s throw from where Paul may have taught? There is only one indication, pointed out elsewhere5. 4 5

Romans 16, 3. Ch. Vergeer: Paulus. Kijken in Uw lezend gezicht. Budel 2012, p. 316-317.

172

Chapter Twelve

There is a clue that has eluded us as long as we have been assuming that the list of names in the sixteenth chapter of the letter to the Romans concerned people living in Rome. It is to be found in Chapter 16 of the socalled letter from Paul to the Romans. But that text, was not added until the second century. Paul had never been to Rome and did not know or knew hardly anyone there. The names of those we recognise on this list were all living in Ephesus. Prisca and Aquila are mentioned first of all. Rightly so, because it was in their domus that the religious congregation of Ephesus gathered. They are followed by a trusted friend of Paul, Epenetus, who had the title of Primate of Asia for God’s Anointed. That title, aparchè tès Asias, ‘first of Asia’, was later ‘corrected’ to aparchè tès Achaias, ‘first of Greece’ in many manuscripts. And then, before a further impressive list of the names of men of importance we read: ‘Greet Mary, who has worked hard for you 6‘ Aspasasthe Mariam, the name of a woman but without her husband’s name. The form of the verb used, (polla) ekopiasen, is derived from the verb kop-iaǀ, ‘to make an effort’, ‘to toil diligently. The eldest son of Mary, Jesus, had – according to Luke – been born about the year 6 of our era. If the letter dated from the early fifties, Mary, the mother, would have been about sixty years old. Ephesus played a major role in the emergence of Christianity. Perhaps more so than Jerusalem had in its earliest days and Rome later. The conversion from a Jewish sect to the Christian faith took place around the turn of the first century in Ephesus.

6

Romans 16, 6.

CHAPTER THIRTEEN THE TEMPO OF THE TEXT

Before a musician starts playing, he has to get an indication of the tempo from the musical score. Until the seventeenth century one sometimes comes across the indication ‘in suo tempo’, at its own pace, at the appropriate pace. But what is that pace? The Italian currente slowed down in the French courante and the Spanish sarabande lost its prolonged stately pace when it was heard north of the Pyrenees. Nevertheless, the tempo determines both the playing of the music and the reading of a text. The pace of writing and reading, often reading out aloud, was slower in ancient times. That had to do with the way of writing. Anyone who has ever read the original compactly printed Dutch State Bible or the King James Bible printed partly in clear Roman letters and partly in Gothic script; or – even better – read it out aloud in front of an audience will know that this can only be done slowly. In ancient times the reader still had to construct the sentences himself when reading: there were no spaces between the words and the texts had no punctuation marks. That obviously slowed the pace of reading as well as did the audience and the sometimes large space in which the text had to be read. The reader felt that he had to pause at times to enable his audience to follow him properly. One stylistic figure that was helpful in reaching an audience was the anaphora. The reverberation, resounding of a kind of refrain, a repetition that would be recognized and quickly understood. We often see this in the texts and in those places it speeds up the momentum. As an example, Paul’s repetition of the words hǀs mè five times in I Corinthians 7, 29-31 resound like hammer blows, fixing and drumming it in firmly as if it were the sound of truth. And yet, the letters of Paul lack the momentum and verve of the spoken texts as for example the three homilies in the letter to the Romans.

174

Chapter Thirteen

Paul’s tone and style, but especially his pace, can hardly be described in any other way than halting. Why is that? What causes this awkwardness? Let us for example look at the last sentences of the edition. Originally in the first and second editions these were the sentences of Romans 14, 13-23 with the concluding admonition not to give offence to the brothers. A polite ending, of which we have no idea where it originally belonged in Paul’s letters. It is a very suitable text to close the collection with and the editors’ choice of placing this text at the end is understandable. Whereas Paul is actually merely writing about observing Jewish dietary laws, the editors come up with a desirable extension: ‘So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.1‘ ‘The sentence starts off hesitatingly with ara oun, mere halting plug words. The Dutch translation comes to the aid of interpretation rather than the meaning of the words. In Greek it says: ta tès oikodomès – ‘peace and building up’. ‘Of our community,’ according to the Dutch Bible translation. ‘Our’ is absent in the text and oikodomèn is here interpreted as if it said ǀpheleian. Paul speaks merely about the pursuit – diǀkǀ – of domestic peace, of tranquillity at home and he exhorts not to argue about food and drink. Paul is dealing with disagreement within the Jewish community about Jewish dietary laws. In the interpretation given by the editors (enhanced by the incorrect translation), it has to do with the formation of the Christian community of believers. Paul considers the dietary laws as being to ergon tou theou – ‘the work of God’ and he sees it simply as black or white: either kakon – ‘bad’, or kalon – ‘good’.2 That sounds as if things are quite clear. But far from it: although the Jewish dietary laws are God’s work, we should refrain from eating or drinking some items of food or drink for the sake of preserving the peace at home when something is offensive – proskoptǀ – for your – sou – brothers. Immediately followed by: ‘The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God.3‘

1

Romans 14, 19. Romans 14, 19-21. 3 Romans 14, 21-22. 2

The tempo of the text

175

That seems to suggest compromising between God’s work on the one hand and the offended brothers on the other, saving both the cabbage and the goat. Su pistin echeis here means ‘your own conviction’. The reasonableness of these positions is shaky: (a) The Jewish dietary laws are the work of God, but (b) ignore them if your brothers are offended and yet (c) hold on to your own beliefs (because) (d) you are standing before God. That is quite a ponderous train of thought, cumbersome and beside the truth. Which must therefore be emphasized by a pathetic exclamation: ‘Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves.4‘ At the same time however, it is unclear whether this is an actual consideration of Paul or whether it is a gloss, once a notation in the margin by a reader which ended up in the text. In any case, these hesitant considerations lead to a sharp conclusion, both overstated and impossible to reach from the preceding thought: ‘But whoever has doubts is condemned if he eats, because the eating is not from faith.5‘ One thing is painfully clear, the collection of texts ended beautifully in the first and second editions arching like a drawn bow: the conclusion with the admonitions of Paul, not to be guided by others in the enforcement of the Jewish dietary laws, but to hold on firmly to your own beliefs. It is a straightforward answer and reaches back to the opening scene: the dietary conflict at Antioch, where Peter is acting unfairly by giving in to the opinions of others whereas Paul is adhering to his convictions. A marvellous composition, which was quite apparent to every reader in both editions. And that composition was hopelessly lost owing to putting the letter to the Romans in first place in later editions. This is an important indication of how the editors operated: they opened both editions with the conflict about eating and drinking at Antioch and closed the edition with yet again an opinion of Paul on the same matter with a demonstrably closing text. For the lesson to be learned from the foregoing is summed up in one line and impressed upon the 4 5

Romans 14, 22b. Romans 14, 23a.

176

Chapter Thirteen

readers or listeners: ‘For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin!6‘ Again, the translators lend the ancient editors a helping hand in strengthening their positions. Pistis, translated twice as ‘belief’, is now called ‘conscience’. But conscience was not at issue at all. (…) pan de – ‘all’, ‘always’ is a generalisation here translated as ‘whatever’. Whereas in the preceding verse dokimazein, ‘to doubt’ and krinein, ‘to judge’ were still in contraposition to each other, here a verdict is being pronounced. In the version of Marcion the letter ends here with ‘grace to all saints7‘; this is included in many manuscripts. An indication that it was not until later that chapters fifteen and sixteen were pasted behind the text, the praises of Romans 16, 25-27. In chapter fifteen I will point to the possibility that this text, with which Romans closed as it stands, is more or less incomprehensible and confusing and only becomes understandable when we restore the original setting and read Romans 14, 13 after Galatians 2, 14: ‘But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Kèphas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?” ‘Therefore let us not pass judgment on one another any longer, but rather decide never to put a stumbling block or hindrance in the way of a brother.8‘

A. Anyone who not only reads the texts carefully, but also pays especially close attention to their editing, makes a curious observation. Paul’s own letters are part of a correspondence. He responds to questions and tries to provide answers that help the community he is writing to. But of his correspondence we only possess the answers without knowing the questions, not knowing the congregation that raised them, nor the intended consequences. As a result the connection has disappeared and the coherence has been lost. The correspondence was a kind of conversation from afar. And in most cases the connection and cohesion of

6

Romans 14, 23b. Romans 14, 24* Omitted in most translations of the bible. 8 Galatians 2, 14 followed by Romans 14, 13. 7

The tempo of the text

177

conversations between people are in themselves hard to understand for bystanders. The texts of the editors on the other hand always have a clear purpose and the homilies are cleverly constructed and show a welldesigned argument with coherent thoughts. In addition, the editors had a significant advantage. They used longer and better sentences than those that Paul was capable of. Most of Paul’s sentences are simple sentences and like all main sentences, are determinative, definite. Only through the use of subordinate clauses do provisions and restrictions, relativities, and incidentals follow. Following a comma – which the Greeks did not yet know – the determinants of the main sentences are further defined and nuanced. The way in which the editors achieve this is very Greek: they use contrapositions. They present protagonists and antagonists almost as in a theatre. By using formulated contrapositions, such as Law versus Faith, Jew versus Greek, Hagar versus Sarah, Abraham versus Moses – to name but some – tension and drama occur already created, the audience and readers becoming involved and more or less forced to take sides. Opposite this is the certainty of Paul – this is how it is, I proclaim the good news to you.

B. Leo Tolstoy says that above all one should pay attention to three things when reading: a. Who wrote this? b. How did he write it? and c. how sincere is he? These questions are quite characteristic of this magnificent author and are also surprisingly modern. For a long time, attention was mainly paid to what was written and whether it was in accordance with reality. Only since Les Confessions (1770) by Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Die Leiden des jungen Werthers (1774) by Goethe was the text read as a confession, as a subjective interpretation of the world. It means that not too much attention should be paid to the content of a text. ‘Try to get to grips with an author and see how he writes’ is a maxim Friedrich Nietzsche repeatedly puts into words. But the last point, to pay attention to sincerity, is typical of Tolstoy. Nietzsche taught us that for a reader suspicion is a virtue. Such as the beginning of the third homily: ‘I am speaking the truth in Christ, I am not

Chapter Thirteen

178

lying.9‘ He who is speaking the truth does not need to emphasise it and here it is even done twice: ‘I am not lying’. But was there anyone who raised the possibility that a lie was being told here? A letter writer cannot hear this answer, but an enthusiastic speaker can formulate these words as a rhetorical challenge. The sentence is phrased like a triple punch: -

Alètheian legǀ – ‘I speak the truth’ en Christǀi – ‘in Christ’ ou pseudomai – ‘I am not lying.’

The word legǀ ‘I say’, or ‘I speak’ indicates right in the beginning someone who is speaking and not someone writing a letter. A speaker who notices the astonishment and disbelief about his statements on the faces of his audience. Or, possibly, a speaker who wants to evoke surprise with his triple exclamation. In the edition of Marcion the entire ninth chapter of the letter to the Romans is missing. But then, in the present-day text the transition from the end of the magnificent eighth chapter to what follows is rather abrupt and incongruous. The opening sentence of Romans 9, 1a is easily recognised as a note in the margin which was later on included in the text, a gloss. It is in fact an exclamation from a reader who wanted to underline the truth of the text. The exclamation ‘I am not lying!’ does not occur anywhere in Paul’s real texts. We only find it in texts attributed to him10. We also hear pseudesthai, ‘lying’ or ‘cheating’, in pseudadelphoi, ‘lying brothers’ together with pseudapostoloi, ‘lying emissaries’11. Finally we hear ‘I am not lying!’ – ou pseudomai in II Corinthians12. Also there evoking Christ as being witness to the truth. But this text too is not from Paul, as I have indicated elsewhere13.

9

Romans 9, 1. Colossians 3, 9 and Hebrews 6, 18. 11 II Corinthians 11, 24 en Galatians 2, 4; II Corinthians 11, 13. 12 II Corinthians 11, 31. 13 Ch, Vergeer: Wie was Paulus wel?! Op zoek naar zijn teksten. Budel 2016, pp 103-118. 10

The tempo of the text

179

The evangelist John of Ephesus (left) with Marcion of Sinope. Manuscript 748, J.P. Morgan Library, New York.

Tolstoy’s counsel is wise: when it is vociferously claimed that the truth is being spoken and vehemently stated as in ‘I am not lying!’ there is every reason for suspicion. The truth, it is said, speaks for itself. If someone were to say, ‘I am a good person’ and finds it necessary to add: ‘really, I’m not lying!’, then and there beware. It doesn’t sound right nor is it genuine. Paul, on the other hand, speaks or writes straightforwardly, sincerely. Quite typical for him is, for instance: To stoma hèmǀn aneǀigen, Korinthioi (…) hè kardia hèmǀn peplatuntai – ‘We have spoken freely to you, Corinthians; our heart is wide open.’ That is the translation in the English Standard Version14. But the Greek text is much more forceful, 14

II Corinthians 6, 11.

180

Chapter Thirteen

‘My mouth and heart are full of you and wide open for you. I am sincere towards you.’ Paul speaks, he says, straight from his heart.

C. The present-day translations are actually an obstacle for reaching Paul. They opt for a formal order that was only introduced much, much later, after the first two editions. First Rome, then the Greeks, and finally the barbarians, the Galatians. To pay homage to the Empire and its capital, Rome and the Romans in the way they deserved was naturally quite desirable from the second century on, an effective means of conferring and spreading the faith in the Roman Empire. But it is a high hurdle for any reader. The first twelve chapters were not written by Paul and the three homilies are theologically of the highest quality. They are profound discourses about the Law and the faith, contemplations that still, after two thousand years, capture readers and raise many questions. The accessibility to the bundle was construed so much better by the first editors. An opening scene has to be captivating and the person and problem have to be immediately evoked for us. What a gripping start: ‘For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it.15‘ Right from the start there is a man, Paul, and his voice, the tone and the tension is intense. The problem is also spot on: the relationship to Judaism. ‘The first scene dictates the atmosphere, the tone, the tension and the charge of the entire book,’ writes Jan Brokken16. This opening scene remains close to reality. Although it evokes a reminder of Paul from the time shortly after the crucifixion of Jesus, it takes us above all straight into the everyday reality of the early Christians around the year 100 in the harbour town Ephesus: what are we to do with those Jews, with the Jewish ancestry of our faith? What once was a blessing has now become quite a hindrance for us. How to continue? Let us compare both versions. The present one, which begins with an absolute climax, difficult texts with profound theological contemplations. 15

Galatians 1, 13. J. Brokken: De wil en de weg. Over het schrijven van romans en verhalen. Amsterdam/Antwerp 2016, p. 28. 16

The tempo of the text

181

Everything that follows is paler and wan. Then comes the tangle of fragments collected here and there from Paul’s letters to the Corinthians and the whole collection finishes off with the quarrels in Jerusalem and Antioch and the vile outbursts against the Jews in the closing chapters of Galatians. Even the editors realized that something more was needed here, and after the first series of letters from Corinth they added the grandiose text about victory over death and after the second series of fragments from the letters to Corinth the beautiful In Praise of Love.

D. Texts written in the first person singular are experienced and read fundamentally differently than texts that speak on behalf of ‘we’, the first person plural. ‘I say this’, ‘I do that’, ‘I act in this way’ and ‘I think like this’, all of this evokes a high degree of engagement in the reader. As soon as a text changes to ‘we’, distance is created. Paul’s own texts mostly begin with ‘I’, those of the editors and of the homilies are predominantly ‘we’ texts. Paul begins with, ‘For you have heard of my former life (…). How I persecuted (...) I was advancing in Judaism beyond many (…).’ This raises the question who this ‘I’ is who is speaking in such a penetrating manner. By doing so, we gain some insight into the manner in which the editors try to obscure something. The way they do it is quite similar to what is done by Luke in Acts round about the same time. Luke repeatedly mentions James, but nowhere does he clarify that in the first chapters this is James the son of Zebedee and then further on James the Davidean, the brother of Jesus. The latter was unwelcome to him and so he obscured his identity. There is hardly any reader who will notice the transition. The writer of Acts does something similar, when, in a casual remark in Acts 13, he dismisses the change of name from Saul to Paul: Saulos de, (ho kai Paulos) – ‘But Saul, who was also called Paul (…)’. Not a word is said about the reason for this name change from Saul into Paul in the presence of the Roman proconsul Lucius Sergius Paullus. First, let us have a look at another example of the editors getting rid of a rather important distinction. At the beginning of the first letter to the Corinthians it is Paul himself who is writing, about the different factions that have formed among the believers at Corinth: the followers of Simon Peter from Jerusalem, those of Apollos from Alexandria and Paul’s own.

182

Chapter Thirteen

In the short editorial introduction to the account of his trip to Jerusalem, the editors insert a text. ‘I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel.17‘ The ‘I’ who is speaking here is not Paul, and the factions and apostasy mentioned here have nothing to do with the ones Paul denounced at Corinth in the 50’s, but refer to events taking place in Ephesus about half a century later. In order to make that clear it is useful to point out some peculiarities of that text. The text strongly emphasis unity: there can only be one gospel, there is no other option. Furthermore, that gospel is not because of a man or people, but directly from God. In doing so the text thus links up with the heading of this letter in which the same presumptuous position is taken. A position that was not shared by Paul; on the contrary, he travelled to Jerusalem to gain approval and permission for his missionary work from the powerful apostles there. Paul does appeal to a revelation, but, being a Jew, is a revelation from the Eternal, while this text is about a revelation for a Christian from Jesus Christ18. The editors also show themselves in the repetition. Twice in succession the unity of the proclamation is emphasized19. And both times all who deviate from this imposed unity are solemnly cursed through ecclesiastical authority20. Such an anathema is not found anywhere in Paul, but it does resound in the third homily21. The ‘I’ who is speaking in this text is the same person who continues his argument from Galatians 2, 15 onwards22. There we find the same emphasis on the unity of the proclamation. The ‘I’ addresses those who in defiance claim, ‘We ourselves are Jews by birth and not gentile sinners – Hèmeis phusei Ioudaioi kai ouk ex ethnǀn amartǀloi23. ‘Sinners’ is an overly abstract translation of amartǀloi (ethnikoi): people who serve idols. The ‘I’ does not only address those who are Jews 17

Galatians 1, 6-12 Galatians 1, 12. 19 Galatians 1, 8 and 9. 20 In I Corinthians 12, 3 it is not seen as a denunciation by Paul. 21 Romans 9, 3. 22 Galatians 1, 6-12. 23 Galatians 2, 15. 18

The tempo of the text

183

but also Greeks, those who ‘formerly not knowing God, were enslaved to those that by nature are not gods,’ idols24. The speaker is fiercely against ‘the curse of the Law’ which makes slaves of man while faith in Christ has set them free25. The speaker identifies himself as ‘I have become as you are’ – hoti kagǀ hǀs humeis26. As is often the case, the Dutch translation is incorrect. It says that his audience (or readers) should be like the speaker ‘for I too am like you, brethren’. ‘You have never yet saddened me’, the text continues. This is quite a different situation from Paul’s, who in his ‘letter of tears’ frequently reproaches the Corinthians and clearly says that their conflicts with him are regrettable. The sentence that follows is odd: ‘You know it was because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you at first. 27‘ The Greek text is oidate de hoti di’astheneian tès sarkos (…). The word used, astheneia indicates a physical shortcoming, lack of strength, infirmity. To asthma, ‘gasping’ is related to it. It is remarkable that here sarx instead of sǀma is used to indicate a physical defect. It is a strange phrase which can be found once more elsewhere, namely in Romans 6, 19, with reference to 8, 26. ‘You know it was because of a bodily ailment, a carnal weakness, that I preached the gospel to you at first.28‘ At the time, the text continues, the speaker had been welcomed warmly but now he is being treated with hostility. Probably it will never be clear what the reason was for these outpourings. But one thing is very clear: this ‘I’ is another person than Paul and the disputes at issue here are not the faction disputes that Paul is referring to as Paul was writing about internal conflicts among the Jews in Corinth in the 50’s. All Jews longed for salvation, for the coming of the Kingdom of God and God’s Anointed. Then the first rumours from Jerusalem arrived that were incredible, unbelievable: He had come, the son of David, King of Israel in the Name of the Highest. He had been triumphantly welcomed into the holy city by a deliriously enthusiastic crowd and had taken possession of the Temple and purified it. And then he had failed and had 24

Galatians 4, 8. Galatians 3, 13 and 4, 9. 26 Galatians 4, 12. 27 Galatians 4, 13. 28 Galatians 4, 13. 25

184

Chapter Thirteen

been nailed to the cross like a common criminal! But, hear ye, hear ye, some, first Simon the Rock and then the Twelve, state that the Living One accepted the sacrifice and had raised the crucified man who had been beaten to death to His heavenly throne. The Living, the Eternal had raised him from the dead! Some embraced those messages, while others dismissed them as mere nonsense and as giving in too quickly to hope and expectation. And men had come from Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch, emissaries of God’s Anointed. What and whom should they believe? Quarrels and scuffles ensued. Even the authorities took notice, and in several cities, as far as in Rome, measures were taken against those – in Roman eyes – rabble rousers. ‘These men are Jews, and they are disturbing our city (Philippi). They advocate customs that are not lawful for us as Romans to accept or practice.29‘ And in Thessalonica, the Jews agitate the government even more fiercely to take action against their people: ‘These men who have turned the world upside down have come here also, (…) and they are all acting against the decrees of Caesar, saying that there is another king, Jesus. 30‘ These were the quarrels of the Jews among themselves about the coming of God’s Anointed. But during the years around the turn of the first century and in the Roman provincial capital Ephesus, the point of contention had completely shifted. Now it concerned disputes between Greeks and Jews, between those who adhered to the new faith and those who wanted to remain faithful to the old Law and regulations. The conflict in the fifties had to do with a mutual dispute within the Jewish community about the meaning of the coming of the Messiah. After that, the subject of the conflict had changed and became a dispute between the original Jewish views and the growing Christian faith community where the Greeks gained the upper hand. In the fifties the legitimacy, the mission on behalf of the apostles in Jerusalem was important. Fifty years on, Jerusalem no longer played a role, then the ecclesiastical authorities, the first bishops, were concentrating on the unity of the doctrine and were, in threatening language, already able to forbid certain ideas and pronounce anathemas. It is particularly 29 30

Acts 16, 20-21. Acts 17, 6-7.

The tempo of the text

185

fascinating how, by editing the texts, it was possible to obscure the difference between both, essentially dissimilar, disputes in such a way that the texts of Paul appeared to relate to conflicts that were unknown to him and did not concern him.

E Anonymous B and A -1After the factions, finally the persons. Who actually wrote the texts that would go down in history as ‘the letters of Paul’? ‘I, Paul, myself entreat you, (…) I who am humble when face to face with you, but bold toward you when I am away!31‘ This is the beginning of an apparently autobiographical text, quite a protracted long text taking up the closing chapters ten, eleven and twelve of the second letter to the Corinthians. It has been demonstrated that in Marcion’s second edition of ‘the letters of Paul’, which appeared in Rome in the mid-second century, these three chapters were already present. We can therefore accept that they were also included in the first edition. But in the edition prepared by Marcion chapters eight and nine are missing, so there is a kind of gap between the first half of the epistle (the first seven chapters) that were partly written by Paul and the closing chapters – ten, eleven and twelve. Those closing chapters were certainly not written by Paul, despite the assurance in the opening lines. Here, an inspired person, a shrewd writer and speaker manages to captivate his audience with a kind of masquerade of folly who indulges in vehement expletives against his opponents: liars! devils! even. In this typical Greek moriae encomium, praise of folly, no reference is made (apart from the trivial one in 10, 17) in three chapters to the Law or prophets. In the midst of this defence of folly, we find Paul’s ostensible autobiography, as is generally accepted. That suggestion is inescapable to later readers, but was not at all obvious to the first readers. Although the word ‘I’ resounds like a drumbeat throughout the text, only the opening words state that this person is supposed to be Paul. Autos de egǀ Paulos. There you are!. Translated into Latin: Ego ipse vero Paulus. That is such 31

II Corinthians 10, 1.

186

Chapter Thirteen

an ostentatious emphasis that any attentive reader will hesitate. It is hammered into us that it is really Paul himself who is speaking here. If it were indeed a letter from Paul, that emphasis would of course have been quite unnecessary. For a philologist it is a signal, an alarm bell: here something is imposed upon us. In a previous chapter we established that the conclusion of the biographical account given in II Corinthians corresponds to the one in Romans 8, 3532. It ends the second homily, of which Anonymous B is the author. The second collection of letters to Corinth ended with this editor and a biographical account. As to the series of adversities experienced in life: tribulation or distress, persecution, hunger, nakedness, danger to life, also è machaira – ‘(to be killed) by the sword33‘ is included – therefore the oldest and first record of Paul’s death – and so we may assume that this is not a text of Paul himself. It was written around the turn of the first century, by Anonymous B. As a portrait of Paul or as a self-portrait? Or both in one? In order to learn how an ancient biography was drawn up and what its aims were, Cornelius Nepos provides a series of instructive examples. His Liber de excellentibus ducibus exterrarum gentibus (generally known as De viris illustribus) probably originates from sometime in the thirties BC and clearly shows that these biographies are intended as exempla, examples to be followed, in which the virtutes in particular, the virtues and character traits of the person described should be delineated. The means for this are words as well as mimicry. An example of this is to be found in the biography of the Theban Epaminondas. Nepos interrupts his account because he deems it necessary to make clear first of all to his readers that one should never judge someone’s norms by their own norms. Then he gives an account of his own working method: ‘I will first tell you about his origins, then by whom and in which subjects he was taught, then about his character and talents and other noteworthy qualities, and finally about his (military) actions.34‘ Also in the account of Paul’s life by Anonymous B a description is used in a kind of mimicry, a challenging game of folly and defence. It is quite obvious that the biography functions as an exemplum, an example to 32

II Corinthians 11, 26-29. Romans 8, 35. 34 Nepos. C.: Liber de excellentibus ducibus exterarum gentibus XV, 1. 33

The tempo of the text

187

be followed by Christians: the facts are presented to the reader not because they were actually true, but are an example and to be brought to mind when standing firm in times of persecution. ‘I will tell you about his origins first,’ says Nepos. And Anonymous B does the same: by descent a Hebrew, an Israelite, a son of Abraham. ‘Then the training he received (...)’ – ‘More than anyone else, I am in the service of God’s Anointed’. ‘Then about his character and talents (...)’. – ‘with far greater labours, far more imprisonments, with countless beatings, and often near death.’ ‘And other noteworthy traits.’ – ‘Five times I received at the hands of the Jews the forty lashes less one. Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I was stoned. Three times I was shipwrecked.’ ‘And finally about his deeds.’ – ‘Always traveling and enduring all sorts of dangers, toiling and worrying, ‘apart from other things, there is the daily pressure on me of my anxiety for all the churches.35‘ Carried away by his account and his enthusiasm, the writer forgets for a moment that here Paul is supposed to write to his congregation at Corinth: hè merimna pasǀn tǀn ekklèsiǀn – the care (the management) over all churches36. Cura omnium ecclesiarum; this could be written around the turn of the first century by an archbishop, who was encumbered with the management of the churches of Ephesus and the entire province of Asia. The text can be swallowed whole (and that was what happened for two millennia) but then the digestion would suffer. That the text is not from a letter from Paul to the congregation at Corinth may be evident from the mention of being shipwrecked thrice and the night spent on the high seas after being shipwrecked37. But the sea voyage to Rome and the shipwreck near Malta and drifting on the high seas for a day and a night did not take place until several years later. Also the statement about being imprisoned for many years could only make sense after the two years imprisonment in Caesarea and the two years imprisonment in Rome. But that took place later (from 55 to 59), after the correspondence to Corinth. And then there is the mention of 35

II Corinthians 11, 22; 11, 23; 11, 24-25 and 11, 26-28. II Corinthians 11, 28. 37 II Corinthians 11, 25. 36

188

Chapter Thirteen

being decapitated by the sword in the parallel ‘auto’-biography38. That cannot be Paul speaking here, evidently, but someone writing after his death and giving an overview of his life and death. Was it taken from the Acts written by Luke, which was also written in about AD 100 and probably also in Ephesus? Possibly, but the report that Luke gives does deviate on essential points from these two biographical reports. After the publication of the book of Acts, it would be difficult to come up off-hand with another story about Paul’s life and suffering. Perhaps, therefore, the two biographies in the letters are the earliest surviving reports.

-2Texts of antiquity are like present-day plastic packaging material where you first have to look carefully where the little tab is, necessary to reach the content. The starting point is that they cannot be authentic texts by Paul from the fifties. We provided some reasons to back this up above. Because of the similarity between the biography with which the second homily in Romans 8 ends and the biography with which the letters to Corinth end, my conclusion is that one and the same writer, the Anonymous B, is responsible for both biographies. That provides an opportunity, an opening to reach the content. The first, short biography, was read out, included in a homily and held in front of an audience. The second, longer biography, is part of a longer and fairly consistent text, a written apology, a quite elaborate defence of folly. Anyone who is willing to seriously consider my thesis, my hypothesis, that the first edition of Paul’s letters was published in response to an earlier series of sermons, homilies, held around the turn of the first century in Ephesus, will be aware that the spoken short autobiography came before the later, more elaborate written autobiography. This provides an exciting opportunity to determine the difference between fact and fiction. In the short biography the Anonymous makes no attempt to conceal himself. The audience saw him standing before them and he spoke of someone (Paul) whom he presented as an example to his audience. So he 38

Romans, 8, 35.

The tempo of the text

189

told about his exemplary life and also reminded his audience of the way that life had come to an end (which apparently was known to his audience): ‘by the sword’, beheaded just outside Rome. Then about four decades ago. In the more extensive biography, a rhetorically well-constructed text with numerous contrapositions and appended provisos, examples for the main theses and an almost exhaustive accumulation of vicissitudes, a later editor pretended that all this had happened to Paul and that Paul had written this down himself. We have seen that it was not Paul but a prominent church leader, a bishop, about half a century after Paul’s death, who was responsible for this text. His readers may well have understood that he was telling them about the founder of their faith community, the exemplary apostle. Paul was a man of whom some elderly people still might have a vague memory but about whom stories were still circulating. Those sea voyages, shipwrecks, floggings – yes, they had heard of them. They were unable to separate fact and fiction. Five times the forty lashes less one by the Jews: a punishment for Jews who violated the Law, imposed on the devotee for the Law Paul? And having been beaten three times by order of the Roman magistrate? A punishment that was expressly forbidden to be given to someone such as Paul, who had Roman civil rights? Of the almost staccato rhetorical summary, the audience would have understood that this was all a bit exaggerated and meant as a manner of speaking. And towards the end: – ‘apart from other things, there is the daily pressure on me of my anxiety for all the churches’, they would have understood that their spiritual shepherd was now talking about himself and no longer about the magnificent example from the past. The overview of Anonymous B about the life of Paul which has the appearance of being autobiographical, therefore consists of: - Remainders of memories, fragments of tradition, partly correct, largely incorrect: – beatings, sea voyages, imprisonment – - Rhetorical exaggerations: – robbers and rivers, toil and worry, hunger and thirst, cold and nakedness – - A portrait of the Anonymous himself: – burdened with the laborious concerns for all the churches under his administration, full of cares day and night –.

Chapter Thirteen

190

-3Who those two anonymous authors were will remain unknown forever. Anonymous A is responsible for a number of homilies (included in Galatians beginning with 2, 15, and Romans, beginning with the third and the ninth chapters) In addition, as editor he compiled the first letter to the Corinthians and included therein (chapters 9, 11 and 15) his own writings of vital importance, such as the one on the victory over death. His opponent and ally was the Anonymous B. He held the homily that forms the chapters 5 – 8 of the letter to the Romans. It contains the passionate and penetrating plea of Romans 8. He was also the editor of the second letter to the Corinthians, which he concluded with a grotesque defence of folly and a story of the life of his great example, Paul. This may also explain the division of the correspondence with Corinth into a first and second letter: each compiled by a different editor. That is why the first letter mainly focuses on factions conflicts and the second on personal vicissitudes. The third author is Paul. His texts, dating from five decades before, were still the backbone of the correspondence and his authority was still respected. He it was who had come from Jerusalem on behalf of the apostles to proclaim the faith in God’s Anointed. He was the founder of the Ephesian congregation where he had been active for five years. Apparently the editors had contacts with the circle around John the Evangelist, also active in Ephesus, and included a text from that circle, In Praise of Love. Four writers, two names and for the rest mainly uncertainty and conjecture. Before attempting to find out anything more about the editions of Paul’s texts, it is helpful, after having observed the methods used by the editors39, to consider the implications associated with the texts of Paul himself. The collection of letters included five types of texts by Paul himself: 1.

39

First of all, evidently, parts of the correspondence with the Corinthian congregation, letters written between 52 and 55 sent by sea from Ephesus to that harbour town. The content is hardly theological, but mostly filled with notes on pastoral care:

See: Introduction.

The tempo of the text

2.

191

regulations for the meetings; decrees on morality; regulations about whether or not to use pagan sacrificial meat. Within the given framework of the relationship between the validity of the Jewish Law and the belief in God’s Anointed as discussed in the homilies and pamphlets, these fragments fulfilled a function. They gave substance to daily practice and a living attitude within this renewed framework. It is no longer possible to determine to what extent the guidelines of Paul, based on the Scriptures, fitted within that framework. After all, what the editors no longer considered appropriate, was not included in the text editions. A separate contribution are Paul’s three letters in which he expresses another aspect of his apostolate, not the proclamation of the faith but the raising of money. None of those three begging letters had been included in Marcion’s edition40. Above, in the list of observations regarding the criteria used by the editors, I indicated that these three begging letters were probably connected to the comment in Galatians 2, 10 about the financial support of the saints, the poor of the congregations of Jerusalem and Judea. But that was not included in Marcion’s edition. That merely referred to the agreement reached with the apostles in Jerusalem and ‘they asked us to remember the poor.41‘ The rest of the sentence, the main point, was missing and what was added was: ho kai espedousa auto touto epoièsai – ‘the very thing I was eager to do.42‘ The change from the plural ‘we’, to the singular ‘I’ is in itself a sign of this later editorial insertion. The position of the begging letters also betrays the later insertion by an editor. In the first letter to the Corinthians, 16, 1-6 forms a kind of appendix to the letter. In the second letter to the Corinthians the two begging letters interrupt the ongoing discourse43. It is obvious to conclude that the editor who added the statement of Galatians 2, 10b also had the three begging letters included in a later edition.

40 A. von Harnack: Marcion. Das Evangelium vom fremden Gott. Darmstadt 1996, p. 96* and 100*-101*. 41 Galatians 2, 10a. 42 Galatians 2, 10b. In a footnote on p 71* Von Harnack says about this text that the words of 2, 10b are ‘nicht bezeugt’ – not attested but – ‘werden aber nicht gefehlt haben’ – would not have been omitted. He provides no further explanation. 43 II Corinthians 8, 1-24 and 9, 1-15.

Chapter Thirteen

192

3.

4.

5.

44

This may also be true of the autobiographical ‘novella’. The editor who knew that Paul had been beheaded by the sword44, may also have been responsible for adding the account attributed to Paul dealing with his own life45. Possibly Paul’s life may not have been relevant in the first edition. It was not until the apostle had gained authority through ‘his’ letters that the demand for information about his life arose. The texts that are really autobiographical, and certainly included in the oldest editions, are the ones at the beginning of the letter to the Galatians46. These texts were heavily edited and were not intended to provide information about Paul’s life. They were of much greater importance to the editors and entirely in line with their intentions, because the texts are about being a Jew, faithful to the Law and to the faith in God’s Anointed. They therefore support – in their edited and mutilated form – the text edition that was at the forefront of the three homilies and the pamphlets of Galatians. They provide an image of Paul that – adjusted by the editors – fitted in with the image constructed through the collection of texts. Whether this does justice to the reality of Paul’s actions cannot be determined, but certainly not in this rewritten form. The last point has to do with the apostolic authority that the editors are eager to adhere to Paul and subsequently derive support from it for their own purpose. Whereas Paul goes to Jerusalem to come to an agreement with the Arch-Apostles, the editors reshape it into a disagreement, and crucially end the scene with a conflict between Peter and Paul. Authority was also bestowed on the apostle by the later inscriptions above the letters; ostentatious as the beginning of the letter to the Romans is, it later infers at the beginning of Galatians an omnipotent authority coming directly from God. The editors added extra weight to the edition by adding the names of Sosthenes and Timothy in the inscriptions. Timothy, certainly, the son of a Jewish mother,

Romans 8, 35. II Corinthians 11, 21-31 and 12, 1-10. 46 Galatians 1, 13-23 and 2, 1-14. 45

The tempo of the text

193

Eunice, and a Greek father and said to come from Lystra in Galatia, was an authoritative man in Ephesus.

CHAPTER FOURTEEN SCRATCHING, TEARING AND SCRIBBLING

-aOnce again we will read the text, perhaps even more slowly and more attentively, but also with fewer certainties, with fresh indications and different ways of reading and understanding. We don’t know how the first edition came into being. Were the names of Paul, Silvanus, and Timothy mentioned as its authors as they are in II Corinthians 1, 19? Were names of others mentioned, such as Epaphroditus? We can only conclude that the clear intention was to identify the oft-mentioned ‘I’ as Paul. Whether the first edition began with the quite pretentious acclaim which we know from the second edition, that of Marcion, is another question. The editors open the edition in an expected manner, programmatically: ‘I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of the Anointed and are turning to a different gospel1‘ – thaumazǀ hoti houtǀs tacheǀs metatithesthe apo tou kalesantos humas en chariti christou eis heteron euangelion. Traditionally, we are meant to fill in the name Paul for ‘I’. But is that really the case? Thaumazǀ is the first word, ‘I am amazed’, ‘I am surprised’. It is a word that Paul does not use anywhere else2. In general Paul was not so easily surprised; he was no Greek. He was a devout Jew proclaiming the truth and used explanations like ‘know, brethren’ and ‘according to the scriptures’ or ‘according to the Law’. In earlier chapters I pointed out that here it is not Paul speaking in the fifties to the Jewish congregation of Corinth but an editor at the end of the first century addressing the Christians of Ephesus. The amazement is 1

Galatians 1, 6. It can only be found in II Thessalonians 1, 10, a text not by Paul but actually opposing his ideas.

2

Scratching, tearing and scribbling

195

caused by the rapid turning astray, the apostasy, the fall from grace. The chosen word, tacheǀs, indicates the speed, the hastiness with which it happened. It was apparently not a prolonged process but a sudden decision. The reader may wonder through whom or why these people so quickly and suddenly decided to turn away from the gospel. Had their circumstances dramatically changed as the result of the Jews defeat in the war, the conquest of the land, the destruction of the holy city and the temple, and the expulsion of their God from his temple and his people from their land? The chosen verb, meta-tithèmi, cannot be translated as ‘deserting the faith’. It has to do with ‘moving’, ‘taking a different position’. This is also expressed by the prepositions apo, ‘from’ and eis, ‘in’. The verb is used in the medial form: metatithesthe, and thereby expresses the involvement of those who take a different point of view. They turn, apo, from ‘him that gave them grace’, and turn to, claim, ‘another gospel’." Many translations capitalise the word ‘Him’. Him, the Lord. This is due to the fact that the text is suspended in the air and deliberately or not leaves unanswered from whom that grace is derived. Therefore later manuscripts supplemented: Christou, Ièsou Christou, Christou Ièsou, theou. But none of that is written here and this ‘him’ can also simply be Paul. The editorial introduction lashes out vehemently against those who choose another evangelical congregation3. The true one is characterized as ‘the grace’ the other, up to five times, as the work of men. In a harsh, authoritarian way the latter group is condemned and repeatedly cursed. Paul nowhere assumed authority to pronounce an anathema. But already at the beginning of the third homily, the speaker loudly curses the brothers who deviate from the doctrine4. And the editorial ending of the first letter to the Corinthians lashes out fiercely once more5. And here twice in a row. How violent and threatening that anathema is intended may be evident from the anathema directed against Paul himself by the forty Jews who came to the high priest. ‘They said – anathemati anethematisan heautous – we have strictly bound ourselves by an oath to taste no food till we have killed Paul.

3

Galatians 1, 6-12. Romans 9, 3. 5 I Corinthians 16, 22. 4

196

Chapter Fourteen

The reader should notice that the editors give an assurance five times that the true gospel is not because of men, but immediately follow the text in which Paul says that Kèphas and also James, the lord’s brother, agreed with him in Jerusalem that he was an emissary for the peoples.

-bSo the editors face the problem that within the faith community (at Ephesus around AD 100), many believers choose to withdraw from their ecclesiastical authority, to use the modern term, and choose to interpret the proclamation in a different way. But what is the dispute about? That can hardly be interpreted any other way than that it has been caused by the friction between the original core of the congregation, the Jews adhering to the Jewish Law, the dietary laws, the writings and precepts, the covenant and expectation, the promise and fulfilment thereof through the coming of God’s Anointed – and the Greeks who also believed but increasingly distanced themselves from, and even became hostile towards the Jews. First, in the fifties, there had been differences, conflicts even, within the Jewish community between those who believed in the coming of the Kingdom and God’s Anointed and those who denounced Jesus’ unsuccessful attempt as human failure. Of course, all Jews longed for salvation and the coming of the Messiah, but there were those who came with the glad tidings: God’s Anointed is among us. ‘He will be great and will be called the son of the Most High. And the Lord God will give to him the throne of his father David, and he will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.6‘ In addition to the majority of Jews who rejected this proclamation of salvation, there was also disagreement within the minority: some held on to the authoritative reports from Jerusalem of Kèphas, others remained faithful to the Baptist interpretation proclaimed by Apollos from Alexandria, and yet others were convinced by the words of Paul. Both of these disputes were internal Jewish quarrels. The strife of half a century later was between the believers who held to the Jewish way of life, the wisdom of the Law and the promise, fulfilled in the coming of 6

Luke 1, 32-33.

Scratching, tearing and scribbling

197

God’s Anointed, and those who increasingly found themselves opposed to Jews and those Greeks who believed that with the fulfilment of the promise salvation had also come and the new faith in the anointed had also brought new liberty, release from the yoke of the Law.

-cAnd so the editors were faced with a problem: how do these two factions stand within the religious community? How can authority be restored and unity maintained and how to deal with the growing hostility between Jews and Greeks? Problems that could be discussed at a high level, such as the relationship between Law and the promise and faith and fulfilled expectations – but within the congregation usually at a less profound level – that of the daily difficulties with: the Jewish dietary laws, or moral behaviour, or the position of women, or the regulations of the meetings. With this problem in mind, is it possible to gain insight into the decisions and choices made by the editors? It is worth a try. If we can make this clearer, then we will not yet have found any definite proof, but we will have found strong indications for the sustainability of our hypotheses about the first editions.

-dIn the beginning there were thin threads that left more to be guessed than offer any answers. But gradually the web of clues solidified and we may now be able to outline the structure of the first edition. The editorial introductory piece of Galatians 1, 6-12 does indeed contain a programme that is then recognisably carried out. The editors intend to discuss the authority in the faith congregation, the apostolic authority. The first text the editors provide, therefore, deals with the manner in which the Church of Ephesus was founded: the statement by Paul about his visit to Jerusalem, the agreement reached there with the Arch-Apostles and the confirmation of his mission as emissary, apostle7. That apostolic authority is necessary because of the disputes, as many members choose other options of the faith. That is therefore the first

7

Galatians 1, 13 t/m 2, 10

198

Chapter Fourteen

theme with which Paul’s admonitions begin8. However, what is obscured is that the issues involved here, for the editors, are different ones from those of Paul. The edited introduction emphasizes the proclamation on behalf of God and not by human standards. When the text in I Corinthians 3, 1 to 4, 21 – two chapters in length – elaborates further on the nature of the apostolic authority concerning those disputes, here too the emphasis is placed on human failure. ‘But I, brothers, could not address you as spiritual people, but as people of the flesh (…).9‘, The contrast is not spiritual versus secular but pneumatikois versussarkinois, ‘filled with the spirit’ versus ‘imprisoned in the flesh’, free versus imprisoned. The text continues with the same words where the translators then alternate between earthly and worldly dispositions. The text attempts to subdue the human conflicts: ‘What then is Apollos? What is Paul? Servants through whom you believed (…).’ And then the comparison: ‘I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth.10‘ The preceding chapter also emphasizes that the gospel is from God and does not depend on human weakness. In the beautiful words of the King James Version: ‘And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling, and my speech and my preaching not in fluent words of man’s wisdom, but in the demonstration of the spirit and of power: that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.11‘ Before going on to a series of Paul’s recommendations, apostolic authority is once again emphasized. For the benefit of the readers inferences are drawn from the foregoing: ‘I have applied all these things to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brothers.12‘ A severe lesson, uttered mockingly in a superior tone and without any reference to texts of prophets or psalms. A composition filled with rhetorical ingenuity, pointed contrasts and exaggerations. No text from Paul. The same words are used as those with which the first letter to the Corinthians is closed by the editor in the fictitious account of the apostle’s life: ‘(…) we have become a spectacle to 8

I Corinthians 1, 10 t/m 2, 16. I Corinthians 3, 1. 10 I Corinthians 3, 6. 11 I Corinthians 2, 3-5. 12 I Corinthians 4, 6. 9

Scratching, tearing and scribbling

199

the world, to angels, and to men; we are fools for Christ’s sake, but you are wise in Christ; we are weak, you are strong. You are held in honour, but we in disrepute. To the present hour we hunger and thirst, we are poorly naked and buffeted and homeless, and we labour, working with our own hands. When reviled, we bless; when persecuted, we endure; when slandered, we entreat. We have become, and are still, like the scum of the world, the refuse of all things. 13‘ Quite! It is no longer ‘I’ who is speaking but ‘we, the apostles’. It is a quite indignant church authority that is fiercely committed to maintaining its power and authority. And their claims are based on Paul: ‘For though you have countless guides in Christ,’ only one is the father, ‘for I became your father in Jesus Anointed’. And afterwards came ‘Timothy, my beloved and faithful child’. And after this claim to authority open threats follow: ‘Some are arrogant,’ but ‘I will find out not the talk of these arrogant people but their power’ when ‘I come to you with a rod.14‘ En rhabdǀi, with the rod of the Roman authorities. The rod of righteousness and discipline, the rod of His wrath.

-eThe editorial set-up, the framework, the cage in which Paul’s texts are captured, is perfectly clear; it illustrates the tense relationship within the congregation between the old guard, the Jewish believers, true to Law and promise, the covenant and expectation, and the younger believers, Greeks especially, full of the fulfilment of the promise, the liberty in Christ and the belief in the victory over death. That problem arose on two levels. The everyday level of: what do we eat and drink, what to do with the strict dietary laws that one’s neighbour ignores, or with the cheap sacrificial meat that they are allowed to eat and not we? And so on. But it could also be raised to a higher level and required theological considerations of the relationship between the Jewish Law and the new faith in Christ. Anyone who is willing to consider this and is also willing to acknowledge the original order of the texts (Galatians first), will notice this threefold pinch. Schematically:

13 14

I Corinthians 4, 9-13. I Corinthians 4, 15-17; 4, 18-21.

Chapter Fourteen

200

1.

2.

3.

15

The editors begin with their introduction and clear positioning against the Jewish Law and for the belief in God’s Anointed15 and conclude with the three homilies in which the same dilemma between Law and faith is explained in more detail16. Within this framework Paul’s texts regarding the dietary laws and the confrontation about them with the Jewish views were fitted in 17 . Paul’s contributions close with his admonitions regarding dietary laws18. In between, fragments from Paul’s letters included, mainly to cool down the burning issues. In I Corinthians, there is first the fifth chapter, an attention seeking opener, about incest. The sixth chapter is on pagan courts, the seventh about marriage and unmarried people and the eighth on sacrificial meat and offal. The ninth opposes the way in which the men of Jerusalem, Kèphas, and the members of the Davidean family treat women and also deals with working for one’s livelihood. The tenth chapter again opposes the Jews and their laws and customs: ‘with most of them God was not pleased’. They ‘sat down to eat and drink and rose up to play’ and committed fornication19. Then there are more rules about eating with Gentiles and the use of sacrificial meat. Chapters 12 and 14 (then still a unity and not yet broken by chapter 13 with the Praise of Love) deal with the way in which the gatherings should take place and whether or not to allow calling out in ecstasy or in prophesying. The series of texts concludes with establishing the order of gatherings, legitimized by God20.

Galatians 1, 6-12 en 2, 15 – the end. Romans 1 – 12. 17 Galatians 2, 11-14. 18 Romans 14, 1-23. 19 I Corinthians 10. 5; 10, 7; 10, 8. 20 Romans 14, 26-33; 14, 33. 16

Scratching, tearing and scribbling

201

Two Roman ways of writing: a wooden tablet spread with wax, a spatula to erase the text, a double inkwell and a volumen, a book roll. Fresco 1st century found in Pompeii. (Archeological Museum, Napels)

Later editors were not quite satisfied with all this and added texts: Chapter 13 – In Praise of Love and the misogynist text21. The first editors had already ended with a grandiose text, chapter 15 on the victory over death, then in the sixteenth chapter followed it with some travel plans and greetings.

-fThe choice of text fragments from Paul’s correspondence in II Corinthians also fits perfectly within the editorial scheme. It begins with a report that drew attention far and wide, even as far away as Rome (according to the first letter of Clement of Rome) – the elaborate account of the conflict between Kèphas and Paul, breaking off abruptly with the words: ‘So I took leave of them and went on to Macedonia22.’ Then comes a series of digressions about the apostolate. It contains biting comments, such as on ‘(…) the ministry of death, carved in letters

21 22

Romans 14, 33b-40. II Corinthians 2, 13.

202

Chapter Fourteen

on stone.23‘ The characterisation of the stone tablets of Moses as ‘the ministry of death’ we can find in the words of both authors of the homilies and in the closing chapters of Galatians, words originating from the editors, not from the devout and Law-abiding Paul. Hè diakonia tou thanatou – ‘the service of death’ is put here versus tèi kainèi diathèkè of the preceding verse: the Jewish Law as ministry of death versus the new covenant (the New Testament of the Christians). That is by far the most anti-Jewish formula that appears in these letters. The most hostile anti-Jewish conclusion is the well-known: ‘For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.24‘ This is toned down in later interpretations and stripped of its hostility by turning it into generally applicable wisdom. But that was by no means the author’s intention. It clearly says to gar gramma apoktennei, the letters of the written Jewish Law bring death, to de pneuma zǀiopoiei, the Spirit of the Christian faith alone leads to life. From 5, 11 the text deals with the apostolate being in the service of atonement. The apostle through his legitimate authority has to stand apart from any of the factions and end the disputes among them. The sixth chapter then examines how laborious the work of the apostle is and how burdensome this mediating role is. And then, having said all this, the text breaks off again and is again picked up from the break-off in 7, 5: ‘For even when we came into Macedonia (...).’ There Paul finally expresses his joy that everything turned out for the best. The two begging letters, chapters eight and nine, were not included in the first editions and were only added later. The letter concluded from 10, 1, with a kind of self-defence from Paul which, as I pointed out elsewhere was not written by Paul but by an editor25. The edition then concluded with three homilies in which the positions on the relationship between Jewish Law and the Christian faith were explained in many nuances and in-depth opinions. And right at the end Paul is given the last word. It concludes with the brief observation that the entire Jewish Law can be summed up in one commandment: ‘the one who loves another has fulfilled the Law.26‘ That 23

II Corinthians 3, 7. II Corinthians 3, 6. 25 Ch. Vergeer: Wie was Paulus wel?! Op zoek naar zijn teksten. Budel, 2016, pp. 103-134. 26 Romans 13, 8-10. 24

Scratching, tearing and scribbling

203

is rabbinic wisdom that was already said in the Torah itself. Then follows an apocalyptic exhortation: be vigilant, for ‘the night is far gone; the day is at hand.’ The dawn of the coming of the Kingdom of God is coming. The final chapter is lenient in character: an appeal for tolerance and an exhortation not to give or take offence.

CHAPTER FIFTEEN GOSSAMER IN THE BREEZE

The result of our analyses is not merely destructive; on the contrary, as only now does it become possible to observe several things about Paul that had previously remained unknown.

-1Marguerite Yourcenar once remarked, ‘One of the best ways to recreate the world of ideas of a human mind is to reconstruct its library.’ Goethe’s collection of books can still be found next to his study in Weimar. Paul’s library, however has gone, in the letters there is only one vague reference: ‘When you come, bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas, also the books, and above all the parchments.1‘ This kind of intimate sentence is supposed to give the impression of authenticity, but in fact arouses suspicion among philologists. They are not unknown in fictitious letters. Nowadays no one includes the second letter to Timothy among the authentic letters of Paul. The editor suddenly reveals himself by the use of a particular word: tas membranas. That is not really Greek, it is derived from the Latin word membrana, the prepared skins to write on. It could also be used to indicate parchment. Quite expensive materials, more expensive than the papyrus, and used by Jews for copying the Law, the prophets, and psalms. Even though the text may not be authentic, it may possibly say something about what Paul read. In his texts we do not encounter Greek science, philosophy or literature anywhere. Every few sentences he quotes texts from the prophets and psalms and he bases his argument on the Torah, the Law. He quotes so frequently that his argument has the 1

II Timothy 4, 13.

Gossamer in the breeze

205

appearance of an ongoing conversation with prophets, psalms and the Law of Moses. This world of devout reading and careful handling of Jewish Law and scriptures is at odds with the anti-Jewish tendency of texts in Galatians and Romans attributed to him.

-2In some parts this pious dialogue between the Jewish Law and scriptures on the one hand and Paul’s contemplations connected to them on the one other is missing. What is striking is the text of the Praise of Love, a text from John’s circle. The first two chapters of the letter to the Galatians are also worthy of note. These are not texts of Paul’s letters but a kind of report or justification of his journey to Jerusalem. Paul’s letters date from the early fifties. This report can only originate from ten years earlier and is therefore of the utmost importance. The difference in style between the various types of text that the editors used for its text collection is still easily discernible to us. o The collection opens with an introductory report or justification, an apology by Paul regarding his mission to the congregation of Jerusalem and Judea, in agreement with the Arch-Apostles. o Followed by texts of orally given sermons and pamphlets, homilies and diatribes, dating from decades after Paul’s death. o Use was made of written exhortations and explanations by Paul, letters sent from Ephesus to the congregation at Corinth. o editorial additions between the texts and connecting the texts. With quite some hesitations these four types of texts can be dated: - Paul’s account from around the year 44/45, - Paul’s letters written and sent between 52-55. - the texts of Anonymous A and Anonymous B possibly from the 80s, 90s, - editors’ edition from around AD 100.

-3Why did the edition of the texts open with an account of Paul’s journey to Jerusalem? That is a question to which obviously no answer can be found in a statement by the editors, and yet, it is, nevertheless answered by the editors.

206

Chapter Fifteen

For the homilies in the first twelve chapters of the letter to the Romans and in the last four chapters of the letter to the Galatians have a very distinctive theme: what can the Jewish Law, scriptures, customs offer us, now, when we share in the belief in God’s Anointed? The original opening of the first edition was what we know as the letter to the Galatians. This is much more obvious than the later arrangement of the letters, beginning with the letter to the Romans. This later arrangement begins with three complication reflections on the relationship between the Law and the Faith and with texts that were not Paul’s. The original first editions of Paul’s letters began with a text by Paul and the account of the journey to Jerusalem immediately came to the point: what was to be done now that Jerusalem and the Temple had been destroyed and the mother church and its authorities had gone? Paul had been an emissary of God’s Anointed, sent by the Arch-Apostles in Jerusalem. And now? How to continue?

-4That appears to be the editors’ intention. But Paul himself had just as clearly had quite a different intention with that same text. His opening line is mind-blowing: ‘For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the Church of God violently and tried to destroy it. And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers. But (…)2‘ He then suddenly switches sides: from persecutor of the believers in God’s Anointed to believer. And that is what the editors are all about; that is the theme of the redacted text. But Paul does something extraordinary: he emphasizes twice the revelation that changed his life so suddenly and utterly before, by providing dates. First of all it is apparent how much had changed between the AD 40s when Paul wrote about his revelation and the AD 90s when Luke recounted the same event in Acts. The same event? No, it was not. Being a Jew, Paul clearly indicates that it is the Only and Eternal One who has revealed something to him3. Luke is already a Christian and he emphatically describes the revelation as coming from Jesus: ‘I am Jesus, 2 3

Galatians 1, 13-15. Galatians 1, 15-16.

Gossamer in the breeze

207

whom you are persecuting.4‘ He repeats this in two other places5. In the twenty-sixth chapter of Acts in particular, it is made clear how actively Paul led the persecutions, and had a leading role in locating and carrying out the executions, even in cities outside Judea. About the sudden conversion through a revelation much has been written and, above all, much conjectured. By theologians, historians, playwrights and painters. Perhaps the example of another Jewish man, the philosopher Avishai Margalit, is illuminating and revealing. Margalit, like Paul, lived in Jerusalem and, like Paul, on the edge of two worlds. He could not enter some streets and alleys because of Palestinian snipers. Margalit was deeply involved in the establishment of the Jewish state and fought three wars against its enemies. He also fought as a soldier in the Six Day War (1967) and was euphoric about the victory. After the conquest of Jerusalem he, like many others, was ecstatic: the aim of Zionism had been achieved, the Jewish state had proved itself. But on the last day of that war, something else happened to Margalit. It happened while he and everyone else was in a messianic mood ‘why clean the guns again, we won!…’ I suddenly had what I can only describe as a religious revelation. A voice coming from outside and not from yourself. And that voice in me said, “We’re trapped, we’re trapped!” This idea, these words went against everything that had occurred, especially on this day. However, it just kept ringing in my head: “We’re trapped!” I will tell you one more thing, I didn’t speak English at the time, but the words were in English: we are trapped.6‘ Margalit added that it was totally out of step with the events of that day, that there was no question of giving reasons or arguments, and that he did not speak the language, however clearly it spoke to him. From then on, he no longer believed in the state of Israel and turned against it.

-5The opening scene of the original edition, with the exclamation of Paul ‘For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the Church of God violently and tried to destroy it’ and immediately following 4

Acts 9, 5. Acts 22, 8: ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting. And Acts 26, 15. 6 R. Riemen: De universiteit van het leven. Nexus 65, Tilburg 2013. Conversation with Avishai Margalit, p. 90. 5

208

Chapter Fifteen

the account of the revelation and his total conversion, is impressive but not completely reliable. The text begins with a well-known formula: Gnǀrizǀ de, ‘I assure you’. It is the call for extra attention at the proclamation: ‘Behold (…)7‘. Here it is used to refer to the revelation that will be given, but which the editors here give with a Christian and no longer Jewish interpretation: ‘a revelation of Jesus Christ.8‘. It is hard to tell to what extent the editor also interfered with the following text by Paul himself. In any case, the formulation tèn ekklèsian tou theou9 was not yet used in Paul’s time when, although there were Jewish congregations that recognized the coming of God’s Anointed, could not yet really be considered Christian churches. This opening scene, however reliable or authentic the text may be, immediately brings us in medias res, much like the way Tolstoy would begin a story.

-6Anyone who is convinced by the idea that Paul wrote letters to the Romans and Galatians will be reading a text which is less impressive and less centred around the figure of Paul. The letter to the Romans begins with the first twelve chapters with three sermons and hardly any words from Paul himself. Although we know that the oldest known edition of texts collated by Marcion commences with the letter to the Galatians and that the very first (second century) references to Paul’s letters also consider the letter to the Galatians as opening the edition, the generally accepted hypothesis being that Marcion intentionally used the letter in this way.

7

Galatians 1, 11. Galatians 1, 12. 9 Galatians 1, 13. 8

Gossamer in the breeze

209

Fragment of the text of the Apostolikon of Marcion. (Sackler Library, Oxford UK)

However, there is actually no evidence or any indication to support that theory. Neither, as we have seen, can it be maintained that Marcion deleted from the original text parts that were not to his liking. There is a good reason in support of the contrary: the first edition opens with Paul’s account of his journey to Jerusalem and his relationship with the original Jewish congregation in Judea, rather than the elaborate theological expositions with which the letter to the Romans opens. It starts off with a gripping scene, immediately delineating the relationship between Judaism and the new faith. And it begins with a text

210

Chapter Fifteen

by Paul himself. This is an important indication and guideline in understanding the purpose of the edition, something that was obscured by the later editorial composition in which Rome was given precedence over Greeks (Corinthians) and barbarians (Galatians).

-7I mentioned earlier Paul’s tone of voice. It is not really very hard to point out the clear difference between the letters of Paul and the lively transcriptions of the spoken sermons in diatribe style: questions and answers, exclamations and the emotional addresses to an audience. The style of the justification for the journey to Jerusalem or the almost Greek philosophical text of the Praise of Love also differs strikingly from the other texts. Great stylist as he was, Tacitus uses with dramatic effect the solemn style that was possibly derived from Augustus. That style, imitated by Edward Gibbon but sparkling with irony and satire, is instantly recognisable as eighteenth century. Jules Michelet, as P.C. Hooft did two centuries earlier, also imitated the style of Tacitus, but when his descriptions of the events of the French Revolution come tumbling over each other in rapid succession, he abbreviates his sentences in order to speed up the momentum of the text to make it conform with its content. In a similar way, the voices can also be recognized in these ‘Pauline’ texts. The three sermons are well-composed, with momentum and gusto, coherence and theological depth10. The fragments from Paul’s original letters lack that depth and coherence; they falter and show a kind of catalogical enumeration: peri de (…), peri de (…), ‘concerning this’, ‘concerning that’.

-8One doesn’t merely read the words of a text. The most thorough way to immerse yourself in a text and thereby get in touch with the author is to try to listen to the voice, the tone and the pitch. Just as in music a melody will sound completely different when it is played in C-major instead of C sharp-minor. It is not just a semitone higher, but above all it is deeper and sadder. A lot can be covered up in texts but a voice is unmistakable. One 10

I Romans 1 t/m 4, II Romans 5 t/m 8 en III Romans 9 t/m 12.

Gossamer in the breeze

211

can only pick up a voice when one is silent and silences one’s own interpretation. It is about a certain tone, a way of expressing and establishing a relationship between the person speaking or writing and those who are addressed. Prose is full of hidden rhythms that may be discovered by listening to what one reads. As an example look at the opening sentence of the first sermon ‘For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth.11‘ An alluring, dramatic beginning with a delightful Greek sentence. The prosody of the ancient Greeks was based on the quantitative. Apokaluptetai gar orgè theou. The Dutch bible translation opens by translating a word that is not there at all, ‘but’, which moreover gives the impression that this opening sentence is not really an opening sentence but a kind of confutation of something that went before. Nonsense. The beginning is gripping, almost apocalyptic, it evokes a threatening judgment on us. In Greek longer words were preferred to give emphasis. Apokaluptǀ meant ‘to uncover’, ‘to lay bare’ in Plato12. In these early Christian writers it contained already the threat of the divine insight into end and judgment. The apo of the chosen verb is repeated in ap’ouranou, ‘the judgment from heaven’. Opposite this apo, ap’ is epi: epi pasan, over all. That construction is then doubly índicated: asebeian kai adikian anthrǀpǀn, ‘the ungodliness and unrighteousness of men’. This adikia is taken up again and repeated in the following double determination: truth and unrighteousness. The sentence ends with a ‘strong’ word: katechontǀn. This is a form of the verb katechǀ, which means ‘to cover’, ‘to hide’, ‘to suppress’. Through which the drawn bow of the sentence returns to its starting point: revelation from heaven by God, covered, hidden under the earth by men. All this is exquisitely Greek, gripping and revealing, and written with knowledge of rhetoric. Aristotle says that the word must be taken to heart – enthumèma. And in order to achieve this, three means of persuasion – pisteis – can be used: pathos, èthos, deiknunai – ‘feeling’, ‘character’ and ‘reasoning’13.

11

Romans 1, 18. Plato: Protagoras 352a/b. 13 Aristotle: Rhetorica 1356 a1 – b2. 12

212

Chapter Fifteen

This author knows how to apply this in a civilized and competent manner and how to respond to the mood of his audience. In the Greek edition of Kurt Aland and Bruce M. Metzger a comma is put after this sentence, continuing with dioti, ‘for’. Here the weakness of the principle used by them is evident: to restrict themselves to available manuscripts. These manuscripts usually do not go back much earlier than the fourth century and already contain almost all edits and additions from the previous centuries. The perfectly balanced opening sentence is broken by a later addition, which was still missing from Marcion’s edition. The real sermon does not continue until 2, 2. The first sentence of Paul himself in the letter to the Romans is verse 12, 1: ‘I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.’ Parakalǀ oun is a common beginning of Paul’s admonitions: a meaningless word, not evocative but a call to listen and obey. The sentence is halting and contains words that a Greek would know but would not often use. In words like oiktirmon, ‘have mercy’ and parastèsai, ‘to present yourself as’ – a Greek would have said prospherein and thusia, ‘sacrifice’ – Aramaic still resonates and makes the Jewish world audible in which and for which Paul spoke. The expression ta sǀmata humǀn – ‘your bodies’ is rather clumsy, as a kind of pars pro toto for ‘yourselves’. To a Greek the sentence tèn logikèn latreian humǀn will also have sounded odd and bizarre. ‘Which is your spiritual worship’ says the translation. Hè latreia is ‘paid employment’, or ‘slavery’; it means ‘the imposed duties’. Plato also uses it in Socrates’ apologia (23b) for the services we owe the deity, the ‘worship’ we would say. It is a phrase that illustrates the world in which it was once familiar: a Jewish congregation gathered in a Greek harbour town. It is a phrase that Jews, especially those who were familiar with the Greek translation of the Law and Scriptures would have understood whereas their Greek neighbours would have raised their eyebrows and wondered what exactly was meant. To clarify: if I were to say to my son, ‘This kind of pretence would not be condoned by my acquaintances nor upheld,’ he would answer, ‘talk sense dad’ and would then explain that grandad had acquaintances but nowadays you have friends or you meet people through social media.

Gossamer in the breeze

213

He knows the word ‘pretence’, but never uses it, and ‘condone’ also sounds really old-fashioned to him. And this is also the case with Paul’s sentence. A Greek would not call a sacrifice or service logikè, but noètè or pneumatikè. And he would not understand the phrase tèn logikèn latreian humǀn until someone clarified for him: ‘he means to say humas autous hǀs logikèn latreian’.

-9The voice and tone of the sentences become clearer if we can distinguish between Paul’s texts, letters or accounts better; or the texts of others – sermons or pamphlets and editorial texts. Not only does the text become easier to read, but the context also becomes clearer. The three homilies with which the letter to the Romans opens are examples of elegant texts, well composed, with a clear intention and coherence. This is often absent in Paul’s own texts. There the subject is constantly changing: admonitions about immorality; travel plans; remarks regarding the meetings; the use of sacrificial meat; then in a completely different style and tone the begging letters and texts about the victory over death. It is a mixed bag, but we cannot possibly blame Paul for that. When Paul first writes a letter in tears and immediately after is delighted, or when he remarks that he is now coming for the third time, it is impossible for us to find any order in it. Anyone who considers all texts as Paul’s own letters can only conclude that Paul shows little consistent behaviour. But that would not be fair: the editors gave completed and coherent texts of the three homilies, which also refer adequately to each other and elaborate on previous comments. On the other hand, the editors chose from Paul’s letters only those fragments that suited them and could serve their purpose.

-10This last consideration leads to more modesty when making a portrait of Paul. What do we actually know about him and what can we know? The portrait sketched in Acts was made by someone who lived almost two generations after him, would not have known him, nor does it give any indication that he was familiar with Paul’s letters. We do not really know those letters either. Only the fragments the editors chose. Neither do we know the chronological order, nor the entire

214

Chapter Fifteen

letter, nor the most important subjects of the original letters. Some subjects may have been left out because they were no longer relevant to the editors at the time of editing nor were they perhaps compatible with the changing theology. So what can these texts still reveal about the writer? What was Paul’s daily life like in the five years he spent in Ephesus and the months he spent in Corinth? Did he lead the Sabbath service at a home ‘church’? Did he preach there and interpret the Law, the words of the prophets, the psalms? In passing we hear from him that apart from a few exceptions, he did not baptise. How did he raise funds or have contributions collected for the ‘saints’? What was done with the money? Was it banked somehow? Did he bring it with him when he visited Jerusalem? Was he really a Roman citizen by right? And did he nevertheless allow himself to be whipped? Did he speak Aramaic, read Hebrew and speak Greek in the local vernacular? Did he also write or dictate in Greek? Should we really picture him as a poor tent maker or as a powerful patriarch, surrounded by a staff of co-workers? Again more and more questions and there is little in the letters that helps us further. Rather the opposite. In the second letter to the Corinthians the text breaks off in his account of the first voyage to Greece. The editors only pick up the report five chapters later14. What, if anything, had to be concealed? Paul does give hints about his imprisonment and the failed voyage to Corinth, but nowhere do the editors allow us to obtain information about the two years that he was imprisoned in Ephesus or about the complete failure of his last trip to Corinth. What do we actually get to know about this man? What would those who first published his letters really know about him half a century after he was last in Ephesus? What do we actually know about our own fathers? With them we shared part of our life, there is a blood relationship and only one generation difference. Did some elderly people still have vague memories of the man who worked in their town two generations earlier? What image had survived and what writings or testimonies were still there? Was most of it guesswork or was it the voice of the dominating faction? History is mainly trying to form a picture of what has definitely gone. We use the image that suits us, which benefits us and with which we can do something. We discard much that does not fit. This is what the 14

After II Corinthians 2, 14 and the account continues at 7, 5.

Gossamer in the breeze

215

editors did, re-inventing Paul and his words. This may be evident from the two thousand years in which different representations and interpretations of Paul’s life and teachings were given time and again. We save and tear up, when talking we usually mention and hold back what seems best to us later, much later.

-11This is also the case with reference to Paul’s circle of friends, his companions and associates. Thirty-five names are mentioned in the final chapter of Romans. Scholars used to marvel at the many people Paul knew before he ever set foot in Rome. Today this is recognized as an editorial addition. It is remarkable that two lists with greetings were added, to impress us. The first list consists of twenty-seven persons, probably notables from the religious congregation in Ephesus from around the year 100. This is followed by a brief note with greetings from a certain Tertius. The latter list contains four Latin and four Greek names. In the longer list we find five Latin names, two Jewish and many Greek names. The longer list appears to come from a well-travelled preacher of the Faith who had gone ‘from Jerusalem and all the way around to Illyricum,’ was now heading ‘back to Spain’, was ‘going to Jerusalem’ by way of ‘Macedonia and Achaia’ and then ‘I will leave for Spain by way of you [Rome]’15. Whoever that eminent man might have been, it was not Paul. Nor do we know whether the names mentioned by this man and Tertius were contemporaries of Paul. We do know that decades after Paul’s death, the editors were hard at work to surround him with well-known names of influential people at the time – but it remains uncertain when precisely that was. Later editors did the same and with an even freer hand. In the second letter to Timothy, colourless and shoddy work from the second century, it says: ‘Luke alone is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, for he is very useful to me for ministry.’ That is quite something, two of the gospel writers as co-workers of Paul! But they were not from Paul’s generation and Paul did not know them. But by the second century, both of those

15

Romans 15, 19-28.

216

Chapter Fifteen

gospels apparently enjoyed such authority that it was convenient to associate their authors with Paul.

-12Assuming that there are valid arguments that the first edition as well as the second began with what would later be called the letter to the Galatians, we can also gain more insight into some aspects of the structure of the collection of texts. The volume opened with Paul’s apologia, the account of his journey to Jerusalem depicting the well-known conflict between Peter and Paul during which Paul confronted the supreme authority in Jerusalem and told him eyeball-to-eyeball that he was wrong.

Double portrait, from around 450 AD - Peter and Paul in granite, found in Aquileia. Notice the face-to-face confrontation and the right hand as the symbol of Concordia. (Altes Museum Berlin)

The transition from this scene to the editorial commentary is cleverly done. Paul’s last sentence is to reproach Peter: ‘If you, though a Jew, live

Gossamer in the breeze

217

like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?’ And then, ‘We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners.16‘ The latter would be an odd remark if it were addressed to Peter. It only makes sense when we know it is directed towards a different audience. Here the editor takes over the text and alters an existing story to make it one about the pertinence of the Jewish Law to the Christian faith. Which was not the theme of the preceding statements. In that commentary he suggests a few possibilities, as if he were weighing up possible attitudes of faith in front of an audience. That too differs from the tone and tenor of Paul’s previous text: he clearly states his own position with absolute certainty. This author uses the diatribe style and allows himself a typical outburst, to raise a pointed rhetorical question: ‘Is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not!17‘ A completely reprehensible idea, which would never be expressed by Paul. The obvious answer therefore is: mè genoito, ‘certain not!’ That is a very distinctive exclamation, comparable to ‘not bloody likely. Something my father or friends would never use, but immediately calls to mind someone who used it frequently. It is an exclamation which occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, only here and for example no less than three times in the second homily18. A mannerism, a kind of filler word. It is possible to see him with a surprised look on his face firing the exaggerated question and then making a gesture of rejection to the effect of no, never! This may include an important clue: the editor responsible for choosing the opening with Paul’s apologia, this editor-in-chief who is the first to insert a commentary is the same person who produced the second homily. The content and gist of that homily is also fully consistent with the content of this editorial commentary on Law and Faith.

-13Then something stands out that can only be noticed through all previous insights. I stated earlier that chronologically the occurrence described in 16

Galatians 2 14-15. Galatians 2, 17. 18 Romans 6, 2; 6, 15 and 7, 7. 17

218

Chapter Fifteen

short text on the conflict in Antioch should probably be not considered as having taken place following the meeting of the apostles in Jerusalem but before it. The editors put the agreement between Paul and the apostles in Jerusalem in a different light by continuing their edition with an account not of an agreement but a vehement conflict. Even if we dispense with the chronology for a moment, it is clear that these are two separate texts that can be read separately. It consists of only four verses19, but the account of this encounter between Paul and Peter in Antioch is a kind of explosion that has left deep marks in the history of Christianity. It was an extremely effective account. I will offer a comment about it, a suggestion, or if you like, a hypothesis. This text differs from the usual letters, we see it as a report or justification. Neither has it to do with the account of the visit to Jerusalem. The text was broken off by some important editor and continued with the new editor’s own interpretation. It is, if we assume that the first edition began with the explanatory words of Paul, an introductory text. The same editor who broke into it and added his interpretation to it is also speaking again at the end, in the second homily20. Therefore, he was in fact the editor of the beginning and also the end, closing this with what later became known as the fourteenth chapter of the letter to the Romans. It is also a text by Paul about Jewish eating and drinking customs. Yet, unusual for Paul, he gives only one single quotation from the Old Testament, in this case from Isaiah. Whoever reads Galatians 2, 11-14 followed by Romans 14, 1-6 and 14, 2, is reading a complete argument.

-14It would in fact be the first time that, by identifying an editor’s modus operandi, we were able to restore an authentic text of Paul’s. If this is correct, then the way of reading and interpreting the conflict in Antioch reported in Galatians would also change. It is no longer in support of a conflict that, as it were, throws a spanner in the works after the earlier agreement with a missionary assignment from the apostles in Jerusalem. But now it can be seen as an example provided by Paul in justification of 19 20

Galatians 2, 11-14. Romans chapters 5 – 8.

Gossamer in the breeze

219

his precepts regarding Jewish customs in the congregation regarding the meal.

-15This is followed by another aspect which we can see more clearly. The structure of the first two editions of Paul’s letters, which were published at Ephesus and at Rome, is consistent with the account Luke gave in Acts round about the same time. As its starting point, the story of Luke in Acts has Jerusalem, centred around the figure of Peter, then it takes the reader to Antioch, with Paul leading the way to the capital of the world, Rome. The first two editions of Paul’s letters too appear to have started with an account of the mission from Jerusalem to Antioch and Corinth, concluding with the letter or journey to Rome. This initial structure was later indicated by the fictitious addressees Romans and Galatians, and broken by putting the letter to the Romans in first place. Through this the logical structure of the compilation was broken. After all, the points raised here can also be regarded as arguments for the assumption that the edition of the letters originally began with what would later be called the letter to the Galatians.

-16The situation concerning the disagreements between the several factions as elaborately discussed in the letter to the Corinthians also appears in a different and more comprehendible perspective. The letter of Clement of Rome illustrates that it was this matter in particular, the disagreement between the various preachers and their factions, that attracted attention. Those who are reading the texts in the current order will find it difficult to understand what is going on. On the contrary, the usual order, beginning with the letter to the Romans, starts off with the successful achievements of the faith, even in the capital, in Rome. Then there are references to disputes, which are not discussed further. The original order of the texts, beginning with the letter to the Galatians, provides a clearer and different picture: it begins with the authorisation of Paul’s mission and preaching from the authority of Jerusalem, dramatically followed immediately by the conflict between Peter and Paul. Then the strife between the

220

Chapter Fifteen

followers of Peter, Apollos, and Paul, and then the explanations that the newly proclaimed faith is above the old Law and the Jewish customs, circumcision and dietary laws. That is where the dispute between Jerusalem and the new faith was about.

-17None of the several kinds of text included in the edition can be properly read and understood unless we consider the intended readership. For example, Paul wrote his letters as answers to questions. Each time he uses peri de, ‘regarding’ this or that. As we do not know the questions that were sent to him, the answers hang in the air. A much more comprehensible text is Paul’s account of his visit to Jerusalem. This was probably first orally reported then written down. It was also intended to explain the authority given for his mission to a congregation that apparently had to judge him. The purpose was clear enough: the agreement was emphasised, no objections were expressed, no limiting conditions were imposed and the handshake sealed it all. A text that later on was only preserved by adding vicious anti-Jewish insertions and distortions. The three homilies constitute a completely different kind of text. These were given before an assembled congregation and the speaker tried to be as convincing as possible. Paul certainly did assert his authority; after all, he had to, as he wrote to people across the sea. But the man who was giving the sermon found himself face to face with his audience and could see the effects of his words. Paul did not see the effect of his letters but he must have received, at best, mixed reactions: ‘I do not want to appear to be frightening you with my letters. For they say, “His letters are weighty and strong, but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech of no account.”21‘ In contrast, those who held the homilies were passionate speakers with a high degree of persuasiveness. They spoke for about ten minutes before an audience they had to captivate with their very first sentences and to convince them with a coherent argument and with a well-formulated closing sentence which summarized their message concisely. And this they did, skilfully.

21

II Corinthians 10, 9-10.

Gossamer in the breeze

221

Some letter writers write as if they were talking to you, Alexander Pushkin for example. But not Paul; he is not writing to specific persons, directing his words to them, but he is making a text that will be read out in front of a congregation. This means that Pushkin would address a friend, his wife, a neighbour or a sweetheart and could always vary the tone of the letter. Paul’s tone can be fierce, but it is always in the same style, that of the congregation at Corinth.

-18We learned how to read texts quite differently, through Michel Foucault or through Robert Darnton. Darnton’s book The Great Cat Massacre shows how texts were taken up by their environment, publishers, booksellers, reading clubs and magazines22. We know more about the French reading clubs of the eighteenth century than we know about Paul’s surroundings. Still, there is a big difference in reading and understanding the texts when we consider them letters from Paul written in the AD 50’s to the Jewish congregation of Corinth than texts that played an important role in the congregation at Ephesus around AD 100. Now let us look not at the texts but at the congregation to whom they were read. The Corinthian Jewish congregation in the fifties of the first century needed clarification of what the Law prescribed for morals, customs, and conduct. So they asked questions such as how to deal with a woman who wanted to remarry or a man who desired his father’s wife? What to do with the cheap meat that had already served as sacrifices in the temples? How should the meetings of the congregation be organized? And they received answers from Paul. They also wanted to know about the man descended from the royal house of David and who was crucified. Was he really God’s Anointed? Did his victory over death hold a promise of any salvation after our own death? The picture changes completely when we realize that the texts, having been read in the Corinthian Jewish community in the fifties, were not read again until the end of the first or the beginning of the second century in the Ephesian congregation. A totally different situation! Ephesus, an important Asian harbour town, with intensive contacts by sea 22

R. Darnton: The Great Cat Massacre. New York 1984.

222

Chapter Fifteen

with Corinth, Alexandria and Rome and being the capital of the province of Asia by land with the hinterland, from nearby Colossae to distant Galatia. This was a world hostile towards the Jews after the great war between Romans and Jews; there was also hatred and hostility between Greeks and Jews. Its religious congregation, once predominantly Jewish and under the supreme authority of Jerusalem, was in those days mainly formed by Greeks who believed in the new, redeeming faith. Among them were still many Jews, faithful to the Law and the customs but full of anxious questions about their situation. The most important questions were: what authority should be recognized now that the original authority of Jerusalem had disappeared? What about the party strife caused by the different views about proclaiming the faith? How important is the Jewish Law and the customs if at all?

-19Now, after two thousand years, we hardly know who Paul was. His importance as a founder of Christianity, as Nietzsche puts it, is strongly exaggerated. We have a vague image of him because of the colossal pedestal on which his image was placed. Paul is not the man as outlined by Luke in Acts. His journeys and sea voyages are a hero’s saga; his glorious orations at Athens and in Jerusalem, their content is the theology of half a century later and sketch a situation that do not outline the truth and reality of the days and deeds of Paul himself. And when we take, as a starting point, Paul’s letters to the Romans, to the churches of Galatia, to his friend Philemon, to the Hebrews or to his co-workers Timothy and Titus it does not bring us into close contact with the writer of those letters. The texts are for the largest part not authentic, not written by him but later attributed to him. Latin authors made a distinction between the speaker and the persona, the character that has to be presented when someone performs in front of an audience and puts on a mask through which - per – he speaks – sonare. That is the Paul we meet in the letters, whether those letters are fictitious or edited: the persona a later editor wanted to present to the audience. But not the man himself, the person he really was; far from it.

Gossamer in the breeze

223

We have to approach Paul in a completely different way if we do not want to continue to see him only through the eyes of editors who especially made clever use of his prestige and some surviving texts. We probably have only four original texts written by Paul himself: Possibly the oldest text is a series of precepts regarding Jewish dietary laws23. a. The account presented by Paul regarding his agreement with the Jerusalem congregation and the agreements made about his apostolic mission24. Perhaps it was the statement he had to provide before he could begin his work in Ephesus. b. Fragments of letters sent from Ephesus between 52-54 to the Corinthian congregation. The content usually deals with explanations of Law and scriptures concerning difficulties in the Jewish community: how to deal with marriage, women, immorality, buying meat and the rules about the meetings of the congregation. c. Later on three more letters were added to the collection, all three about how to collect money for the Jerusalem congregation. It is unclear whether these are authentic texts by Paul. Paul was not a great writer and, according to his own words, not a good speaker either25. We cannot know whether he was a wise man. From all of these texts the picture emerges of a devout Jew proclaiming the coming of the Kingdom of God, the victory over death of God’s Anointed and the manner in which Jews were to hold fast to the promise of salvation.

-20We also will have to accept that in the edition of Paul’s letters, his actual share was but modest. Neither do we really know what the title given to the first editions was. What we can be certain of, as far as we can speak of any certainty here at all, is that the titles given were not yet ‘To the Galatians’ and ‘To the Romans’ but possibly – ‘To the Corinthians’?

23

Galatians 2, 11-14 and Romans 14, 1-6 and 14, 10-24. Galatians 1, 13 – 2, 10. 25 II Corinthians 10, 1 24

224

Chapter Fifteen

Probably Paul’s name was used or that of Timothy, and Sǀstenes. And possibly those of the unknown authors of the homilies or other texts of the editors? Perhaps we need to learn to distinguish two different groups of authors and two different audiences or readers, and distinguish between the different times and places. The most important collection of texts was written and probably read out in the Ephesian congregation around the turn of the first century by two men who were well acquainted with each other. They preached the three homilies, wrote the texts of the four closing chapters of Galatians, included such texts as the fifteenth chapter on the victory over death, wrote the editorial texts and put the edition together. The rest of the texts date from half a century earlier and were sent by Paul and his associates as letters and directions to the congregation at Corinth.

-21These editors did make use of texts by Paul, in a highly edited form, mainly using the name of the apostle which had become well-known in Ephesus after five years of diligent work. There may have been something which largely eludes us that determined the choice of Paul’s letters. He was, after all, the emissary who had been sent to the Greek cities in accordance with the authorities in Jerusalem as early as the forties and who had proclaimed the faith in God’s Anointed under their authority in Ephesus. That was the text with which the first edition began: Paul’s statement of his mission to the apostles in Jerusalem. But the editors were not completely enamoured of that premise. Times had changed, Jerusalem had been defeated and destroyed, the Jews were despised and considered with hostility by Greeks and Romans. Even their fellow believers increasingly distanced themselves from the Law and regulations, circumcision and customs. They kept on reading the prophets and singing the psalms, celebrating the victory over death and expecting the return of Christ, but the colour of that faith shifted more and more from being Jewish to early Christian, as well as from Jewish to Greek. The editors firmly put their stamp on those old and partly outdated texts. They added, and each time on the decisive points, their more up to date opinions. After the account of the mission in accordance with Jerusalem came the anti-Jewish texts from Galatians. And after the letters to Corinth came

Gossamer in the breeze

225

some magnificent texts: chapter fifteen, on the victory over death, and as an update and correction of their vision came the Praise of Love in II Corinthians 13. It was concluded with three homilies in which the relationship between Jewish Law and customs and the new faith was clearly formulated26.

26

Romans chapters 1 – 11.

CHAPTER SIXTEEN UNTIL THE NIGHT

The final chord is carried by a ground tone. Hè gar apokaradokia tès ktiseǀs tèv apokalupsin – ‘For the creation waits with eager longing for the revelation,’ A sentence from the marvellous middle part of the letter to the Romans1. The word used is threefold apo-kara-dokeǀ and clearly a word indicating that it was written by a learned Greek. In those same years, another learned Jew, Flavius Josephus, used the word in his account of the Jewish war he wanted to express the extraordinary tense atmosphere: tensely awaiting the attack on the city. Kara-dokeǀ, ‘tense’, ‘eagerly awaiting’. This awe-inspiring passage in Romans begins by expressing the belief that ta pathèmata tou nun – ‘the sufferings of this present time’ are nothing when looking at the glory to come2. That seems like an indication of a specific time, the years of hostility and persecution in the decades following the Jewish war. All is now ‘subjected to futility’ and ‘filled with eager longing’ for redemption, apo tès douleias tès phthoras, ‘from its bondage to corruption’. And then the beautiful lament: ‘For we know that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirth until now’ – Sustenazei kai sunǀdunai3. The translation neglects the double sun: lamenting together and in labour pains together. That double emphasizing of ‘together’ is clarified in the following verse: ‘not only they [the Greeks], but we ourselves [the Jews], who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly.’ We also encountered the Jews as ‘firstfruits of the Spirit’ in the editorial introduction to the letter to the Romans4.

1

Romans 8, 19. Romans 8, 18. 3 Romans 8, 19-23. 4 Romans. 2, 9-10. 2

Until the night

227

The theme, the ground tone, is undoubtedly the Jewish theme of the longing for salvation. But the belief in Paul’s preaching especially – salvation is here now, the Kingdom has come! – is what this author and Paul have in common, but the tone is completely different. Here the welleducated Greek betrays himself in the choice of words, sentence structure and refined rhetorical twists. It shows a totally disciplined pathos, while with Paul the uncontrolled emotional outbursts are remarkable. The doubling of the word sun – does not apply to Christians but to pasa hè ktisis, all and everything. Everyone, in the first place Jews, and then Greeks, oidamen (…) achri tou nun – can now have a share in salvation. In his Vermischte Bemerkungen, Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote down a few bars of musical notes, and added: ‘This must be the end of a theme that I don’t know.5‘ And indeed, any musician will be able to notice that this cannot be a beginning or middle part, but only the end of a theme. In the same way it is possible to indicate the end, the conclusion of a text. The verses of Romans 8, 35-39 are undeniably a concluding piece. This may already be apparent from the turn of phrase: ‘What then shall we say to these things?6‘ Indeed, the writer himself says that he has come to the end of his speech. The lines that follow are clearly a closure, an imposing ending even, a kind of culmination, a finale. Before we take a closer look at that text itself, first something about its context. Anyone who still considers the four letters of Paul as they appeared in the first edition (Romans, I and II Corinthians and Galatians) as authentic texts of the apostle himself, cannot extract these culminating lines from the text. After all, it comes in the middle of the letter to the Romans. But when one realises that the letter to the Romans consists mainly of three homilies most likely read out in Ephesus somewhere at the end of the first century will see these are the closing words of the second homily. That is the first step. The second one follows when we consider that the letter to the Romans, which in current editions is put in first place, concluded the texts in the two earliest editions.

5 6

L. Wittgenstein: Vermischte Bemerkungen. Frankfurt am Main 1977, p. 54. Romans 8, 31.

228

Chapter Sixteen

We have already taken the third step when we designated the writer of this second homily as editor-in-chief of the first edition. A fourth step, then, is an inference: the author and editor who opened the edition with Galatians 1, 6-12 and then set its tone7 is the first person to be considered as the author of the text that closed the edition. Finally there is the fifth step, the most debatable: the oldest edition known to us is, confusingly enough, the second by Marcion, which ends Romans 14, 23b with a simple greeting, hè charis meta pantǀn hagiǀn. A simple, too simple an ending for such a splendid collection of texts. The fourteenth chapter, the original conclusion, is indeed by Paul himself; it is a treatise on the Jewish dietary laws and whether or not meat should be eaten or wine drunk and whether these customs might offend. After the series of awe-inspiring texts a curious and trivial ending. After the second homily8 there is in fact a sequel to the first homily. Odd. Why is one homily interrupted by another? We do know that these three homiletic texts were already included in the oldest editions, but we know nothing about how that happened. Possibly they initially appeared unadulterated, first the homily of Anonymous A (Romans 1 to 4 and 9 to 12), then the reply in the second homily (Romans 5 to 8). This is not a mere fragile, unfounded hypothesis; it can be supported by the analysis of the text. The eighth chapter of Romans is one of the highlights of the New Testament: fiery and visionary. Living according to the flesh brings death, living according to the Spirit brings the victory over death, life. It is striking that here the flesh and the Spirit are contra-positioned and not the Law and faith. The first half of the text deals with that struggle9. Then there is an intermediate piece on expectation and then the final piece on the triumph10. A clear structure that shows a skilful, determined hand. Completely different from the fragments of letters of Paul that were included. The victory is confirmed in a triumphant formula: tis hèmas chǀrisei apo tès agapès tou Christou – ‘Who shall separate us from the love of God’s Anointed?11’ Not a real question but a rhetorical question expressing 7

Galatians 5, 2 – 6, 10. Romans 1 – 4 and subsequently Romans 9 – 12. 9 Romans 8, 1-17. 10 Romans 8, 18-27; 8, 28-39. 11 Romans 8. 35. 8

Until the night

229

a deep conviction. ‘No one and nothing’ is the answer, and this is elaborated on in the same verse: ‘Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword?’ Seven resounding blows of a hammer.

Orante. Museo di Sant’ Eustorgio. Milan We have pointed out earlier that it is this listing that was used to describe the life of Paul. Here not only the text but also the life of Paul is closed, through the last word: machaira – ‘with the sword’, ‘beheading’, to decapitate’. A text therefore that could only be written down after the beheading of Paul in AD 59 at Ad Aquas Salvias just outside Rome. This is followed by a quotation from Psalm 44: ‘we are regarded as sheep to be slaughtered 12‘ It depicts the mood and the situation of the last decades of the first century: the Holy Land was lost, the Holy City, Jerusalem taken and many of its population massacred; possibly one-and12

Romans 8, 36.

230

Chapter Sixteen

half million Jews were killed or slaughtered as animals and the Temple, the House of the Lord was destroyed. Land and people were lost and it seemed that God had forsaken them. Then immediately the beautiful and radiant conclusion: ‘in all these things we are more than conquerors.’ Followed by an outpouring of rhetorical contrast: ‘I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers (…), nor anything else in all creation (…).13‘ A compelling text: A cosmic vision, a Greek would say, and a Jew would judge eschatological and apocalyptic. The structure of the text can possibly be arranged in the following way: - Neither dead nor alive (nothing and none) - Angels (from above, from God) nor rulers (from here, this world). The text gives the somewhat Jewish coloured word archai and seems to mean hoi en archè, or the archontes, ‘the rulers’, - Then follows a determination attached to the heavenly and earthly powers: neither present nor to come, not now and not ever. - Then follows ‘no powers’. Again that Jewish-coloured choice of words: dunameis, for hoi en dunamei, hoi dunatoi. - Those powers are split in two again: nor height nor depth. The forces between which the earth is held: the air and the waters of the underworld. - Oute tis ktisis hetera – nor any other creature. Because all and everything was created by Him. Nothing and no one ‘will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord14.’ With which the closing sentence comes back to the opening sentence in a rhetorical arc. The argument is then concluded. And so is the book, not just the eighth chapter, which speaks of the struggle between life and death between flesh and Spirit, of expectation and victory. And the end of the text that was about the tribulations in Paul’s life, a struggle settled by the sword, and from the expectation raised by the words of the psalm and then from the victory: no one and nothing can 13 14

Romans 8, 37-38. Romans 8, 39.

Until the night

231

separate us from the love of God that was asserted in the Coming of His Kingdom and His anointed. And also the end of the collection in which the letters of Paul were included, beginning with Paul’s journey on earth to Jerusalem and ending with this vision of heavenly Jerusalem. How differently we would read this short text if we did not, as is usually the case, interpret it as a text from a letter from Paul to the Romans. The text becomes incomprehensible and illegible as part of ‘letter to the Romans’. It is quite absurd that in an overview, a retrospective of the life of Paul, Paul himself would close it with a report concerning his beheading with the sword. It would also be quite bizarre if Paul, who for many years had been preaching the faith daily among the Jews and the Greeks in Greek cities, even to large groups of people in the public sports school of Tyrannos in Ephesus, would suddenly exclaim that the Jews were treated as cattle led to slaughter. We, who have familiar with what anti-Semitism meant in the 1930s and 1940s, and how totally different the opinion of the Jews was forty years before and forty years after the horrors of the Holocaust. Would we really fail to see a similar change of attitude which occurred during the first century? The 40s and 50s AD in which Paul was active and the years around the turn of the first century, following the horrific Jewish war during and after which the Jews were indeed treated as cattle for slaughter, were similarly different from each other. And what is also quite remarkable is that Paul, always averse to Greek rhetoric and philosophy, is suddenly supposed to come up with a text indicating a profound knowledge of Greek philosophy. The text is about deep longing, and it also shows the passion of the author. At the end he wants to show off his erudition and his passion for Greek philosophy. We presented the text above with some comments and read it in a rather Judeo-Christian manner. For example, by interpreting ktisis as ‘the creation of God’. But in the Greek language of those days, ktisis also meant just pragma, chrèma, ‘the things around us’. From the text we can extrapolate a particular scheme that is neither Jewish nor Christian, nor does it have anything to do with faith, let alone the faith of Paul – it is a format of Peripatetic philosophy15. For example, 15 Philo of Alexandria already provided the classification of angels – angeloi – as heavenly powers opposite the dunameis, the earthly powers. Philo: De migratione

232

Chapter Sixteen

this was the philosophy that Epaphroditus of Chaeronea had studied in Athens. The starting point of the scheme is not ‘the Living One’, but rather ‘neither death nor life’. In death and life there are three levels, from top to bottom: angeloi, the angels from the heavens, archai, the powers that rule over us and the dunameis, the forces to which we are subjected. The powers are subjected to time and are thus divided into powers that determine the present and those that determine the future. Neither gods nor humans have any power over the past. The forces active in space are divided into forces that are active in us, over us and among us. We are powerless, subject to higher and obscure forces. Then the scheme is rounded off with: ‘and all other things’. The conclusion of the text does indeed provide a grand closing scene: o The past: with a retrospective look at the 50s AD and the acts of Paul, concluded with his beheading. o The present: around the turn of the first century, the plight of the hated and persecuted Jews. o The future: the originally Jewish sect on the way to a world religion through its adherents seeking and finding connection with Greek philosophy.

Abrahami. 32, 179-181. Other than in modern philosophy, such as at Kant, time and space were contrapositioned in ancient philosophy in imitiation of Aristotle: time was connected with movement (the foundation of nature) whereas space was without movement.

CHAPTER SEVENTEEN BREATH OF WORDS

The less you know the person in question, the easier the answer.1

a. Who was this Anonymous, possibly the man who played the most decisive role in shaping early Christianity? A man who chose to hide behind the figure of another, his predecessor the apostle Paul. This nameless person only becomes visible gradually when critical research pushes Paul himself into the background. Of Paul’s fourteen letters, only four remain that can be considered genuine. And of these four letters, the first, to the Galatians and the last, to the Romans, were hardly, if at all, by his hand. And the letter fragments of Paul himself to the Corinthians included in this oppressive embrace, large parts of those texts also turned out to be of doubtful authenticity and as became gradually clearer were written by other hands than his own. Important, crucial texts, such as about the last supper and about the victory over death, were found to be by the same author as the man we here call ‘Anonymous’ who had orally delivered the homilies recorded in Galatians and Romans. Texts such as the Song of Love, the hostile anti-women texts, those letters dealing with financial matters and travel plans and those with descriptions of the life and tribulations of the apostle were never written by Paul but were, decades later, attributed to him. Only now, now that we have mapped out the various texts, can we attempt to find out something about this man. A man who, for the attentive reader, is actually being quite generous in making himself known. For those who are willing to consider all texts as real ‘letters from Paul’, no distinctions exist. But denying these differences requires remaining blind to rather glaring peculiarities. Paul at times writes in a 1

J. Goudsblom: Reserves. Amsterdam 1998, p. 12.

234

Chapter Seventeen

rather unskilful, simple koinè, a vernacular with mainly short, direct sentences and hardly any elaborately constructed sentences. ‘Anonymous’ was a Greek, a well-educated man who uses beautiful constructed phrases, comes up with pointy retorts and can easily incorporate rhetorical terms and constructions into his long sentences, sentences like velvet lassos. Who is not enchanted, amused even, on suddenly coming across a wording like: ei gar hekǀn… ei de akǀn, ‘voluntarily or as a javelin’2. Every Greek will have noticed it with surprise and be delighted. Sparkling formulations like this are commonplace with ‘Anonymous’ and cannot be found in Paul’s writings. Anyone who reads these texts as originating from real letters will fail to notice the important distinction between written and spoken texts. Paul’s letters often begin with peri de, ‘concerning’, ‘about (…)’, followed by an answer to a question asked, usually of a practical, pastoral nature. In the fierce speeches of ‘Anonymous’ the sentences quite often start off with a challenging question: ti oun; ‘What then? But how (…)?’ Following which the speaker looked at his audience, raised a possible answer, rejected it again and a game of conversation, challenges and objections, begins. Then there are rhetorical figures of speech, artistic contrasts, the diatribe, the mime. All totally Greek, and quite recognizable in tone and vocabulary.

b. Did ‘Anonymous’ and Paul know each other? ‘Anonymous’ wrote around 100 AD, Paul around 50 AD. Below I will provide arguments for my conjecture that ‘Anonymous’ was an elderly man with authority. If he was about seventy years old when he was writing those texts, then he was about twenty years old when Paul was active in Ephesus. So it might be possible, but not very likely. What did ‘Anonymous’ know about Paul? Quite a lot, and probably quite a bit more than we do. In his texts there are no indications of knowledge about the life of Paul as given by the author of Acts. In Acts on the other hand there are no indications that its author had any knowledge of Paul’s letters. Both books, the letters of Paul and the Book of Acts were published around 100 AD and probably in Ephesus. They were both based on the revived interest in 2

I Corinthians 9, 17.

Breath of words

235

Paul and will partly have been read in the same circles. However, there is no evidence of any mutual influence. ‘Anonymous’ had other sources at his disposal. In the first place, he had the statement about the conferral of apostolic authority given to Paul by the authoritative Arch-Apostles in Jerusalem. It is the statement that Paul will have shown at his first appearance and preaching in Ephesus, probably as early as the 40s AD and it was this that prefaced the First Edition. It is an important statement, a metaphorical foundation stone of the ‘church’ of Ephesus, a document that will have been preserved by the Bishop of Ephesus as he would be called a few decades later. ‘Anonymous’ would therefore have been a man of some standing, possibly active in the vicinity of the ‘bishop’. He also had access to the letters, or copies thereof, which Paul himself had written from Ephesus to Corinth from the summer of 51 AD to the early spring of 55 AD. Being able to use these documents also indicates a prominent position in the religious congregation. But he knew more about Paul and his activities. He also knew about the adventurous escape from Damascus (an episode taking place in the early thirties) by means of a basket lowered from the city wall3. In Ephesus people were also aware of the sea voyage in late summer of 57 AD to Rome and the shipwreck near Malta4. It was also known that in 59 AD Paul was convicted in Rome for being an enemy of the state and beheaded, è machaira, ‘with the sword’5. This could not have been gathered from the Book of Acts; on the contrary, what is said there about the corporal punishment that Paul underwent is far less informative than the biography at the end of the second letter to Corinth, and Acts remains silent about Paul’s death. However, some things are said which miss the mark. I shall give three examples. The biography in the eleventh chapter of the second letter to the Corinthians seems grossly exaggerated: five times given the fortyminus-one by the Jews; three times beaten by the Romans with rods, once

3

II Corinthians 11, 31-32. II Corinthians 11, 25 5 Romans 8, 35. 4

236

Chapter Seventeen

being stoned6. The list presents many more horrifying events, too many to be plausible. At least they cannot be found in the report in Acts. In the same letter it says: ‘This is the third time that I come to you. 7’ I can find only two instances of this visit: from the winter of 49/50 AD to his exile by Gallio in the summer of 51 AD, and then the failed attempt to return which ended with Paul being beaten up in the harbour and the subsequent flight through Macedonia. The most obvious mistake is perhaps Anonymous’ rhetorical question – ‘is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living?8‘ That is supposed to be directed to the Corinthians in the fifties AD, but the collaboration of Barnabas and Paul had ended in the forties AD9.

c. ‘Anonymous’ is so completely different from Paul. Paul is the devout, Law-abiding, circumcised Jew, who goes to the authoritative apostles in the Holy City to reconcile his manner of preaching with that of the stalwarts of faith, stating that all he did and said would be meaningless without their permission10. And then in contrast the man who loses himself in insults about those lying apostles, those deceitful and false apostles11! The real Paul is the man who is pleased that among all those circumcised brothers in faith no one has any objection to Titus being uncircumcised. And on the other hand there is the man who scorns and curses unrestrainedly: those circumcised Jews, emasculate them12! It is he who also exclaims, ‘Anointed has redeemed us from the curse of the Law’!13‘ Ek tès kataras tou nomou, hè kat-ara from kat-arassǀ, ‘dragging down’, flinging down with brutal force’. All who keep the Law, according to verse 10, are under the curse!

6

II Corinthians 11, 24-25. II Corinthians 13, 1. 8 I Corinthians 9, 6. 9 Acts 15, 39. 10 Galatians 2, 2. 11 II Corinthians 11, 13. 12 Galatians 2, 3 en 5, 12. 13 Galatians 3, 13. 7

Breath of words

237

A totally different character, evidently, but then, who is he? An older, experienced man and a man of authority as I suggested earlier? Notice how this ‘Anonymous’ concludes his argument in chapter ten of the first letter to the Corinthians in a call, a compelling challenge: ‘Give no offence to Jews or to Greeks or to the Church of God.14‘ That sounds like a commandment. A commandment, moreover, that ignores the contrapositions (Jews versus Greeks) and emphasizes giving respect to the Church’s authority, which is God’s. Here a Church leader is speaking who wants to end the disputes with authority. Bear in mind too that in Paul’s day there was no such thing as yet as an ekklèsia, a Church. There was no ecclesiastical authority, or men vested with that ecclesiastical authority to adjudicate in faction disputes. Notice how Paul, in the beginning of ‘the same’ letter, writes about the different factions in Corinth and how little authority he can assert. Come the beginning of the second century it was quite a different situation; the Jewish social and faith communities were pushed aside by the developing Christian communities with bishops and other structures of authority. The words, the admonition of the following verse is presumptuous: kathǀs kagǀ, ‘do as I do!’ That can only be said by someone who is in authority and prescribes precepts from his high office. This is already the language of the bishops, the shepherds directing their flock. It is the language of those in authority who consider themselves exemplary and recommend the pursuit by others of their own way of life. In addition, this is followed with an extra dollop on top with that pedantic panta pasin areskǀ, ‘I try to please everyone in everything I do’ – here showing the desire to provide everything for everyone. Then comes a guideline repeated in verse 24: ‘Let no one seek his own good, but the good of his neighbour (the congregation.’ And the conclusion, hina sǀthǀsin, ‘that you may be saved,’ with the tacit implication: and those who do not follow and obey these rules of mine will perish. That he was not a Jew was already evident from the sentences quoted above about ‘the curse of the Law (of Moses)’ and the vile remark about ‘they should let themselves be emasculated (those circumcised Jews).’ But he himself says so clearly several times when he quotes that tois pasin gegona panta, ‘everything I am for everyone’ and clarifies: ‘To the Jews I 14

I Corinthians 10, 32-33.

238

Chapter Seventeen

became as a Jew in order to win Jews. To those under the Law I became that I might win those under the Law (although I am not under the Law).15‘ In Galatians 4 he is addressing Greeks, converted Greeks, who ‘formerly did not know God’ and worshiped many idols, and adhered to ‘the weak and worthless elementary principles of this world’, and observed the pagan holidays16. He says ‘I also have become as you are’17. And then he mentions something about his conversion: ‘You know it was because of a bodily ailment that I preached the gospel to you (…) you did not scorn or despise me (…).18‘ This statement is unclear for us, but it reminds his audience of something they knew about. He, a sick Greek, found his salvation in believing in Anointed. A conversion that took place in Ephesus sometime in the 80s or 90s AD. If the mysterious and only vaguely indicative description of a conversion, ‘fourteen years ago,19‘ refers to this conversion, the answer to our initial question may perhaps be given: no, ‘Anonymous’ and Paul did not know each other.

d. Just as it is quite easy to hear the difference in accent and manner of expressing of a Glaswegian and a Cockney Londoner, the difference between the somewhat halted and simple style of Paul and the fluent stylish Greek of the ‘Anonymous’is also quite obvious. The tone and choice of words of ‘Anonymous’ are quite recognizable and unmistakable and difference greatly from Paul’s tone and vocabulary: Paul speaks in the vernacular while ‘Anonymous’ preaches. For example, ‘Anonymous’ says legǀ de, ‘I mean (to say)’ several times20. It is an equivalent of the nowadays meaningless ‘like’ or ‘you know’. When writing one will normally not use it; one pauses, thinks and writes down what one wants to say. But the orator hears his own words and more importantly, he sees his 15

I Corinthians 9, 22 en 9, 20. Galatians 4, 8; 4, 3 en 4, 10. 17 Galatians 4, 12. 18 Galatians 4, 13. 19 II Corinthians 12, 1-7. 20 See for example Galatians 4, 1. 16

Breath of words

239

audience and will think: I will really make clear to them what I actually mean. ‘Anonymous’ is an accomplished, eloquent speaker, rhetorically very gifted. He often starts off by asking questions intending to challenge his audience. He sometimes even begins a conversation, enters a (phantom) discussion with adherents and opponents. Then he puts forward possibilities and objections: ‘isn’t it this’, or ‘it can’t possibly be that’. He comes up with striking examples and comparisons, such as from the world of sports, ‘we go for it’, or, ‘who doesn’t want to win the first prize?’ Or ‘we don’t just hit out at random, we want to knock out the other when boxing’. There are comparisons which would have been immediately understood and appreciated by his audience: which soldier goes to war at his own expense? Take a look, look at those legionaries toiling with their stakes. He also has an amusing way of expressing his aversion to something: mè genoito, ‘certainly not’, ‘no, far from it’. However we may translate it, we have to be aware that he had to make his audience smile or chuckle: there he is again! In all his texts these elements come to the fore, his own peculiar idiosyncrasies21. Fourteen times versus just once in the rest of the New Testament. And that sparkling language, those exclamations are invariably evoked by firing questions at an audience: Ti oun eroumen; To oun (…); ‘But then what does (…) mean?’ ‘Can we therefore conclude (…)?’ and so on22. Like any true Greek, he was also a lover of sports and games. He compares his work as preacher with athletics, the world of runners for stadium prizes in the stadium23. We take part in races to win a prize. He even uses a word from the boxing world, hupǀpiazein, ‘I bash my body’, ‘I punch it’. And elsewhere that beautiful image: my missionary work is as burdensome as that of the soldier carrying his post of the stockade24. Preaching is like running in a race, going for it. ‘The runner in the stadium’ draws his attention and at boxing matches he sees the blows in

21 Galatians 2, 17; 3, 21 and 6, 14; I Corinthians 6, 15; II Corinthians 2, 16; Romans 3, 4; 3, 6; 3, 31; 6, 2; 6, 15; 7, 7; 7, 13; 9, 14 and 11, 1 22 Romans 6, 1; 6, 15; 7, 7 and 7, 15. 23 I Corinthians 9, 22-27. 24 II Corinthians 12, 7.

240

Chapter Seventeen

the empty air and the head-butts. He was also an enthusiastic spectator at horse races in the stadium and comments on it expertly25.

e. Obvious as it may be that ‘Anonymous’ addressed his congregation of believers, apparently at some time there were problems. In Galatians 4 he strikes a more sorrowful note, ‘my little children – teknia mou – I wish I could be present with you now and change my tone (…).26‘ In the beginning the faithful had been willing to lend their ears to the man who preached the good tidings to them and now, ‘have I become your enemy by telling you the truth?’ ‘It is always good to be made much of for a good purpose, and not only when I am present – pros humas – with you.27‘ The letters of Paul had to be written and sent to Corinth because as a result of the judgment of Gallio, he was no longer able to be with his religious congregation. In the same way it seems that the publication of the sermons and texts of ‘Anonymous’ half a century later were also the cause of distress: he too was banished, from Ephesus. But for what reason? In the Corpus Paulinum three different faction disputes can be observed. ‘Anonymous’ will not have begun quoting from the letters of Paul with the passages about the faction disputes in Corinth for no reason. However, the disputes there in the early 50s AD had to do with very different issues. All Jews yearned for salvation and the coming of the kingdom. Now there was the glad tidings of Apollos, an adherent of John the Baptist: we sally forth, from the desert, are baptized in the river Jordan as the children of Israel once went out of the desert into the land of the Lord, and we too go en masse to the Holy City because of the coming kingdom. In addition, there were glad tidings from Jerusalem, from the Rock of God, that God’s Anointed had actually made a royal entry into the holy city. God is faithful. He had sent His son of David. Paul also knew about the failure, the death on the cross, and yet the Living One remained unfailing and raised His Anointed from the dead. 25

II Corinthians 6, 14. Galatians 4, 19-20. 27 Galatians 4, 15-16 and 4, 18. 26

Breath of words

241

Three views all conflicted with Roman authority, for they did not accept the empire of this world but the coming of the kingdom, not the ruling of the Caesar but of a king who would rule in the name of the Name. They were able to reach an agreement among themselves28, but they were treated with hostility by the Jews who (likewise yearning for salvation and the Saviour, the coming of the kingdom) believed that the Eternal had not yet come to their aid and that it was too dangerous for the tolerated minority to resist the Romans. Although Acts actually describes the events from 55 AD onwards quite extensively, those texts are like curtains hanging exactly in front of what we would like to see. After the failed mission in Macedonia (Philippi, Thessaloniki) and the exile from Corinth, Paul almost lost his life in a popular uprising in Ephesus. He was also banished from that city and recalled to Jerusalem in the spring of 55 to account for his actions. The vicious hatred of the Sadducees, whom he betrayed years ago is quite clear. He looks for some support from the Pharisees, to no avail. The Romans are looking on in amusement at all that scuffle. Applying for support from ‘the brothers’ led by the brother of Jesus he receives instead severe censure for his pains. Two years later, in Rome, there does not seem to be any support from the Jews either. On the contrary: ‘At my first defence no one came to stand by me, but all deserted me.29‘ The so-called last words of Paul. The third conflict is what Anonymous A is talking about. Therefore this must have taken place around the turn of the first century in Ephesus and seems to be about the strife between the followers of the Law of Moses and those who increasingly distance themselves from it, between Jews and Greeks, between the defeated authority of the ‘mother church’ of Jerusalem and the emerging authority of the Greek leaders of the young church.

f. In the First Edition of the letters, the participation of Anonymous A far exceeds that of Paul in both quantity and quality. Both the first part (the later letter to the Galatians) and the final text (later known as the letter to 28 29

See for example Acts 18, 23-28. II Timothy 4, 16.

242

Chapter Seventeen

the Romans) are largely written by him. In between, he included fragments of letters from Paul, but all of them in order to support his own views and intentions. Moreover, both letters have a kind of layered construction; letter fragments by Paul followed by a treatises by ‘Anonymous’. The most important texts, such as the victory over death and the celebration of the Lord’s supper, originate from the hand of ‘Anonymous’. In addition to his essential arguments relating to the relationship between Jews and Greeks, there is no doubt that the assertions about the relationship between the Law and the freedom of faith, about the commandments and moral prohibitions are also from his pen. And recognizably Greek in character, with references to catamites and pederasty. The Romans defeated and sentenced God’s anointed, nailing him to the cross like a rebellious slave. And the Jews were blamed for this deed. The Romans inflicted defeat after defeat on Paul, whipping him out of their cities, condemning and banishing him from Greece and Asia, imprisoning him for many years; and when finally the appeal to the Emperor against the death sentence was rejected by the praetor peregrinus, at the time Afranius Burrus, was rejected, the sentence was carried out just outside Rome in 59 AD. Paul was forgotten, and the manner in which ‘Anonymous’ delivered him from oblivion half a century later was actually a successful move to conceal him – under his own words – for nearly two thousand years.

E

CHAPTER EIGHTEEN TITUS

‘I also took Titus.1‘ That phrase is intriguing and raises many questions. It looks like a mere casual remark, but it could also be a well-placed bomb. Someone reading these words about the year 100 would think: Paul is going back to Jerusalem after fourteen years and is taking Titus with him! Titus? Of all people! Titus, the son of Vespasian who took Jerusalem in September 70 and destroyed the temple of Yahweh? Were the early readers appalled when they read this? But who were those first readers actually? Did Paul write this as early as the early forties in an account of the agreement between him and the Arch-Apostles in Jerusalem? Our findings in the previous chapters make it possible to interpret this more adequately. a.

b.

1 2

The account of the journey to Jerusalem is one of the most important texts of the New Testament, a key text, and can be found in Galatians 2, 1-10. It is first of all quite remarkable that Paul provides a date: ‘(…) then after fourteen years (…)’, to be counted from his departure from Jerusalem to Damascus, possibly not long after Jesus was crucified in the spring of, perhaps, AD 27. So about the year 42. ‘After fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas.’ In most versions of the Bible this is followed by a comma, but a full stop would also be in order. Sumparalabǀn kai Titon. The verb used is rather ambiguous: Titus was ‘also added’. The presence of Titus is a coincidence. This is also more or less evident from the report itself: it begins with ‘I (…) with Barnabas’ and ends with: they concluded the agreement with ‘me and Barnabas’2. It concerns the negotiations

Galatians 2, 1. Galatians 2, 1 and 2, 9.

Titus

c.

d.

e.

f.

3 4

245

between the two leaders of the community of Antioch, Paul and Barnabas, with the Arch-Apostles of Jerusalem and Judea, the Kèphas, and the Zebedeans John and James. And what were those leaders talking about? About the validity of the proclamation of the faith in accordance with the approval of the Arch-Apostles3. Also in the parallel account of this meeting in Jerusalem, in Acts 15, only Paul and Barnabas are mentioned and nothing is said about Titus. In fact, Titus does not appear anywhere in the entire book of Acts. The first edition of the ‘Letters of Paul’ began with this account of the agreement reached in Jerusalem. For that was the basis of the proclamation, the recognition by the authorized ArchApostles, the conferral of apostolic authority, the permission to proclaim the faith. That had to be the foundation of any further proclamation, but at the same time it was vehemently and viciously disputed: the congregation of Jerusalem was obsolete, it was gone (obliterated by Titus) and now it had to be replaced by a less Jewish and more Greek community. Therefore the original simple statement was seriously altered: verses 4, 6b, 7-9 and 9b were inserted. With the belligerent intention of forcing a division between Jews and Greeks, the circumcised and the uncircumcised. By this the agreement concerning the preaching between Paul and Barnabas and the authorities in Jerusalem, was transformed into a contraposition. In the subsequent account of an incident in Antioch, it was sharpened even further into an insurmountable conflict4. Whereas the original subject of the negotiations and the agreement had to do with preaching of the gospel, the inserted alterations shifted it to something else, namely the contraposition between Jews and Greeks about having to be circumcised or not. And that is what is expressed in verse 3: Alla oude (…) peritmèthènai – ‘But even Titus, (…) was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek.’ That verse ties in seamlessly with the other corrupt insertions. And it is completely out of place because immediately prior to that it was said that it

Galatians 2, 2. Galatians 2, 11-14.

Chapter Eighteen

246

g.

h.

i.

5

was not a matter of circumcision or the opposition between Jews and Greeks that was at issue, but the preaching of the gospel. Titus is referred to as being Greek and uncircumcised and, by the way, also as ho sun emoi – ‘who was with me’, an unnecessary repetition of what was made clear in the previous verse. An attempt to further integrate this Titus into the text. My conclusion is that in addition to the verses indicated above (under e.), the mentioning of Titus in Galatians 2, 1 and 3 are also later insertions, deliberate corruptions of Paul’s original statement. Later insertions? When did that happen? Through Tertullian we know that the verses about Titus, including the ho sun emoi, were already present in the second edition5. On the other hand it is clear that the mentioning of Titus was missing from both Paul’s own original account of about AD 42, and from the account of Luke of the same event in Acts 15 of around AD 96. That account is remarkably elaborate; it does mention circumcision as a point of discussion and leaves some room by mentioning in addition to Paul and Barnabas that ‘some of the others’, members of the congregation of Antioch joined this delegation. Titus does not appear in the text until about AD 155 when the second appendix was published with the three pastoral letters. That publication explicitly refers back to Paul’s own statement about his past: ‘Though formerly I was a blasphemer, persecutor, and violent opponent.6‘ The author is already referring to the martyrdom of Paul and attempting to arrange ecclesiastical matters from his own time, in mid-second century – such as the collection of money – by appealing to Paul’s authority.7 Titus is then praised and proclaimed as Titǀi gènesiǀi teknǀi – ‘Titus my true son.8‘ An editor also makes corrections again in the letters to the Corinthians following the publication of the pastoral letters. The anti-feminine stipulations in I Corinthians 14, 34-35 correspond literally to those in I Timothy 2, 11-12.

Tertullian: Adversus Marcionem V 3. I Timothy 1, 13; Galatians 1, 13. 7 II Timothy 4, 6-8. 8 Titus 1, 4. 6

Titus

j.

k.

9

The name of Titus is mentioned seven times in the second letter to the Corinthians, and each time with high praise,9. Because of the misrepresentation in Galatians (2, 1 and 3) Titus was believed to be a Greek from Antioch. But he was probably a Roman from the Roman colony of Corinth10. What can we conclude from the previous ten points? Maybe the following sequence, at least the arguments for it: 1. Paul was authorized to preach the gospel in Antioch following a visit to Jerusalem about AD 42. This was mainly directed towards Jews living in the metropolis on the Orontes and also towards interested Syrians, Arabs and Greeks. 2. Obviously these Jews were circumcised from their eighth day, they kept the Law and regulations and lived in the expectation of the Coming. Some of them believed in God’s Anointed and were therefore nick-named ‘anointers’ ‘christians’11. Those of other nations who were interested were usually not circumcised, but no one considered this to be problematic. 3. In the early fifties Paul worked in Corinth for eighteen months until he was exiled and thereafter assisted his congregation through letters. Corinth was a Roman Colony, populated mainly by Romans with a growing Greek population and groups of Syrians and Jews. The Roman Titus became a respected collaborator of Paul’s. A Roman, uncircumcised, no problem. 4. In the year 55 AD, Paul was summoned to go to Jerusalem to give account of his work. There was no other option than to obey. He was harshly judged and owing to the uproar that ensued he was taken prisoner, sentenced to death and in AD 59 beheaded in Rome. 5. In 66 the revolt against the Romans broke out, resulting in the taking of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple and to vicious outbursts of hatred towards Jews in the Hellenistic world.

II Corinthians 2, 13; 7, 6, 13, 14; 8, 6, 23 and 12, 18. Galatians 2, 1 and 3. 11 Acts 11, 26. 10

247

Chapter Eighteen

248

6.

7.

8.

9.

In Ephesus, the capital of the Roman province of Asia lived one of the largest populations of Jews and Christians. This came about after the pogroms at Alexandria, Antioch, and elsewhere. There were increasingly threatening tensions between them and their Greek co-inhabitants. These tensions consisted partly of a growing aversion on the part of the population and city government to the refugees and often even led to prosecutions or confiscations. But also within the religious congregation itself, tensions ran high: between the people of the Promise, the older Jews who wanted to hold on to the Law, scriptures and regulations and the believers, who kept faith in Christ, mostly Greeks, who no longer considered the Jewish Law of Moses binding. Whether to adhere to the Law and circumcision or not became a point of contention. In this study the focus was concentrated on the debate, the conflict between Law and Faith, freedom and circumcision. These issues were raised in some fierce sermons to the Ephesian congregation around the turn of the first century. In addition we endeavoured to discover the working methods of the editors of the first edition of these emissary letters. We saw that what would later be called the letter to the Galatians came in first place, beginning with a statement by Paul; his account, however, was drastically altered some sixty years after it was produced. It was then followed by a fierce plea by Anonymous A. The agreement reached between the leaders of the congregations of Antioch and Jerusalem on the preaching was rewritten into a conflict about circumcision. Owing to the first and as a matter of fact only history of early Christianity, the Book of Acts, the anti-Jewish tendency, — the turning away from Jerusalem and assisted by conversions leading to Rome via Athens — became the predominant, if not only, view of early Christianity.

CHAPTER NINETEEN A GLIMPSE

-I1.

2.

3.

4.

1

Ephesus: one of the most important harbour towns of the Empire, its population, Ionian Greeks and barbarians, the hinterland Asia and Galatia. It has a large Jewish population, engaged in trade and manual labour. They meet in synagogues, are faithful to the Law, read the scriptures, and live in the expectation of salvation. In the late 40s of the first century Paul arrives in Ephesus. The Kingdom of God the Jews have been waiting for has – according to him – arrived: God’s Anointed I proclaim to you. He is successful among the Jews, and is met with both approval and aversion by the Greeks. Claudius Caesar opposes those Jewish claims of kingship which undermines imperial authority. Paul’s mission ends in failure: he is banished from Corinth, Thessaloniki and Ephesus, recalled to Jerusalem to give account of his deeds. After four years of imprisonment, he is beheaded in Rome. Between AD 66-73 the Jewish-Roman war is raging, the Temple and city are destroyed and the leaders of the ‘mother church’ in Jerusalem and Judea are killed or scattered. The Jewish population is also partly massacred in other Jewish centres, such as Antioch and Alexandria. AD 100. Anonymous A fulminates in a fiery speech against the Jews who keep the Law: fools, don’t you understand that the coming of God’s Anointed has precisely set us free from that Law and has given us faith and freedom1?

Galatians 2, 15 ff.

Chapter Nineteen

250

5.

6.

7.

This provokes a debate between Anonymous A (Rom. 3 ff.), Anonymous B (Rom. 5 ff.) And again Anonymous A (Rom. 9 ff.). The decision is made to publish these texts and to enhance the authority of this publication with the use of the ‘founder’ of the congregation, Paul. This text is therefore preceded by the authorization Paul brought from Jerusalem in the forties to legitimize his work in Ephesus and by the use of copies of letters he sent to Corinth in the fifties. The editors (the two Anonymous) begin with the apostolic authorisation of Paul.

This is followed by the argument of Anonymous A. Then comes the first collection of letters to Corinth about the party strife, prepared and supplemented with texts by Anonymous A2. After this comes the second collection of letters to Corinth about the tribulations suffered by Paul. This is put together and supplemented with various texts, such as a biography of Paul, by Anonymous B3. The edition ends with the discussion between the two Anonymous (Rom. 3 – 11) and statements by Paul concerning loyalty to the government and appeals for unity.

- II 1.

2.

3.

4. 5. 2 3

Paul’s account of his life and the agreement made with the ArchApostles in Jerusalem. This was read out to the congregation in Ephesus in the early forties. Letters, or fragments of letters by Paul to the Corinthian congregation written in Ephesus between 52 and 54 that had been preserved. The meager remnants thereof are found in the first chapters of both letters to the Corinthians. The homilies of Anonymous A and B, preached around AD 100 in Ephesus and now partly in the letters to the Galatians and Romans. The first edition, published about AD 100 in Ephesus. The second edition, published in AD 144 by Marcion in Rome.

I Corinthians 9, 11 and 15. II Corinthians 10-12.

A glimpse

6. 7.

251

The many later included texts. The additions, notes, titles, addresses and glosses that were also included in the text later on.

I did something similar in chapter five on The First Editions. There I chose for a synthetic approach. My starting point was what was referred here as the fourth phase, the first edition. That text had a certain order, and that should be recreated as far as possible in the edition given here below. The idea is that readers ought to be able to observe how the editors worked, i.e. three layers of the text should be visible: - the homilies of the two Anonymous. - the statement and fragments from Paul himself - and the editorial texts. This should provide a picture of the state of the text around the turn of the first century. But it should also indicate what happened afterwards, what was added after the first and second editions: ƒ editorial additions, titles, addressees, names and glosses; ƒ texts by others, such as the Praise of Love (I Corinthians 13); ƒ additions: such as the three begging letters; ƒ elaborations of the texts of Anonymous A, with comparisons, for example, about the children of Abraham. The shape of the text was also greatly distorted by the present-day presentation, with the division into chapters and verses and complete disregard for the several type of texts. That created blocks of texts. Of course we maintain the division into verses, but we will not allow the character of these texts to be obscured. The text will come alive again when we notice the play game of question and answer in the spoken word. Such as in Romans 6, 1: What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may abound? Certainly not! How can we who died to sin still live in it? Here we see the speaker addressing his audience, challenging and teasing them with silly solutions which he immediately indignantly rejects. An accomplished orator, this Anonymous B.

252

Chapter Nineteen

Also in the written text it is good to put headings such as: ‘Concerning the sacrificial meat’ (I Corinthians 8, 1) indeed as headings above the text. We remove glosses and marginal comments from the text itself and put them back where they belong: in the margin. The following translation is as close as possible to the Greek text. It is surprising – to put it mildly – how in most translations elaborate attempts are made to lend the reader a helping hand by supplementing, filling in, concealing or extensively interpreting the usually succinct Greek texts. But the text itself should always take precedence before any interpretation. Any interpretation should be based on the text itself and not the other way around. Possibly those who are able to read Greek will appreciate the translation more than those who cannot compare the translation with the original and will occasionally find it stiff and blunt. That cannot be avoided, the Greek text is like that.

CHAPTER TWENTY NOT THE MAP BUT THE LANDSCAPE

This book finishes off with an attempt to recreate the original first edition of the letters. Other than in the Dutch edition, I endeavour to take a step further in this English translation. To clarify and justify this I would like to point out: 1. That many of Paul’s letters were not written by him, but attributed to him only later, is both evident and generally accepted1. 2. Of the fourteen letters attributed to Paul ten were not written by him and only fragments of authentic texts by Paul were included in Galatians, Corinthians I and II and in Romans. This hypothesis still provokes discussion2. 3. The order of the first edition and of the editions still in use during the second century is clear: Galatians, Corinthians I and II, and Romans3. 4. Adolf von Harnack’s posited in the twenties of last century that Marcion had deleted any text that displeased him; this thesis perished in the second half of the twentieth century: Marcion did not delete any texts; he simply did not know them4. Texts not included in his edition were not found in the first edition either. 5. The hypothesis, based on the book of Acts, that the letter to the Galatians is the first written by Paul (about AD 49) and the one to the Romans the last (about AD 57) is conclusively contradicted 1

G. Theissen: Fortress Introduction to The New Testament. Minneapolis 2003, pp. 131-142 2 Ch. Vergeer: Paulus. Kijkend in Uw lezend gezicht. Budel 2013, pp. 13-139. Ch. Vergeer: The Letters of the Apostle Paul. Controversies and Consequences. Cambridge 2017, pp. 8-140. 3 M. Theobald: Der Römerbrief. Darmstadt 2000, p. 7 4 J. BeDuhn: The New Marcion. Rethinking the “Arch-Heretic”. Forum, Third Series 4,2, Fall 2015, pp. 163-176.

Chapter Twenty

254

6.

7.

8.

9.

5

by the style and content of both letters. A list of similarities indicate the intensive relations (die intensive Bezüge) between the two texts5. This brought to light the foundation of the first edition as it was published in Ephesus about AD 100: the dispute between two opponents, the Anonymous A and B. When publishing their homilies they included letter fragments from Paul to lend a sound base for their apostolic authority. This was the position from which I have presented the text of the first edition in the original Dutch edition: that is, I have filtered the normally used texts on the basis of the above-mentioned ideas. This resulted in a text with contributions from Anonymous A, B, Paulus and the editors. In addition, in smaller letters are to be found the later texts, such as the Praise of Love (I Corinthians 13), the letters of Tertius, the digressions and clarifications, the numerous marginal remarks, etc. But precisely because of this new possibility, that we were no longer reading the texts as being letters completely written by Paul, but as a composition based on a clear idea, an intention and a structure applied by the editors, the structure of this first edition became apparent. Reading ancient texts is like doing the laborious work performed by my ancestors in the twelfth-century in the marshy Dutch peat areas. Let us find our way carefully step by step through the soggy marsh from one slightly drier clump of reeds to the next towards to the edge. Do not pay attention to ditches and dikes; they changed the landscape, as nowadays motorways and railways cut and wound the land. We do not want to discover the map but the area, the landscape, not the text, but the voice. The five spoken homilies stand out clearly as the foundation of the edition: Anonymous A who began it all in Galatians 3, 1, was answered by Anonymous B in Galatians 5, 13 and further. Then the alternating homilies in Romans: Anonymous A (chapters 14); Anonymous B. (Chapters 5-8) and again Anonymous A (Chapters 9-11).

M. Theobald: Der Römerbrief. Darmstadt 2000 pp. 110-112.

Not the map but the landscape

255

10. Dispersed in between are brief notes by Paul: pastoral contributions, literally squeezed and trapped there by the two editors, and used only – insofar as was deemed necessary – to illustrate the basic theological positions of both editors. 11. Then it became clear that the two letters to the Corinthians too have a kind of layered structure: the first letter was compiled by editor Anonymous A who discussed the disputes between the factions of his time and included highlights of his own theology, such as chapter 15 on the victory over death. The second letter was compiled by the second editor, Anonymous B, who mainly used texts by Paul on the apostolate and alternated them with his own texts, diatribes and autobiographical notes. 12. It is noteworthy to see how the Jewish editor, Anonymous A – ‘We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners!6‘ – relies on Paul’s letters of appointment on behalf of the ArchApostles of Jerusalem and prominently opens the volume with it. The Greek editor, Anonymous B begins with ‘For you were called to freedom, brothers,7‘ and in the part edited by him immediately takes a stand against those letters of recommendation – sustatikǀn epistolǀn pros humas – unnecessary, away with them. And away with the stone tablets of the Law of Moses and the holy scriptures of the Jews8. Firm words, and especially interesting for those who see the contrast with the opening words of the edition, Paul’s letter of appointment. 13. Less noticeable, perhaps, and only evident through the restoration of the first edition, is that the first editor uses the conflict over the dietary laws at Antioch9 as a key to diminish Peter and the authority of Jerusalem in the texts – and that the second editor at the end of the collection reaches back to these laws, thereby completing the circle10. Perhaps this was a valid argument for not allowing his contribution to disrupt both parts of the homilies of Anonymous.

6

Galatians 2, 15. Galatians 5, 13. 8 II Corinthians 3, 1-3. 9 Galatians 2, 11-14. 10 Romans 14, 1-6 and 14, 24. 7

Chapter Twenty

256

14. If that is the case, the first edition ended with a clear allusion to the death of Paul – è machaira, ‘beheaded with the sword11‘ – and then the grand ending, opposite the sword stroke that separated the head from the body: ‘I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Jesus Anointed our Lord.12‘ 15. For these reasons (but not as being certainty or definite, rather as a call for further research, reading and rereading the texts again and again) I restored the first edition in a more transparent way: - Editors, Anonymous A: Apostolic letter of recommendation, Homily A answered by B (Galatians) - 1 Corinthians: Edited by Anonymous A. - II Corinthians: edited by Anonymous B. - Closing sermons by Anonymous A and B (Romans) 16. Texts added later on in the second and third centuries are merely indicated as such.

On a trail -aTexts can be understood as strings of signals, signs that give meaning to something. This is how Paul’s texts were read and they mean a lot to the Christian West. Present-day philosophers like Jacques Derrida turned the direction of view, the way of reading and looking, around: the signal is seen from the perspective of the trail. We discover the meaning of texts by observing that they bear the traces of time and author, reader and importance. All and each of them left their imprint. They broke into the text and those traces of breaking in, breaking and constructing are pointing to the perpetrators, the thieves who have gone.

11 12

Romans 8, 35. Romans 8, 38-39.

Not the map but the landscape

257

-bAnyone reading the texts as ‘letters of Paul’ is hearing unisono, one voice, not the conversation. The first edition features the voice of a passionate speaker, Anonymous A, a Jewish man of authority who puts forward a point of view; then the counter-voice is heard, Anonymous B, Greek who answers. Both of them then attempt to provide support and authority to their views by quoting letters from the admittedly controversial but still authoritative first preacher of the faith: Paul.

-cAnonymous A does so by referring, in the first letter to the Corinthians, to passages that are to his liking about the factions disputes; about the Jewish customs in the congregation and the tradition of the faith in the words of God’s Anointed and his victory over death. Anonymous B edits the second letter to the Corinthians. This is an amused Greek, playing with admonitions and disguises, playfully pretending to be the apostle himself, and playing with praises, laments, boasts and the burdens of the apostolate.

-dThe first edition revolves around both those speakers, voice and countervoice. Only as a kind of extra is Paul involved and both speakers choose from his texts what suits them. The texts become clearer when we visualize the great difference between what was spoken and what was written: the challenging questions of the two speakers, ti oun; the pointed exclamations to provoke a supposed answer; the indignant rejection of it, mè genoito and only then the announcement of the decisive verdict. All of it is so totally different from the patches of written text by Paul with the simplistic indication, peri de, about this or that.

-eIn between the many quotations from the Law of Moses and the prophets, in our translation in italics, taken from the King James Version, are clearly portentous texts, solemn anchors for the argument.

258

Chapter Twenty

-fIn the later Deutero-Pauline letters, hymns were incorporated, songs that would sung by the congregation standing up expressing their unity.

-gIs that not the best way to bring a text to life? Illustrating the struggle between the early Jewish members of the congregation, holding on to the covenant of Abraham and the Law of Moses, kept by the early Jewish members of the congregation and on the other hand the Greeks and other believers in the coming of God’s Anointed and the victory over death.

-hIt was, however, a harsh struggle between the two elements, with frequent, often insulting, exchanges of words and filthy accusations bandied about, each side always looking back and seeking support from on the one hand what the apostle once wrote and on the other what the Scriptures and the Law prescribed.

-iOnly by reading the text does it become understandable: the opening, the harking back to the statement of the Kèphas of Jerusalem with the permission granted for the preaching, the middle part about the strife between the factions and the calling to the apostolate, and the conclusion with the emotional call to unity: ‘(…) neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God.13‘

-jThe voice of Paul is not heard in the unisono; it only acquires tone and meaning in the war of words in which he was drawn. Goethe observed in a conversation that Sophocles brings Antigone to life through the contradiction 13

Romans 8, 38-39.

Not the map but the landscape

259

of Creon: ‘Alles Edle,’ sagte er, ‘ist an sich stiller Natur und scheint zu schlafen, bis er durch Widerspruch geweckt werde und herausgefordert wird.14’

14

Johann Peter Eckermann: Gespräche mit Goethe, Sonntag, den 1. April 1827. ‘Everything noble, ‘he said,’ is inherently quiet and seems to sleep until it is awakened and challenged by contradiction.’

CHAPTER TWENTY-ONE A FINAL ATTEMPT

Lost words The order of the first and second editions, the editions produced in the second century, is established: Galatians, I and II Corinthians, Romans. It is also established that the addressing of these letters to the Galatians and Romans was still missing in those first editions. And also that as far the correspondence of Paul and his associates is concerned, we only have fragments from letters to the Corinthian faith community, which we can date between the summer of AD 51 and the early spring of AD 55. In this study I provided arguments for attributing the editing of the first letter to the Corinthians to Anonymous A and the second to Anonymous B. Then the work of the editors may be divided as follows: • Anonymous A: Galatians and I Corinthians, • Anonymous B: II Corinthians and Romans. Or, in other words: - Introductory letter fragments from Paul were followed by a homily by Anonymous A which was answered by Anonymous B (Galatians) followed by letters from Paul to the Corinthians, alternated with texts by Anonymous A (I Corinthians), - then letter fragments from Paul to the Corinthians, interspersed with texts by Anonymous B (II Corinthians), concluded by a homily by Anonymous A and the reply to this by Anonymous B (Romans). This creates a clear structure. This English edition goes one step further than in the original Dutch publication. This step is based upon an assumption, possibly indecisive, but well defensible by its inferences. The underlying idea is simple: in Galatians a text by Anonymous A is followed by an answer by Anonymous B. Would it be possible that this

A final attempt

261

might also have been the case in the letter to the Romans, instead of the presently accepted reading in which the homily of Anonymous A is interrupted by the answer from Anonymous B and is then subsequently continued. So we change the usual sequence A – B – A and restore the simple structure A – B. In the contemporary designation this means that we take the text of Anonymous B (Romans 5, 13 - 8, 39) from the text and put it after 14, 23 as a definite ending of the entire text. Doing so opens the way to observing five relevant connections. 1.

2.

1 II

It is noticeable (but it will only be noticeable when the structure of the first edition is first laid bare) that one editor, Anonymous A, precedes the texts to be published with a description of the confirmation of the Arch-Apostles of Jerusalem concerning Pauls mission and proclamation, whereas the other editor, Anonymous B, in the beginning of his text starts off with a blunt rejection of this: ‘(…) or do we need, as some do, letters of recommendation – sustatikǀn epistolǀn pros humas – to you, or from you? You yourselves are our letter of recommendation, written on our hearts, to be known and read by all. And you show that you are a letter from Anointed delivered by us, written not with black ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts.1‘ This is not merely an overt and painful challenge, but also a rather gross rejection of Scripture – ‘written with black ink’ – and Law – ‘etched in stone’. A rejection of the Jewish heritage in favour of the Christian faith. This beginning, the statement about the concordat reached with the Jews of Jerusalem and Judea is also nullified by the first editor, Anonymous A nullified in a remarkable way. He adds some lines (Galatians 2, 11-12 and 14) about a conflict between Peter and Paul, the Kèphas and Saul. Were it not written by a sacred writer, we would call it cunning. The editorial intervention is vitriolic for five reasons: o By inserting a text concerning a conflict immediately after the agreement reached will completely undermine this

Corinthians 3, 1-4.

Chapter Twenty-One

262

agreement. It was a hammer blow that has resounded for two thousand years. o It suggests that the conflict at Antioch followed shortly after the Jerusalem agreement, which is far from likely. o The name of James is put in first place and that gives the impression that this is the powerful brother of the Anointed, which cannot be the case. o Simon Peter’s role is depicted as dishonourable, cowardly and treacherous, instead of being authoritative. What the conflict is actually about is not made clear. Not only through the manner of assembling this text but also with the transition from Paul’s statement to his personal opinions, does the editor show his cunning way of editing. Shrewdly he ends Paul’s reproach to Peter – ‘If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?’ Then he continuous with: ‘We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners.2‘ This latter statement would obviously be a very odd remark, if it were really directed to Peter. But it is actually the opening line of the first homology by Anonymous A. Earlier in the book I pointed out the possibility that at the end of the first edition, the editors – or editor – did continue and finish the interrupted message, i.e. that Romans 14, 13 is the concluding sentence following Galatians 2, 14. 3. What is also remarkable is something that has been obscured in the current Bible editions and can only be observed when the first edition has been restored. In the current editions we find a kind of autobiographical outline at the end of the second letter to the Corinthians and then comes the autobiographical document of Paul himself with which the letter to the Galatians opens. Through this odd sequence we can only conclude that both accounts vary significantly. But, if we restore the sequence suggested by me it is quite noticeable that here, too, the second editor corrects the first one. Anonymous A opened the edition with the document on the early Paul, in Jerusalem, Judea and Antioch. Anonymous B concludes 2

Galatians 2, 14-15.

A final attempt

4.

5.

3

263

the correspondence with the Corinthians with a fictitious biography of Paul, but, not of his early years, but of the later and last years. That is, of course (for us present-day readers, but not for his audience) rather bizarre because in the context of a letter from the early 50s AD he writes about punishments, sea journeys, imprisonments and mishaps that would not take place until years later. So it does not concern two different accounts of Paul’s life but (in the restored order) texts from Paul himself about his earliest years as a zealot for the Law, a fanatical Jew, and then being an emissary with the consent of the apostles of Jerusalem and Judea; and on the other hand an account about the later years of Paul, fiercely anti-Jewish and full of exaggerations: having received five times the forty-minus-one lashes by the hands of the Jews, being whipped thrice, stoned once, shipwrecked three times. Apart from the hostile anti-Jewish tone, it is abundantly clear that Anonymous B apparently did not yet have access to the story of Acts. There are many differences, such as for instance in the account of the well-known incident in Damascus, the escape in a basket lowered from the city wall. He was, of course, familiar with the account of Paul himself presented at the beginning of the first edition. He does pick up a striking element from it: ‘fourteen years ago (…)’3. Possibly even more peculiar is that he repeats the autobiographical account (II Corinthians 11, 16-21) practically in the same wording at the end of his contribution to the first edition: Romans 8, 35. And that there, having come to the end of the text, he also reports (the very first mention of this) how of Paul died: è machaira, caedes, quae fit gladio – beheading with the sword, incidentally, a Roman punishment for rebellion, not a punishment for aberrant religious ideas. The reference to the apostle’s later life and death is of course one more argument that these texts are not Paul’s own. Only through the rendering of the first edition presented here does this come to the fore.

Galatians 2, 1 and II Corinthians 12, 2.

Chapter Twenty-One

264

And above all, only now does the magnificent final chord of this collection of texts resound. After the beheading and in stark contrast to it, the grandiose conclusion: ‘In all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. For I am sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Anointed Jesus our Lord.4‘ This sublime ending of the first edition was screwed up by later changes in favour of ecclesiastical authority and covered by four layers of varnish and dirt. First, by placing the fictional letter to the capital of the world, Rome, in the front as being the first letter. Second, by including the closing text of Anonymous B in the dialogue of Anonymous A. Third, by extending the end of the letter with additional padding, chapter fourteen. And finally by adding the letters of a certain Tertius (chapters fifteen and sixteen) dealing with intended travels and the names of many high-ranking authorities.

4

Romans 8, 37-39.

F APOSTOLIKON - DISPATCHES

LETTER ONE ‘GALATIANS’

Texts between brackets < > and in italics are later insertions. All insertions were absent in the first edition. Texts between brackets within texts that are themselves within brackets are later insertions within insertions. The passages in bold lettering are quotations from the King James version of the Old Testament. The title ‘To the Galatians’ was added in the second century Editors 1, 1. Paul, emissary not of men nor of a man, but because of Jesus Anointed , who was raised from the dead by Him 2. and with me all the brothers who are here, . 3. All good to you from me and peace from God our father and from Jesus Anointed the lord, 4. who gave himself for the sake of our sins, to draw us away, according to the will of our God and father, from these times of aversion. 5. Glory to Him in the ages of ages. Amen. Editors 6. It is incomprehensible that you so quickly turn your backs on me, away from him who called you in good faith, on the way to a deviant good news. 7. There is no other good news! Men incite and confuse you by perverting the good news of Anointed. 8. Even if we or an angel from heaven were to bring the good news that differed from what we have told you: let him be accursed! 9. What I said before, I repeat here: if someone should come to you with good news contrary to what you have received: let him be accursed! 10. 11. I tell you, brothers, that the good news proclaimed by me is not because of a man, 12. for I did not receive it from a man, nor was I instructed in it by a man, but by a revelation of Jesus Anointed.

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

267

Paul 13. You will have heard about my strict Jewish background, and that I persecuted God’s congregation inordinately harshly and destroyed it. 14. And within the strict rules of Judaism I made greater progress in this than many peers of my age, as an extremely fanatical follower of the traditions passed down by my ancestors. 15. But when it pleased Him, Who had separated me from my mother’s wombe, and Who had called me by His grace 16. to reveal his son in me that I might proclaim the good news about him among the nations, I did not immediately consult flesh and blood, 17. neither did I go back to Jerusalem to those who were envoys before me, but I travelled to Arabia and returned again to Damascus. 18. Three years later, I returned to Jerusalem to interrogate God’s Rock and stayed with him for fifteen days. 19. I did not see any other emissary 20. 21. Then I went to the regions of Syria and Cilicia. 22. I was unknown by sight to the congregations of Judea that were in Anointed. 23. They had only heard that he who once persecuted us now preached the good news about the faith he had once ravaged. 24. and they praised God through me. 2, 1. After that, after fourteen years, I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, 2. and I went up following a revelation and presented to them the good news as I declare it among the nations; and in a private meeting to the men of distinction, so that I might not have made such an effort for nothing. 3. 4. 5. we have yielded nothing to them, not even for a moment, so that the truth of the good news would be with you. 6. Of those who enjoyed a considerable degree of prestige but those prestigious men have not imposed anything on me. 7. 9. and as soon as they perceived the grace that had been given me, then God’s Rock, James and John, who were known as the pillars, gave me and Barnabas the right hand with which the agreement was made 10. They only

268

Letter One

insisted that we consider the poor, which is exactly what I endeavour. 11. But when God’s Rock came to Antioch, I withstood him to his face because he was not within his rights, 12. for before some men came from James, he usually ate with the Gentiles, but when he came he always withdrew and kept isolating himself worried about the advocates of circumcision. 13. 14. But when I saw that they were not correct in their attitude towards to the truth of the good news, I said to God’s Rock in front of everyone, ‘If you, being Jewish, live in a pagan and clearly not in a Jewish way, how then do you force the Gentiles to live as Jews?’ Anonymous A 15. Naturally we are Jews! We are not sinful pagans are we? 16. We understand very well that no man is considered righteous because of acting according to the Law, but only through faith in Jesus Anointed, and we put our faith in Anointed Jesus so that we are judged by the faith in the Anointed, and not by submission to the Law, for all flesh shall not be judged with a view as to whether or not to keep the Law. 17. If we seek to be justified in the Anointed and we are proven to be sinners ourselves, is then the Anointed a servant of the failure? Certainly not! 18. If I rebuild what I tore down, then I am surely doing wrong. 19. I have died to the law through the Law, so that I live before God. 20. I myself no longer live, but Anointed lives in me and what I now live in the flesh, I live in the faith in God’s son, who loved me and surrendered himself for me. 21. I do not reject the grace of God, for if righteousness depends on the Law, then the Anointed died in vain. 3, 1. O ignorant who has bewitched you? Was it not shown to you that Jesus Anointed was sentenced to the cross! 2. Only one thing I want to know from you: did you receive the spirit by keeping the Law or by acknowledging the faith? 3. Are you really that ignorant to begin with the spirit and then allow yourselves to be caught in the flesh? 4. Was everything completely for nothing? And did that not matter? 5. Did He give you the spirit and powers abundantly because you kept the Law or because you obeyed the faith? 6. 10. But those who put their trust in following the instructions of the Law, are under a curse. For it is written – Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the booke of the Law to doe them. 11. That clarifies that no one is justified by God by keeping the Law, for the just shall live by faith. 12. The Law is not from the faith, but Ye shall therefore keep my statutes and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them. 13. Anointed has redeemed us from the curse of the Law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree. 14. So that in this way through Jesus Anointed the blessing of Abraham will reach the nations, so that by the faith we might take hold of the promise of the spirit. A passage that was still missing in the first edition 15. Anonymous A continued 21. Does the Law then contradict promises? Certainly not! Had a life-giving Law been given, then righteousness indeed would have sprung from the Law. 22. We are all, through the Scripture, prisoners of sin, but for the believer the promise was fulfilled in Jesus Anointed. 23. Before the faith came, we were locked up under the Law, yearning for the moment when the faith would come. 24. The Law was the strong hand until the coming of Anointed, so that we might be justified by the faith. 25.

26. Through the faith in Jesus Anointed you are all sons of God. Was still missing in the first edition 27. Anonymous A continued 3. Likewise we also were subject to the appointed powers from childhood. 4. But when the fulfilment of the time had come, God sent out his son, born of a woman, born under the Law, 5. so that he might redeem us from the Law and we might be adopted as a son. 6. You have truly become sons, God sent the spirit of his son to our hearts with the cry, ‘Abba, papa.’ 7. We are no longer slave but son and as sons heirs thanks to God. 8. In the past, when you were not aware of the true nature of God you were slaves to idols that do not really exist. 9. Now that you know God, even more, now that you are known by God, why this turning away, the return to the poor and pitiful pack to toil again as slaves? 10. You observe days and months, seasons and times and years. Was still missing in the first edition 11. Anonymous A continued 19. My children, must I then go through once more through the pains of labour for you until you are shaped in Anointed? 20. How I would like to be with you and change my tone, because I am desperate about you. 21. Tell me, you who will obey the Law, do you really answer to the Law? 22. It is written that Abraham had two sons, one out of his slave girl, and one out of the freeborn. 23. But the son of the slave girl was born according to the flesh, the son of the free-born according to the promise, 24. which is allegoric. There are two kinds of agreements: the one, Hagar gave birth in slavery, 25. according to present-day Jerusalem. She is a slave with her children. 26. Heavenly

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

271

Jerusalem is free and is our mother: Was still missing in the first edition 27. Conclusion by Anonymous A 31. So, brothers: we are not children of the slave girl, but of the freeborn. 5, 1. Anointed brought us freedom: so be steadfast, do not let yourself be caught again to be put under the yoke of slavery. Anonymous B 2. Behold, I, , declare that if you have yourselves circumcised, there is nothing more Anointed can do for you. 3. I declare again emphatically: every circumcised person is obliged to live subject to the Law. 4. You turned away from Anointed, you submitted to the Law and are now out of favour with him. 5. We, on the other hand, have received through the spirit, faith, hope of acquittal. 6. In Anointed Jesus neither circumcision nor the foreskin is important, but the faith through fervent brotherly love. 7. You were steady and well on your way. Who cut you off and took from you faith in the truth? 8. You responded to them, not to Him who called you. 9. A little bit of leaven will spoil all the bread. 10. I trust in the Lord that your disposition will not change and those who are stirring you will not escape their punishment! 11. And I, brothers, if I were still preaching circumcision, why all this opposition? The scandal of the cross would then be annulled. 12. Spay them, those agitators! Anonymous B 13. Brothers, you are called to freedom: but not to the addiction of the lusty pangs of the flesh but to the mutual love for each other. 14. For the Law is summed up in one word: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thy selfe 15. And if you bite and devour each other, I am afraid you will be consumed. 16. I mean: do live in the spirit, and thereby avoid falling into the desires of the flesh 17. For the flesh lusts against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh, they are opposed to each other, so that you do not randomly act whatever comes to mind. 18. One who is guided by the spirit is not covered by the Law. 19. The works of the flesh are known: prostitution, sleaze, obscenity,

272

Letter One

20.serving idols, mixing poison, hostilities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, ambitious striving, discord, partiality, 21. envy, drunkenness, immoral drinking and all things like that, and of which I openly tell you, as I have done so many times before, that those who do so will not inherit God’s Kingdom. 22. The fruits of the spirit on the other hand, are love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, trust, 23. meekness and selfcontrol. That is not where the Law is about. 24. Those who are of the Anointed have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires. 25. Whoever wants to live to the spirit, let he open himself to the spirit. 26. Let us not boast about this emptiness, challenging each other, begrudging each other. 6, 1. Brothers, should anyone be caught in some mistake, help him in a spirit of meekness, you who are filled by the spirit, and be careful not to fall into the same pit. 2. Bear one another’s burdens, and in this way fulfil the law of the Anointed. 3. Anyone who thinks he is something when he is nothing is deceiving himself. 4. Let each one investigate his own behaviour. Then he will not boast about himself in front of others. 5. That everyone bears his own burdens. 6. Let the one who was taught make contributions to the tutor. 7. Make no mistake, God will not be fooled. Whatever a man may sow, that he will also reap. 8. He who sows to the flesh will reap corruption, he who sows to the spirit will reap everlasting life from the spirit. 9. Do not lose heart, keep on doing what is right, do not slacken so that we can reap the harvest when the time is right. 10. So take every opportunity to do good, especially towards those of the household of the faith. Editors 11. See, what a long letter I have written to you myself! 12. People who pretend that they want the best for you in this world want to persuade you to be circumcised anyway, in order to avoid being persecuted because of the cross of Anointed. 13. But those circumcised do not keep the Law at all, but they wish you to be circumcised so that they can boast about it. 14. I want to boast of nothing except about the cross of our lord, Jesus Anointed, whereby the whole establishment was put to the cross and I died to the world. 15. Neither circumcision nor foreskin are important any longer in a new creation. 16. And those who live according to this precept, they will have peace and mercy, and also God’s Israel. Let no one trouble me from now on, because in my flesh I bear the wounds of Jesus 18.

LETTER TWO ‘I CORINTHIANS’

The title ‘First letter to the Corinthians’ was added in the second century Editors 1, 1. Paul, called by God’s will as the emissary of Anointed Jesus, and brother Sosthenes, 2.To God’s church at Corinth 3. God’s grace and peace be yours, He who is our father and that of lord Jesus Anointed. 4. I always thank my God about you for His grace which was yours in Anointed Jesus, 7. about reaching a state of grace, you are not short of anything while waiting for the revelation of our lord Jesus Anointed. 8. He will assist you even to the end, lest there be any accusation against you in the day of Jesus Anointed, our lord. 9. God is faithful, through Him you were called to be together with His son, Jesus Anointed, our lord. Paul 10. I exhort you, brothers, in the name of our lord Jesus Anointed, that there is agreement between you and no discord, be of one mind and understanding. 11. I have been told by Chloe’s household that there is disagreement among you, my brothers. 12. I say so because you call out, ‘I am Paul’s’, ‘I am of Apollos’, ‘I am of God’s Rock’,

13. Is then the Anointed torn to pieces? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14. Thank God I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius. 15. So that no one can claim to have been baptized in my name. 16. Oh yes, I have also baptized the household of Stephanas. For the rest I do not know anyone else I would have baptized. 17. For Anointed did not sent me to baptize, but to spread the glad tidings, not in learned doctrines, but in a straightforward way on the cross of Anointed. 18. For the proclamation of the cross is foolishness to those who will be swept away, but to us who will be saved saved the power of God, 19. It is written, I will destroy the wisedome of the wise, and will bring

274

Letter Two

to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? 20. Where the knowledgeable? Where the researcher of these times? Has not God made foolishness of the wisdom of this world? 21. This world with all its wisdom denied God, therefore it pleased God to save the believers by the proclamation of foolishness. 22. Jews want miracles, Greeks desire wisdom. 23. But we proclaim Anointed on the cross, to Jews a scandal, to the nations folly, 24. But to those who are called, Jews as well as Greeks, we proclaim Anointed as the power of God and God’s wisdom. 25. For the folly of God is wiser than men and God’s weakness is stronger. 26. Behold your own calling, brothers, that did not choose the learned according to the flesh, nor the rulers, nor the influential ones. 27. God chose the fools of this world so that the wise would be ashamed, and the humble of this world so that the oppressors would be ashamed. 28. God chose the humbled and oppressed of this world, those who counted for nothing so that those who were considered important might be annulled. 29. So that the flesh would not exalt itself above God. 30. Through Him you are in Anointed Jesus, who became God’s wisdom for us, blessing and justification, holiness and acquittal. 31. As it is written: he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord. 2, 1. When I came to you, brothers, it was not with eloquence and learning to proclaim God’s testimony. 2. I knew nothing but only that Jesus Anointed had been nailed to the cross. 3. And how insecure, afraid and anxious I was! 4. And what I proclaimed to you was not based on smooth words and many idle facts, but was testimony of the power of the spirit, 5 so that your faith would not rest on human wisdom but on God’s power. 6. We are talking about perfect insight, about wisdom, not about temporary cleverness, the petty knowledge of the rulers of this world, all that will be lost. 7. But we proclaim God’s wisdom, still shrouded in darkness, but manifest at a time already determined by God before the times, for our victory, 8. and that no ruler over this world and these times knew: if they had known about it, they would not have nailed the lord of glory to the cross. 9. But as it is written: eye hath not seene, nor eare heard, neither have entred into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him. 10. God revealed that to us through the spirit: the spirit even fathoms God’s deepest depths. 11. It is also only given to people to understand each other through the spirit and therefore no one knows God but only through God’s spirit. 12. Not the spirit of this world but God’s spirit has come upon us, through which we understand the greatness of the grace God has given us. 13. So I do not say this in learned words, learned from men, but with words learned from the spirit, saying things of the spirit in the way of the spirit. 14. But a natural

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

275

man is not mindful of things of God’s spirit, which are only foolish to him, and he does not grasp them, for they can only be understood in a spiritual way. 15. The spiritual man examines everything, and is known by no one. 16. Who hath knowen the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him? We turn our thoughts to Anointed. 3, 1. And I, brothers, was unable to speak to you in spiritual terms, but according to the flesh, as still an infant in Anointed. 2. With milk I suckled you, you could not tolerate solid food as yet. 3. But even now you cannot do without it, for you are still carnal. As long as there is envy and strife, you are carnal and act according to human standards. 4. If someone shouts, ‘I am of Paul,’ and another, ‘I am of Apollos, you are behaving merely according to human standards. 5. Which Apollos? And which Paul? Servants through whom you received the faith, and both contributed as the Lord wanted. 6. I planted, Apollos watered, but God gave it growth. 7. It has not to do with the one who plants, nor about the one who waters, but about God who makes it grow. 8. He who planted and he who watered worked on the same, and received wages according to their work. 9. We are co-workers of God: God’s field, God’s building. 10. God gave me the grace with which I laid the foundation as a skilled builder. Others continue to build on this. Everyone bears the responsibility for how he builds. 11. Any other foundation than there is, that is Jesus Anointed, no one can lay down. 12. And whoever continues on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wooden parts, hay or straw, 13. its soundness will come to light. The day of judgment with the purifying fire will show. 14. If someone’s building will stand, he will be rewarded. 15. If someone’s building burns down he will be punished but cleansed by the fire itself he will be saved. 16. Realize that you are God’s temple and God’s spirit dwells with you. 18. Let no one deceive to himself, who among you believes to have a hold on the wisdom of this world, then he must be considered a fool in order to attain true wisdom. 19. Wisdom of this world is folly to God. It is written Hee taketh the wise in their owne craftinesse. 20. And elsewhere: the Lord knoweth the thoughts of wise, that they are vain. 21. Therefore let no man seek his salvation in men; 22. Paul, Apollos, God’s Rock, the whole world, life or death, What is now or what is to come: all yours! 23. You are of Anointed, Anointed is of God. 4, 1. In this way we are to be judged as servants of Anointed and stewards of God’s secrets. 2. A steward is required to be a reliable man. 3. For me this is a small thing, just press me, I do not play a role in this searching into myself. 4. I am not aware of any wrong-doing, but neither am I completely in my right. But my judgment is of the Lord. 5. So do not

276

Letter Two

judge prematurely, before the coming of the lord, who will also bring to light what is hidden from the darkness and will expose the counsels of the heart: then everyone will receive the praise of God which is due to him. 6. All this, brothers, about me and Apollos may be a lesson to you, do not go too far in the interpretation of the Scriptures, so that there is no conflict and dispute over which of the two is actually right. 7. Who makes the difference between you? And then, what do you own that you received? If you did receive it, why this boasting about a gift? 8. You already have more than enough, you are already rich, and can do without us. Alas, if only that were the case, we would love to rule with you. 9. But God gave our emissaries a place at the back near death, as a spectacle to be seen by everyone, angels and men. 10. We are fools in Anointed, you are so wise in Anointed: we weak, you strong; you honoured, we reviled. 11. We are still hungry and thirsty, we are naked, homeless and beaten, 12. and exhaust ourselves with heavy toil. We are cursed and bless them, are persecuted and endure it. 13. We are abused and pray for them. We are despised as filth of the world, as anti-social scum. 14. I am not writing all of this as a reproach, dear children, but as admonishment. 15. A host of educators came upon you, but you do not have many fathers in Anointed. I have begotten you in Anointed Jesus by bringing the glad tidings. 16. Therefore, please do as I do! 17. That is why I sent Timothy to you, my beloved child and faithful in the Lord, who will remind you of what I taught you about Anointed, , 18. As in Corinth they assumed I could not come again anyway they became arrogant. 19. But God willing, I will come to you shortly, and will judge the drivel of those conceited people by their deeds. 20. God’s kingdom is no nonsense but is in all its might! 21. What do you prefer? Do I come with the punishing rod or with affection towards you and an inclination to be lenient? Editors 5, 1. There is a lot of upheaval concerning the stories about your lechery, forms of debauchery that are not even evident in other nations: that a person takes his father’s wife! 2. Are you so far above everyone else? Why are you not, deeply sad rather, and want this criminal removed from your midst? 3. In my absence as if I were present, I pass judgement over him and his depravity: 4. in the name of the lord Jesus, and in consultation with you, filled with the spirit and power of lord Jesus 5. hand that fellow over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that the spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord. 6. All this boasting of yours does not become you. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens all the dough? 7. Put away the old leaven, so that you will be a new dough. Unleavened

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

277

easter loaves you are and the easter lamb, Anointed has been slaughtered. 8. We are not to rejoice with stale bread, with filth and wickedness, but with unleavened bread, modesty and truth. 9. I wrote not to demean yourselves with catamites. 10. I did not forbid you all association with whoremongers, gripers, money-hungry people or idolaters, because then you would have had to leave this world behind. 11. What I did deny you was the association with a man, be he our brother, who is a scumbag, or usurer, idolater, slanderer, drunkard, or swindler. We shall not break bread together with such. 12. It does not befit me to judge an outsider, just as only you will judge the brothers. 13. God judges all others: therefore put away from among you that wicked person. 6, 1. Should we tolerate that there are those among you who will bring a case against another in front of the unrighteous and not allow it to be settled before the saints? 2. Know that the judgment of the world rests with the saints. And if the judgment of the world is already yours, how much more the judgment of things of minor importance? 3. Realize that even the judgment over the angels is ours, how much more than that of the daily matters? 4. In these everyday matters, the lowly of the congregation should be involved. 5. I say this to provoke: is there then no one among you who is wise enough to pass judgment among his brothers? 6. For now brother opposes brother before unbelievers. 7. It is bad enough to file lawsuits against each other. Why not put up with some injustice, endure a loss? 8. You yourselves commit injustice and theft, and that to your brothers. 9. Do you not realize that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not indulge yourself with catamites, idolaters, adulterers, wretches, nor with sodomites, 10. thieves, money-craving, drunkards, lewd bigmouths, robbers, none of them will enter God’s kingdom. 11. Some of you were like those. But you have been purified, sanctified, and justified in the name of the lord Jesus Anointed and in the spirit of our God. Anonymous A 12. Everything is in my power! But not everything is beneficial. Everything is in my power! But not everything will do. 13. Guzzling for the belly and the belly bloated! However, God will destroy both. Our body is not for fornication, but it is for the Lord and the Lord is for the body. 14. God, who raised the lord, will also raise us by His power. 15. Be aware that your bodies are limbs of Anointed. Must I then squander the limbs of Anointed for a whore? Certainly not! 16. Do you not realize that whoever has intercourse with a whore becomes

278

Letter Two

one body? The Scripture says: for they shall be one flesh. 17. However, he who holds to the Lord is one spirit. 18. Shun the whoring girl: any other sin a man commits without his body, but the whoremonger defiles his body. 19. Do you not realize that your body is the temple of the holy spirit that dwells within you? Received from God and not our own property? 20. You have been bought and paid for: glorify God with your body. Paul 7, 1. Also about what you have written: ‘It is good for a man not to have intercourse with a woman.’ 2. Well, but because of this whoremongering let each have their own wife and each woman her own husband, 3. and let the man give to the woman what is due, and likewise the woman to the man. 4. The woman has no authority over her own body, but the man does. Likewise, the man does not have authority over his own body, but the woman does. 5. Do not reject intercourse, except by temporary agreement, so that you will have time for prayer and then join again in order that Satan will not try you for your lack of self-control. 6. This I say as a concession, it is not an order. 7. I wish all people were like me. But everyone received his own talent from God, the one this way, the other that way. 8. It is good to let the unmarried and the widows remain as I am. 9. If they are unable to control themselves, then let them get married. Better to marry than burn. 10. Married couples are commanded – not by me but by the Lord – that a woman shall not divorce a husband. 11. If she does divorce, she must remain unmarried or return to the husband. Likewise, a man should not disown a wife. 12. To the others I say – not the Lord: if one of the brothers has a non-Jewish wife and she agrees to live with him, do not let him cast her out. 13. And a woman who has a non-Jewish husband and he agrees to live with her, do not let her cast him off. 14. The non-Jewish man is sanctified by his wife and the non-Jewish woman is sanctified by the brother: their children are not unclean but holy. 15. If a non-Jewish man or a non-Jewish woman wants a divorce, do allow it: then the brother or sister is not bound by anything, keep peace, God calls you to do so. 16. For, woman, how can you know whether you will save the man, and you, man, whether you will save the woman? 17. And furthermore, let each live as the Lord has ordained, everyone according to God’s calling.

18. Do not let the circumcised deny his circumcision and let the uncircumcised remain uncircumcised. 19. Being circumcised or having a foreskin does not matter, just follow God’s commandments. 20. Leave everyone in the state to which they were called. 21. If you are a slave, let it not be of concern. If you can obtain freedom, do so. 22. If the Lord called

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

279

you being a slave then you are free in the Lord. Likewise, the Lord called you in freedom to be the slave of Anointed. 23. You have been bought and paid for. Stop being bullied by people. 24. Let everyone, brothers, remain in the state to which they were called by the Lord. 25. Also about unmarried maidens, about whom there is no commandment of the Lord, but I give my opinion as a trustworthy man because I enjoy the favour of the Lord. 26. I am of the opinion that now, given the current needs, it is better that everything remains as it is: 27. if you are married to a woman, do not divorce. If you live divorced, do not look for another woman. 28. If you want to get married then that is all right, and unmarried girls do not sin when they get married, they let themselves into a lot of trouble and tribulation, from which I would like to protect them. 29. I firmly say to you, brothers, the time presses, therefore let all who have wives consider it as nothing, 30. the complaints as finished, the joy as perished, the bargain as not concluded, 31. and those who are in the world as if they were apart from it: the current state of affairs is ending. 32. I would like to see you freer of cares. Let the single person be concerned about the Lord and how he can please the Lord. 33. But the married man is concerned about the world and how he can please his wife, 34. so that he becomes conflicted. The woman without a husband and the unmarried maiden should be aware of the Lord, to be holy in body and spirit. The married woman is concerned about worldly matters and wants to please her husband. 35. All this I say for your good, not to restrain you, but for decency and diligent devotion to the Lord. 36. If anyone considers it inappropriate to have intercourse with a girl who is ripe for marriage before the marriage has taken place, then marry, that is not a sin. 37. However, he who is steadfast and free from passion, strong-willed and determined to respect his betrothed until marriage, does well. 38. Being married is good, staying single is better. 39. A married woman is bound as long as her husband is alive: if the husband dies, she is free to marry, but only in the Lord. 40. She is, in my opinion, happier staying single: I think this is in God’s spirit. 8, 1. Also about sacrificial meat: we all know quite a lot, but knowing makes one conceited, whereas love is uplifting. 2. Anyone who thinks he know something does not yet know what it is actually about. 3. But whoever loves God will be known. 4. As to eating sacrificial meat, we know that idols do not matter here on earth, there is no God but the One, 5. even if there is talk of the gods, in heaven or on earth, 6. but for us there is one God the father, who called all things into existence and we exist through and for Him, and one lord Jesus Anointed, . 7. But

280

Letter Two

not everyone is aware of this and there are some who are still used to the idols and the flesh offered to them, they eat of it unconcernedly, their conscience says nothing about it and they defile themselves. 8. Eating doesn’t bring us closer to God, whether we eat something or not, it does not matter. 9. Take care not to lose your authority in this way with the weaker brothers. 10. If such a person sees you, with all this knowledge of yours, sitting down in a temple of a god, will he then not step away from conscientious objection and be urged to also partake of that meal? 11. In this way the weak one will be destroyed by your knowledge, a brother for whose sake Anointed has died. 12. By doing wrong in this way against the weak consciences of your brothers, you sin against Anointed. 13. Therefore, should the food cause offence to my brother, I will certainly never again eat of that sacrificial meat, so that I am not an offence to my brother. Anonymous A 9, 1. Am I not an authorized emissary? Have I not seen Jesus our lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? 2. If I am not considered by others as an authorized emissary, I am for you, you are the seal of my dedication in the Lord. 3. That is the conclusive answer to my interrogators. 4. Do we lack the authority to being provided with food and drink? 5. Do we then lack the authority to travel in company of women, as is the custom of the other emissaries and the brothers of the lord and God’s Rock? 6. Or should only I and Barnabas roll up their sleeves and find paid employment? 7. Which soldier ever has to pay his own wages? Who plants a vineyard and does not eat of its fruits? Or who tends a flock and does not feed on the milk of the flock? 8. I gave human examples, but the Law also says the same, right? 9. There it is written, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the oxe that treadeth out the corne. Does God care about oxen? 10. Or does he say this about us? About us it is written: that hee that ploweth, should plow in hope: and that hee that thresheth in hope, should bee partaker of his hope. 11. If we sowed among you the nourishment of the spirit, then may we also have our share of the harvest? 12. If others assert claims to powers and privileges, aren’t we allowed to do so all the more? But we have not taken advantage of those privileges, I would rather endure anything in order to share the glad tidings of the Anointed! 13. Have you not noticed that those who offer the sacred offerings receive their portion from the sacred, and those who provide the service at the altar are allowed to take it from the altar? 14. Likewise, the Lord determined that the bearers of the glad tidings could live thereof. 15. Personally I have never made use of it myself. I did not write all this to you, in order to claim all this now: I would rather die than have this

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

281

renown taken away from me. 16. When I spread the glad tidings, that is nothing for me to boast about: I cannot do otherwise! Woe to me if I were to be silent about the glad tidings. 17. As a volunteer I am being paid, being unwilling I pay myself. 18. So in what lies my merit? That I freely spread the glad tidings, and lay no claim to the benefits that are due to me. 19. Not depending on anyone I have entered into the service of Anointed to gain many. 20. With the Jews I pretend to be a Jew to take them in; with those who respect the Law I also pretend to take them in, although I myself do not keep to the Law, 21. with those who do not respect the Law I also present myself as such, to take them in. 22. With the weak I pretend to be weak, to gain their confidence: I am whatever you want, just to win over the people. 23. 24. Remember that the runners in a stadium are all running fast, but isn’t there only one who gets the prize? Therefore go for the victory! 25. All participants in the competition make every effort, for a wreath that will wither again, we for what will never wither! 26. Well then, I am not just running about, neither am I boxing the air, 27. but I wear out my body and punish it in order not to go under in the fight that I myself started. Paul 10, 1. Know, brothers, that our fathers were all under the cloud and all went through the sea 2. and all were baptized with Moses in the cloud and in the sea 3. and all ate the same food of the spirit 4. and all drank the same drink of the spirit. 5. Yet God took no pleasure in most: for they were overthrowen in the wildernesse. 6. All this is a lesson for us, so that we do not fall into the same mistakes. 7. Do not worship idols, as they did, as it is written: the people sate downe to eate and drinke, and rose up to play. 8. Do not go to harlots, as they did, and in one day twenty-three thousand perished. 9. Don’t defy God. as they endeavoured and perished through the serpents. 10. Neither murmur, as they murmured and were slain by the angel of destruction. 11. All of this had a deeper meaning and was described as a warning to us who stand at the ends of time. 12. Whoever stands, see that he does not fall. 13. The suffering does not surpass the human measure: God is faithful, He does not allow unbearable suffering, but gives strength to bear and to endure. Editors 14. Therefore, my beloved, flee from the service of the idols. 15. For I am addressing the word to people who use their understanding, so make your own judgment about what I am putting forward. 16. Does the cup of the

282

Letter Two

blessing we bless allow us to partake of the blood of the Anointed? The bread that we break, our partaking of the body of the Anointed? 17. Because the bread is one, we together are one body, for we all partake of the one bread. 18. Also remember earthly Israel, how they ate of the altar when they partook of the sacrificed. 19. By saying this, I am not thereby saying that sacrificial meat is important or that gods exist? 20. But what they offer they sacrificed unto devils, not to God and I do not want you to lay it on with daemons. 21. You cannot drink from the cup of the Lord and from the cup of daemons, you cannot sit at the table of the Lord and at the table of daemons. 22. Or do we want to measure our strengths with the Lord? Would we surpass Him in strength? Anonymous A 23. Everything is in my power! But not everything is beneficial. Everything is in my power! But not everything will do. 24. Let no one be selfish, 25. It is lawful to eat meat bought at a temple without any objection to conscience. 26. For the earth is the Lord’s, and the fullness thereof. 27. So feel free to accept the invitation of unbelievers and sit down to the meal without restraint, without prejudice against what is presented. 28. But when it is expressly stated that it concerns sacrificial meat, then refuse that food, for the sake of those who let it be known and the conscience. 29. By conscience I do not mean your own conscience but that of the others. Because in how far is my freedom limited by the conscience of the other? 30. If I agree with the thanksgiving, what is there to blame me when I give thanks to God? 31. Whatever you eat, drink or do, do it for the glory of God. 32. Do not offend Jews, nor Greeks 33. I too want to please everyone, without my self-benefit but for your sake, so that they may be saved. 11, 1. Follow me as I follow Anointed. Editors, this misogynist treatise was missing in the first edition Anonymous A 17. Having said all this, I take the opportunity to criticise the way you come together, which is not good and could be better. 18. First, I hear of a lot of arguing and disagreement in the congregation, and that will probably be the case. 19. It is even necessary to argue among yourselves for it to become clear who are the true believers. 20. In the way in which you now come together there can be no question of the meal of the Lord. 21. There is just a lot of gorging, the one goes out with an empty stomach and the other completely drunk. 22. You can eat and drink at home, right? Or do you look down on God’s congregation and try to show off before the hungry? What can I say about that? It cannot be praised. Not by me! 23. I myself have received from the Lord what I then delivered to you, that the lord Jesus in the night in which he was betrayed took the bread, 24. gave thanks and broke it and said: This is my body for you, do the same, in remembrance of me. 25. In the same way, after the meal, he took the cup and said: This cup seals with my blood the new covenant, do the same when you drink it, remembering me. 26. Whenever you break this bread and drink of this cup, you proclaim the death of the lord until his coming. 27. So whoever eats of the bread or drinks of the cup unworthily, disgraces the body and blood of the lord. 28. Remember this well before you eat of the bread and drink of the cup, 29. for whoever merely eats and drinks, condemns himself in that way. 30. That is why many of you are sick and weak and die. 31. Judge yourself lest you be condemned. 32. Through this punitive judgment of the Lord we escape the doom of the world. 33. Therefore, my brothers, take one another into account in your meetings. 34. Whoever is hungry should already eat something at home, then the congregation need not be condemned. I will arrange the other matters as soon as I arrive.

284

Letter Two

Editor or unknown author 12, 1. You should not remain in uncertainty concerning the gifts of the spirit, brothers. 2. At that time you were still heathens, worshiped the dumb gods and were lost. 3. I point out to you that no one can curse Jesus in God’s spirit, only through the holy spirit can we recognize that Jesus is the lord. 4. There are many kinds of grace, but there is only one spirit. 5. And many kinds of servitude, but there is only one Lord. 6. God’s power is manifested in many ways, but there is only one God who accomplishes everything in all.7. But to everyone the spirit revealed what is allowed. 8. The spirit gives one person the gift of expressing wisdom, another receives knowledge of the same spirit, 9. again to another the same spirit gives faith, to others the grace to bring about healings, all in the same spirit. 10. Others again can perform miracles, or prophesy, understand many things or speak different languages, 11. and all this is produced by one and the same spirit, who gives as he disposes. 12. As the body is a whole of many limbs, and all those many limbs together are one body, so is the Anointed. 13. We are also of one spirit, and together through baptism form one body, whether Jews, or Greeks, or slaves, or free, all are pervaded by the one spirit. 14. The body is not one part, but many parts form the body. 15. If a foot says, ‘but I am not a hand, so do not belong to the body,’ does it fall off the body? 16. And when an ear says, ‘but I am not an eye, and therefore do not belong to the body,’ does it fall from the body? 17. Would the body be wholly eye, how would it hear? And if it was all hearing, how would it smell? 18. But God gave all parts of the body their place in the body according to His will. 19. If together they formed only one member then there was no body. 20. Now there are many parts of a body, but one body. 21. No eye can say to the hand, ‘Unnecessary, superfluous!’ and no head to the feet, ‘Unnecessary, superfluous!’ 22. It is precisely the weakest parts of the body that are indispensable 23. and the private parts we conceal and cover that which is inappropriate to display, 24. which is not necessary for the other parts of the body. God composed the body in such a way that the lesser parts should be covered more, 25. so that the body would not fall apart but show cohesion in unity. 26. And when a part is afflicted, the whole body suffers, when one part is glorified, all rejoice. 27. You are the body of Anointed and each of you is a part of this. 28. In the congregation God has also appointed each and everyone in his place: the authorized messengers in the front, then the prophets, the teachers, then those who can perform miracles, those who enjoy the gift of being able to heal, then the counsellors, administrators and interpreters. 29. Are they all authorized emissaries, prophets, teachers, or miracle workers? Are they all teachers then? 30. Can all of them bring about healing or speak many

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

285

languages or explain the Scriptures? 31. Strive diligently for the highest grace. Editors

This text, from the circle around John was missing in the first edition

Continuation of the argument started in chapter 12 strive towards the gifts of the spirit, especially prophesying, 2.who speaks in transformation of the spirit does not speak to men but to God: he is unintelligible, dealing with the mysteries of the spirit: 3.he speaks what is holy and for men there is benefit, exaltation and comfort therein: 4. he who speaks in the spirit does it for himself: he who prophesies does it for the congregation. 5. Let them speak in ecstasy, but I prefer them to prophesy: the prophet is above the speaker in ecstasy, unless he explains to the congregation what his ecstasy is about. 6. Were I, brothers, to come to you in a trance of the spirit, what good is it to you, unless I clarify, or speak with knowledge, or prophesy, or come to explain the Scriptures? 7. That would be as with instruments which produce sound, such as the flute or zither, but cannot distinguish pitch, obviously we then cannot hear what is being played? 8. If the trumpet gives an unclear sound, no one goes to war. 9. It is the same with you: whoever cannot express something clearly

286

Letter Two

remains misunderstood and his words evaporate. There are so many voices heard in the world and nothing is without its individual sound. 11. But those who do not know the meaning of the sounds, will hear but understand nothing and we remain unintelligible strangers to each other. 12. You too, being very fond of the gifts of the spirit, should strive for improvement in the interest of the congregation. 13. Let him who speaks in ecstasy pray for clarification of it. 14. For when one prays in ecstasy, then though my spirit is in prayer I cannot understand it. 15. So what to do? Pray with the spirit and the mind, sing with enthusiasm and use your mind. 16. Otherwise, an outsider would understand nothing if you spoke the thanksgiving in a trance and would not acknowledge that blessing. He does not understand what you are saying, 17. You are expressing it very nicely, but no one else benefits from it. 18. Thank God, I speak the language of the spirit better than you, 19. but in the congregation I would rather say five words that indicate understanding and benefit others than a thousand words spoken in ecstasy. 20. Brothers, remain innocent children in evil but show your maturity in judging with understanding. 21. In the Law it is written: with men of other tongues, and other lippes will I speake unto this people: and yet for all that will they not heare me, saith the Lord. 22. Therefore speaking in ecstasy is therefore intended for the unbeliever. not for the believer, whereas prophesying is not for the unbeliever but for the believer. 23. What if the whole church is together and all speak in ecstasy, what would outsiders and interested people say when they came to take a look? 24. But should outsiders or interested people come in while someone is prophesying, they will ask all kinds of questions, 25. about the secrets of the heart that come to light and he will prostrate himself on the earth, thanking God and saying, God is in you of a trueth 26. So what are we to do, brothers? When we come together, someone strikes up a psalm, explains something, tells of a revelation, or speaks in ecstasy, or interprets the Scriptures, let it all be done in an orderly fashion. 27. If someone gets into a trance, let them do so together with one or two others, taking turns explaining it: 28. if there is no one who can interpret it, silence him and leave him in his trance speak to himself and for God. 29. And as for those who prophesy, let two or three of them speak and leave judgment to others. 30. If one who sat down rises up, then be silent. Immediately! 31. Take turns in prophesying and let it be for instruction and comfort. 32. The prophetic spirits are subjected to the prophets, 33. for God does not want disorder but peace

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

287

Editors, this misogynist essay was missing in the first edition

Conclusion of the argument started in Chapter 12 37. Anyone who thinks he possesses the gift of prophecy will also be able to see that what I am writing to you is a commandment from the Lord: 38. 39 So, brothers, pursue the gift of prophecy, and do not restrain ecstasy. 40. Do everything seemly and orderly. Anonymous A. 15, 1. I imprint in you, brothers, the good news which I gave you, which you have accepted and with which everything stands or falls, 2. whereby your salvation is assured, such were the words that I used. 3. In the first place I have delivered to you what was delivered to me: that Anointed died for our sins according to the Scriptures; 4. and that he was buried, and that he was raised again on the third day according to the Scriptures; 5. and that he appeared to God’s Rock, then to The Twelve; 6. subsequently, he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at the same time, most of whom are still alive, some of whom have fallen asleep. 7. Then he appeared to James, then to all the emissaries. 8.Last of all, he also appeared to me, as to an afterbirth, 9.for I am the least of the emissaries, not worthy to be called an emissary, because I have persecuted God’s church, 10.but I am by God’s grace what I am and His grace was not in vain for me: I toiled harder than all of them, not I but God’s grace in me. 11. Whether by me or by them, this is what was proclaimed and what you accepted. 12. When it is proclaimed Anointed was raised from the dead, why do some of you claim that there is no resurrection from the dead? 13. If there is no resurrection from the dead, neither was Anointed raised 14. And if Anointed was not raised, our preaching is nothing and also our faith is void 15. and we will have lied as witnesses when we testified that God raised Anointed whereas He did not, and therefore the dead will no longer be raised. 16. For if the dead are not raised, neither was Anointed raised. 17. And if Anointed was not raised, believers are fools, and still imprisoned in sin 18. and those who fell asleep in Anointed perished, 19. and if we have put our trust in this life in Anointed, we are more miserable than anyone else. 20. Now, however,

288

Letter Two

now that Anointed was raised from the dead first of those fallen asleep. 21. For through one man came death, and through one man the resurrection from the dead. 22. As all die in Adam, we revive in the Anointed. 23. Each in turn: first Anointed, then at his coming those who live in Anointed, 24.then comes the end of times, and he relinquishes royal power again to God and father, then he will have annulled all earthly rule, powers and authority. 25. For it was decided that he should rule as king until hee hath put all enemies under his feete, 26. the last enemy to be destroyed is death. 27. For all things he hath put under his feete; but when hee saith all things are put under him, it is manifest that he is excepted which did put all things under him, 28. and if all is subjected to him, then shall the son submit himself to Him who subjected everything to him, so that God may be all in all. 29. What will those baptized over the dead do? If the dead are by no means raised, why are they still baptized for their sake? 30. And we also, why are we in danger every hour? 31. I die every day, truly, because I boast of you in Anointed Jesus our lord. 32. What by human standards is it to me for them wanting to throw me to the wild beasts in Ephesus? If the dead are not raised, Let us eate and drinke, for to morrowe wee die. 33. Make no mistake: bad company corrupts good morals. 34. Sober up and sin no more. It is a disgrace to me to observe that some of you have no notion of God. 35. But someone will say, how are the dead raised? What kind of body do they come with? 36. Stupid! What you sow must die ere it comes back to life. 37. And you sow seed, not a body, while from the grain the corn or something else must still come forth, 38. God’s will then shapes the body and He shapes each seed into a body of its own. 39. For all flesh is not the same, it differs, that of men, cattle, birds and fish, 40. and heavenly bodies, and earthly, and they differ: the brightness of the heavenly is different from that of the earthly, 41. The radiance of the sun differs from that of the moon, and in its turn that of the stars, each of which shines differently from any other: 42. So it is also with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown perishes, what is raised remains. 43. The seed is small and weak, to be raised is in glory: sown in weakness, awakened in power, Further explanation added later on

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

289

Continuation of the discourse 49. and like we carried the image of clay, so also the heavenly image. 50. Let me say this, brothers, flesh and blood will not enter God’s kingdom, no more than corruptible the incorruptible. 51. Behold, a mystery I reveal unto you: not all shall sleep, all shall change. 52. Suddenly, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet, that will then sound and the dead will be raised incorruptible and we will be changed. 53. The corruptible must put on the raiment of incorruption, and the mortal must put on immortality. 54. If then this corruptible is clothed with incorruption, and this more mortal with immortality, is fulfilled what is written; Death is swallowed up in victory. 55. Death, where is thy sting? O hell, where is thy victory? 56. 57. Thank God, we were victorious through our lord Jesus Anointed. 58. Therefore, my beloved brothers, continue to be steadfast, unyielding, always committed to the Lord, it is not in vain that you give everything for the Lord! Chapter sixteen was missing in the first edition Editors

LETTER THREE ‘II CORINTHIANS’

The title ‘Second letter to the Corinthians was added in the second century Editors 1, 1. Paul, emissary of Anointed Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy the brother, to the church which is in Corinth and to all the saints who are in Achaea, 2. thanks to you and peace from God our father and the lord Jesus Anointed. 3. Blessed is God the father of our lord Jesus Anointed, the mild father and comforting God, 4. Who gives us courage in all our distress. And that God-given courage, in turn gives us the strength to encourage others who are oppressed, 5. as we partake of the suffering of the Anointed, so we also receive our share of the courage of Anointed. 6. When we are afflicted it is to give you courage and it is beneficial. The courage given to us must also inspire you so that you can endure the same torments we suffer. 7. Our hope for an outcome for you is well established, for we know that you participate in both suffering and courage. Paul 8. We do not want you to remain ignorant, brothers, of the calamity that befell us in Asia, an ordeal that nearly exceeded our strengths so that we nearly lost our lives 9. and we already considered ourselves doomed so that we put our trust, not in ourselves, but in God who raises the dead. 10. He saved us from this dangerous situation and He will continue to protect us, 11. also through your prayer, so that grace became part of us in many ways. 12. We pride ourselves on the testimony of our conscience, that our action in the world, and especially with you, was through God’s grace done in simplicity and uprightness, and not with the wisdom of the flesh. 13. We write in our letters nothing but what it says and that is how it should be understood. I hope you will finally fully understand that. 14. For you already understand a little that we put our glory in you on the day of the lord Jesus, as you do in us. 15. And in this conviction I wanted to come to you earlier, so that you might have a second grace, 16. and go on to Macedonia and then come to you again from Macedonia to be sent by you to Judea. 17. That was my plan, and did I not take that too lightly? Or am I too much guided by the flesh in my deliberations, feigning approval and

292

Letter Three

rejection? 18. God is faithful, and I give my word that is not unwavering and without subterfuge. 19. For the son of God, Jesus Anointed, who has been preached among you by us, by me and Silvanus and Timothy, did not degenerate into now this, then that. 20. The promises of God he keeps, and therefore we affirm to honour God in this way. 21. God gives us the strength to share with you the faith in Anointed, and it is He who gives us Anointed, 22. Who has put His seal on our work and put in our hearts the handsel of the spirit. 23. God I call as a witness to my soul that I have not yet come to Corinth so as not to get you into trouble. 24. We do not want to judge your faith but participate in your joy. After all. For you show yourself true to the faith. 2, 1. However, I am determined not to suffer again during my visit. 2. If I cause you grief by coming again, then there remains no person to give me joy but only you who were plunged into grief by me. 3. I have written this really so that when I arrive at you, I will not grieve because of those who should actually fill me with joy, while I am convinced by all of you that my joy is shared by all. 4. For out of much torment and pain of the heart I have written to you in tears, not to make you sad too, but that you might know the love that I bear to you beyond measure. 5. If anyone else has caused grief, he has not so much grieved me, but let me say, all of you. 6. Enough, for such a person this rebuke, which was also made by others, is sufficient. 7. So forgive him and take courage, lest such a one be somehow lost in greater sorrow. 8. Therefore I ask you to support him through your love. 9. I wrote to you with the intention of learning about your disposition and obedience. 10. To those whom you will forgive, I do the same and confirm it. And if I accept someone in grace, it will be done for you before the face of Anointed, 11. so that we will not be deceived by Satan. I do see through his thoughts. 12. After I had come to Troas to declare the good news of the Anointed, and though I found the door open for the lord, 13. I knew no rest because I did not find Titus my brother, so I parted from them and I left for Macedonia ..... Unknown author(s) 14. Thanks be to God who always makes us triumph in the Anointed and who reveals the fragrance of knowledge of him through us in every place, 15. for we are an incense offering of Anointed to God, both those who will be saved and those who will be destroyed. 16. For them the smell of corpses, for them the smell of life. And who will earn which? 17. We do not, as many do, flaunt God’s word, but proclaim with pure intentions, before God’s presence in accordance with Anointed. 3, 1. Are we now reverting to boasting? For do we, as some do, need letters of recommendation for you or from us? 2. You yourselves are our letter,

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

293

which is inscribed in our hearts, an open writ, read out among all people, 3. you are an open appeal, a letter from Anointed written by us, not with black ink but with the spirit of the living God, not etched on stones but written in flesh and blood. 4. Such is the trust in God through Anointed, 5. not we ourselves are worthy of it and proceed from ourselves, but what we do know and can do is from God, 6. Who also qualified us to be servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the spirit: for the letter kills but the spirit gives life. 7. If the service of death inscribed in letters on stones was so glorious that the sons of Israel could not look steadily into the fading glow of the face of Moses, 8. then how much more glorious will be the service of the spirit? 9. When lustre is given to the ministry of condemnation, then much more so to the ministry of acquittal, 10. And what seemed so glorious pales in the face of this vast glory. 11. If the corruptible was adorned with such glory, how much more so the everlasting. 12. Drawing on this hope, I can speak with great conviction, 13. and not like Moses with a covered face so that the sons of Israel would not become blind because of its gradually fading glow. 14. But their thoughts are dumb. For to this day the same veil covers the reading of the old covenant. That is not taken away because it has only been put off by Anointed, 15. but to this day when the Law of Moses is read out, their hearts remain covered: 16. when it shall turne to the Lord, the vaile shall be taken away. 17. 18. All of us who are reflecting the glory of the Lord with uncovered faces are being recreated in His image and likeness in ever greater glory, 4, 1. Therefore, we do not lose heart, invested in this office obtained by grace. 2. But we have renounced the concealment of shame and do not act cunningly and do not adulterate the word of God, but bring out the truth and appeal to the conscience of men before God. 3. If our good news would still be veiled, then only to those who are rendered up to destruction, 4. the unbelievers whose minds are blinded by the god of these times, so that they do not see the splendour of the good news concerning the glory of Anointed, God’s image. 5. For we do not speak for ourselves but in the name of the lord, Jesus Anointed, and therefore we ourselves as your servants for the sake of Jesus. 6. God Himself says: out of darkness light shineth, light that has shone in our hearts such as the light of the knowledge of God’s glory before the face of Anointed. 7. We keep this treasure in earthenware vessels, for it is the power of God that is decisive and not our impotence, 8. we, ever troubled but not distressed,

294

Letter Three

we, distraught but not desperate, 9. persecuted but not forsaken, trodden down, but not destroyed, 10. ever bearing the murder of Jesus in our body, so that the life of Jesus may also take shape in our body. 11. For continually we living are sacrificed to death for the sake of Jesus, that the life of Jesus may also be revealed in our mortal flesh. 12. Therefore, though in the power of death we carry life in us. 13. While we have the same spirit of faith according to what is written: I beleeved, and therefore have I spoken: wee also believe. 14. We know that He Who raised the lord Jesus, the Living Lord, will also raise us with Jesus from the dead and make us stand with you. 15. All this is yours, so that this abundant grace leads to thanksgiving for God’s glory. 16. Therefore we do not loose courage, but even if the outward man is undone, the man inside us will be renewed again and again, 17. and our present torments to be endured, will be made good by the eternal glory, 18. while we do not keep an eye on the visible things but on the invisible: for what is visible will vanish, the invisible is eternal. 5, 1. For we know that when our earthly abode is stripped of its bodily sheath, we will be housed by God, in a dwelling not made by hands, eternally in the heavens 2. and locked up in this body we lament, eagerly awaiting our heavenly abode, 3. for once within it, we are no longer exposed to anything. 4. And as long as we carry this covering with us, we are to be lamented, and do not want to be uncovered but clothed, that the mortal may be swallowed up by life. 5. God moulded us for this and He gave us the advance of the spirit. 6. Therefore we should always keep courage and realize that as long as we are living outside in the body we are dwelling in the Lord, 7. 8. let us be of good cheer and think it better to abide outside the body and abide with the Lord. 9. Therefore we take pride, whether dwelling in or outside, in being pleasing to Him. 10. We will all stand trial before the seat of Anointed, where each receives what he deserves, reward for the labours, good or bad. 11. We live in the fear of the Lord, and direct ourselves from there to the people. To God our souls are exposed and I want to expose myself to your consciences in the same way. 12. We will not regress again in boasting before you, but we desire you to be able to praise us before those who have a big mouth but are heartless. 13. If we indulged, remember it was for God’s sake; if we use our mind it is for your sake. 14. For the love of Anointed has completely overwhelmed us, and the realization that one died for all, and we all died with him is heart-breaking 15. and he died for all, so that the living would no longer live for themselves alone but for him who died and was raised for them,

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

295

16. 17. Therefore, if anyone is in Anointed, he is a new creation: all that was old is past, see, it has become new. 18. All this is because of God, who reconciled us to Himself through Anointed, and who has given us the office of atonement. 19. God was in Anointed, reconciling the world to Himself, not accounting to us for our sins, and He entrusted to us the proclamation of atonement. 20. Therefore we are plenipotentiary emissaries of Anointed and like God speaks through us we say to you in the name of Anointed: be reconciled with God! 21. He who knew no sin, He made a sin for our sakes, that we might become God’s righteousness in him. 6, 1. As God’s co-workers, we also pray that you may not receive God’s grace in vain. 2. For he says: I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee. Behold, now is the right time. Behold, now is the day of salvation. 3. I gave no offence to anyone and nothing, lest our office be discredited, 4. but continually behave worthily as God’s servants, by enduring much, in torments, in need, in distress, 5. in lashes, in prisons, in popular fury, in strenuous efforts, in sleepless nights, in fasting, 6. in chastity, in knowledge, in longsuffering, in leniency, in holiness of spirit, in unfeigned love, 7. in speaking the truth, in the power of God, by the weapons of righteousness on the right and on the left, 8. by glory and reproach, by dishonour and praise. as deceiver and honest one, 9. as unknown and well-known, as if near death, and behold, we live, as one convicted pending execution of the death sentence, 10. as overcome with grief but still always cheerful, as a beggar distributing much wealth, as ragged and yet possessing everything. Paul 11. We speak candidly with you, , our hearts are open to you. 12. You will not be distressed by us, you yourselves feel oppressed and tightened in your stomach, 13. but ‘one-for-one’ – to put it in a childish way – you be more candid too! Anonymous B 14. Do not conspire with the unbeliever for what agreement is there between righteousness and lawlessness? 15. What covenant between the Worthless, Belial and Anointed, or what fellowship between believer and unbeliever? 16. Or can the temple of God stand next to that of idols? We are the temple of the Living, God, as God said: I will dwell in them, and walke in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

296

Letter Three

17. Wherefore come out from among them, and bee yee separate, saieth the Lord, and touch not the uncleane thing, and I will receive you, 18. And will bee a Father unto you, and ye shall bee my sonnes and daughters, saith the Lord Almightie. 7, 1. Because we have these promises, dear friends, let us purify each other from every stain of flesh and spirit, and in the fear of God strive for holiness. Paul 2. Be generous to us: we have done nothing to anyone, we have corrupted no one, deceived no one. 3. With this I am not judging anyone. Earlier I said that we have closed you in our hearts, we share death and share life. 4. Great is my candour in speaking to you, great is my pride in you. I am in good spirits and am overflowing with joy despite everything that was done to us…. Paul 5. For even after we had come to Macedonia we felt neither rest nor peace in our body, overcome with grief, besieged on all sides and filled with fear within. 6. But God comforts the downcast man through the arrival of Titus, 7. and not only through his coming. I also took heart once more from his account of your courageous actions. He told about your desires, complaints, enthusiasm for me: this filled me with joy. 8. Even if I hurt you through the letter, I do not regret it and if I ever did regret it (because I do see that that letter, if only for a moment, caused you pain), 9. now I am cheerful again, not because of your grief but because you were sad and repented. God took approval in your tears and therefore they did not detract from my actions. 10. For God approves in your sorrow which leads to repentance and to salvation. 11. See what that sorrow has produced for God: such devotion and such considerations, such indignation, and add to this the fear, and the longing, and the zeal, even the revenge. Your reliability in this case has been fully proven. 12. So my writing was directed not so much against the injustice suffered nor against those who committed it or had suffered this injustice, but I attempted to reveal your devotion to us before God. 13. All this comforted us. On top of this came our joy at the good tidings from Titus, who has been completely reassured by you. 14. I am not ashamed that I boasted about him to you, for that has proved to be justified, and as I have always spoken the truth, so it turned out with regard to our praise of Titus. 15. You remain in my thoughts with great affection as I consider how much you demonstrated your obedience

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

297

and received him with awe and reverence. 16. I am glad that I can rely on you completely. This begging letter was missing in the first edition 8, 1. Also missing in the first edition 19. Anonymous B 11, 1. If only you would put up with some folly from me, but you will accept that from me, don’t you? 2. For I am zealous for you as I am zealous for God. You, like an unspoiled virgin I led to your bridegroom, the Anointed. 3. I fear that your thoughts too will stray from the sincerity toward the Anointed, as the serpent slyly led Eve astray. 4. For if he who comes preaches a different Jesus than the one we have preached, or a different spirit than the one you previously accepted, or some other good news, such as you have not received, then you might well accept it. 5. However, I do not think I should be subordinated to the most important emissaries. 6. Although I do not speak glibly, I know enough and have made that sufficiently clear to you. 7. Have I at times been wrong in humbling myself so that you could be lifted up, or of proclaiming to you God’s good news to no avail? 8. I have stripped other Churches by accepting wages for the preaching to you 9. and while I resided with you and was in want, I did not live idly at anyone’s expense, for what I lacked was provided by the brothers who came from Macedonia, so that I have never been dependent on you and always provided for myself and will continue to do so. 10. That is the truth of Anointed in me and I may boast of it without encountering any contradiction in the areas of Achaea. 11. Why?

300

Letter Three

Because I do not love you? God knows. 12. This I do and will continue to do, thereby I can prevent any pretence from those who seek an opportunity to better me and contest precedence: 13. the false ambassadors, deceivers, workers posing as emissaries of Anointed. 14. And no wonder: for Satan himself disguised himself as an angel of light. 15. It is therefore not surprising that his servants also pretend to be servants of righteousness, but they will not escape their punishment. 16. I say it once more: let no man take me for a fool, and whoever does so should endure my foolish chatter. 17. What I am going to say now is too silly for words and I am not saying properly on God’s account, 18. but because a lot of worldly foolishness is being spread, I too will not remain silent and will boast. 19. For you like to lend your ear to fools, whereas you are not weaned off understanding 20. you tolerate that someone makes you submit to him, profits from you, abuses you, rules you, that someone hits you in the face. 21. I am ashamed to admit that I lacked the courage to go this far, but if others are foolish, I am familiar with that too: 22. Are they Jews? Me too! Are they Israelites? Me too! Are they Abraham’s seed? Me too! 23. Are they servants of Anointed? I am out of my mind when I say it: but I surpass them: more exhausted in toil, more often thrown into prison, more often thrashed, more often in danger of death. 24. by Jews received five times forty lashes minus one, 25. three times beaten with sticks, stoned once, shipwrecked three times, a full day in the desolation of the sea: 26. always on my way, threatened at river crossings, threatened by pirates, threatened by my own people, threatened by many others, threatened in inhabited cities, threatened in the uninhabitable desert, threatened at sea, threatened by false brothers,

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

301

27. in laborious toil, in miserable weariness, in many sleepless nights, in hunger and thirst, in lack of livelihood, in bitter cold and in nakedness 28.and in addition also the daily care for all churches. 29. Weak, am I weak? What I am being accused of that is not bothering me? 30. If there is boasting to be done, I will name weaknesses. 31. God, praised in eternity, the Father of the lord Jesus knows that I am not lying. 32. In Damascus the governor under King Hareta had the city of Damascus guarded in order to arrest me 33. and through a shutter in the city wall I was lowered in a woven basket and kept out of his hands. 12, 1. Boasting is necessary although it is of no use, I will say something about the visions and revelations of the Lord. 2. I know a man in Anointed who fourteen years ago was – either in the body, I do not know, or outside the body, I do not know, God knows – was caught up to the third heaven. 3. And I know that this man – either in the body, or outside the body, I do not know, God knows – 4. was dragged to paradise and there heard unspeakable words, for a person not permitted to say. 5. I want to boast about him, but not about myself, only about my weaknesses. 6. I will not be so foolish as to boast about myself: let me tell the truth in a controlled manner so that no one will overestimate me in word and deed 7. And to ensure that I would not boast of special revelations I had to wear a girder on my weak flesh, a Satan’s angel to beat me down. 8. To thrice imploring the Lord to deliver me from this. 9. He answered: my grace is sufficient, for strength comes only in weakness. Therefore, I will boast all the more about my weakness so that I may share in the strength of Anointed. 10. Therefore I delight in weaknesses, insults, need, persecution, and being cornered because of Anointed: if I stand weak, I show myself to be strong. 11. I behave foolishly, forced to do so by you. You should really have praised me. I am not worth anything, but I am in no way inferior to those prominent emissaries. 12. Actually I proved to be an emissary by showing perseverance with you, by signs, miracles and decisive action. 13. In what do you feel you have been left short compared to the other churches? Is it because I did not live at your expense? Excuse me! 14. Well, for a third

302

Letter Three

time I am ready to go to you, and that will not be at your expense and to your detriment: your money is unimportant to me, yourselves I want to have. Surely the children should not have to support their parents, but the parents should take care of the children. 15. For my part I have given everything for your salvation and am willing to sacrifice myself. But the more I care about you, the less it helps. 16. Let it be this way: I was not a nuisance, but shrewd that I am, I have deceived you. 17. Did I impose burdens on you through those I sent to you? 18. I delegated Titus and sent the brother with him. Did Titus live at your expense? Did we not act in the same spirit and in the same way? 19. You have believed for a long time that we are in the process of exonerating ourselves to you. But we answer to God in Anointed. Everything, dear friends, was for your own good. 20. I fear that when I come I will not find you as I would like, and also that I will disappoint you and will behave differently than you would like, that somehow disagreement will come, envy and aversion, rioting, pursuit of self-interest, shouting, inciting gossip, conceit, disorder. 21. I am afraid that when I am with you once more, my God will humiliate me before you and I will be deeply depressed because of all those who are living loosely and are showing no remorse for their filthiness and visiting of brothels and the licentious manner in which they behaved. 13, 1. For the third time I am coming to you, now. At the mouth of three witnesses, shall the word be established. 2. I have warned you before, when I was with you and now again in my absence, you and all the others who sin, that I will spare no one when I come. 3. For you want to be assured that I am speaking on behalf of the Anointed, who has no weakness but demonstrates his strength to you. 4. For his death on the cross was not weakness but yielding to the will of God and he lives by the power of God. We too are weak in that way, together with him, but we will show to you that we live by God’s power. 5. So ask yourselves whether you are believing, and if so, examine it. Observe in how far Jesus Anointed takes shape in your life. Anyone who does not pass that test will be eliminated. 6. And you can count on it that I am no renegade! 7. We pray to God that you may not do any harm, not that it would benefit us, but if you do what is right, we do not matter. 8. We cannot compete against the truth, we can only endorse it. 9. So we are glad when our weakness empowers you. I only desire your perfection. 10. That is why I am writing all this while I am absent, so that when I am with you again I do not have to act with a severe hand, by virtue of the authority that the Lord gave me to accomplish something, not to destroy it. 11. Again, brothers, be well, improve your behaviour, be admonished, remain of one

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

303

mind, keep peace and the God of love and peace will be with you. 12. Greet each other with the holy kiss. All the saints greet you. Editors 13. The grace of the lord Jesus Anointed and the love of God and the communion of the holy spirit be with you all.

LETTER FOUR ‘ROMANS’

The title: ‘To the Romans’ was not added until the second century Editors 1, 1. Paul, subject of Anointed Jesus, called as emissary to dedicate himself to the good news of God, 2. 3. about His son, 4. Who was appointed to be the son of God with power according to the spirit of sanctification out of the resurrection of the dead, Jesus Anointed, our lord, - 5. 7. to all who are – God’s beloved, holy called ones – grace to you from God our Father and the lord Jesus Anointed. 8. First of all I thank my God through Jesus Anointed for all of you, because your faith is being proclaimed throughout the world. 9. For my witness is God, whom I worship in my spirit in the good news of his son, that I mention you incessantly, 10. in my prayers imploring each time that I may at last be given the opportunity for the sake of God to come to you. 11. For I yearn to see you, to share with you some spiritual gift of grace for your strengthening, 12. that is, to be encouraged together with you through the faith in one another of you and me. 13. I do not want it to be unknown to you, brothers, that I have often intended to go to you (and have been prevented until now), to reap any fruit among you, as among the rest of the Gentiles. 14. I am in debt to Greeks and barbarians, to wise and ignorant men, 15. hence the desire to proclaim the good news to you as well. 16. For I am not ashamed of the good news, for it is the power of God that renders salvation to every believer, firstly for the Jew and then for the Greek. 17. For the righteousness of God is revealed in it, out of faith to faith, as it is written: the just shall live by faith. Anonymous A 18. For manifested is the wrath of God from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who oppress the truth in iniquity.

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

305

19. 2, 1. Anonymous A. 2. We know that the judgment of God on those who do such things is honest 3. Do you think, O human, who judges those who do such things as you do whereas you commit them too, so that you can escape the judgment of God? 4. Or do you despise the riches of His goodness and His forbearance and longsuffering, not knowing that the benevolence of God will lead you to repentance? 5. But with your harshness and your

306

Letter Four

impenitent heart you fill yourself with wrath until the Day of Wrath and the revelation of the righteous judgment of God. 6. Who will render to every man according to his deedes. 7. To those who steadfastly continue to seek the glory of good work and of esteem and incorruption: eternal life. 8. But to the quarrelsome and adversaries of the truth, who obey unrighteousness: wrath and fierce rage. 9. Torment and distress on every human soul of Jew above all and of Greek that commits evil. 10. Glory and honour and peace to all who do good, in the first place to a Jew and then to a Greek. 11. For God is not influenced by appearances. 12. Those who have done wrong without the Law will perish without the Law, and those who have done wrong under the Law will be judged by the Law. 13. For it is not those who bow before the Law who are not righteous in the eyes of God, but the followers of the Law will be exonerated. 14. For if the nations that have no Law by nature fulfil the things of the Law, then, although being without the Law they are still under the Law anyway. 15. They show by their deeds that the Law is, as it were, inscribed in their hearts, also their conscience testifies, irrespective of the fact that in the meantime they gainsay or support each other’s reasoning. 16. 17. And if you are said to be a Jew and you fall under the Law and boast your knowledge of God 18. and you know His will and appreciate the differences, because of your knowledge of the Law 19. and you are rather convinced of being a guide for the blind, a light to people in darkness, 20. a mentor to the unwise, tutor of the inexperienced, who himself possesses the knowledge and truth of the Law, 21. You therefore, who teaches another, you do not educate yourself? You who proclaim not to steal, steal? 22. You who say do not to commit adultery, commit adultery? You who abhor idols, rob temples? 23. You, who boast about your keeping the law, dishonour God by breaking the Law. 24. For as is written the Name of God is blasphemed among the gentiles through you 25. For circumcision is helpful if you obey the Law, but if you are a transgressor of the Law, then your circumcised foreskin has become meaningless. 26. But should the uncircumcised person follow the precepts of the Law, would he then not be counted among the circumcised despite his foreskin? 27. And the physically uncircumcised who fulfils the Law will judge you, you who hold to the letter of the Law and circumcision, that you are a transgressor of the Law. 28. For by appearance you are not a Jew, nor by external circumcision in the flesh, 29. but you are a Jew when your heart inside has been circumcised. You are a Jew through the spirit, not through the letter, nor through the praise of men but by God.

The First Edition of the Letters of Paul

307

3, 1. For what is special about the Jew or what is the advantage of circumcision? 2. Much and in many ways. First, because they have been entrusted with the words of God. 3. So what? If some have become disbelieving, will their unbelief nullify the trust of God? 4. Certainly not! Let God be true and every man a liar, it is written: that thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. 5. And if our injustice confirms God’s righteousness, then what shall we say? Is God unrighteous if He is wrathful? (I speak like the people do.) 6. Certainly not! For how will God judge the world? 7. If the truthfulness of God prevailed over my unreliability to His glory, am I then still condemned as a transgressor? 8. And can it be – as we are slandered and as some claim we say – that we are criminal in order to gain what is good? That should be rightly condemned! 9. How is that? Are we better off? Not at all! After all, we have already proven that Jews as well as Greeks are all under the power of transgression. 10. As it is written: there is none righteous, no not one. 11. There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God. 12. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable, there is none that doeth good, no not one. 13. Their throat is an open sepulchre, with their tongues they have used deceit, the poyson of aspes is under their lippes. 14. Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitternesse. 15. Their feet are swift to shed blood. 16. Destruction and misery are in their ways 17. and the way of peace have they not knowen. 18. There is no feare of God before their eyes. 19. We do know that what the Law imposes, it imposes on those who are under the Law. In this way each one is silenced and the whole world is subjected to God’s judgment. 20. No man will be justified in God’s eyes by the works of the Law, for only by the Law have we learned the transgression. 21.