   #copyright

Paul of Tarsus

2007 Schools Wikipedia Selection. Related subjects: Religious figures and
leaders

   Saint Paul
   Apostle to the Gentiles
   Born c. 10 in Tarsus
   Died c. 65 in Rome during Nero's Persecution
   Venerated in Catholicism, Orthodox Christianity, Protestantism
   Major shrine Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls
   Feasts January 25, June 29, November 18
   Attributes thin-faced elderly man with a high forehead, receding
   hairline and long pointed beard; man holding a sword and a book; man
   with 3 springs of water nearby; sword; book
   Patronage Extensive list, see

   Paul of Tarsus (d. c. 65), who called himself the Apostle to the
   Gentiles ( Romans 11:13, Galatians 2:8), together with Simon Peter was
   the most notable Early Christian missionaries. Unlike the Twelve
   Apostles, Paul did not know Jesus in life, though he claimed to have
   seen the resurrected Jesus ( 1 Cor 15:8-9). His own account of his
   conversion states only that he "received it [the Gospel] by revelation
   from Jesus Christ" ( Gal 1:11-12); according to Acts, his conversion
   was on the Road to Damascus.

   He was the second most prolific contributor to the New Testament, after
   Luke the Evangelist. Fourteen letters are attributed to him, with
   varying degrees of confidence. These contain the earliest systematic
   account of Christian doctrine, and provide information on the life of
   the infant Church. His letters are arguably the oldest part of the New
   Testament. He also appears in the pages of the Acts of the Apostles,
   attributed to Saint Luke, so that it is possible to compare the account
   of his life in the Acts with his own account in his various letters.
   His letters are largely written to churches which he had founded or
   visited; he was a great traveller, visiting Cyprus, Asia Minor (modern
   Turkey), mainland Greece, Crete, and Rome bringing the gospel of Jesus
   Christ, first to Jews and then to Gentiles. His letters are full of
   expositions of what Christians should believe and how they should live;
   what he does not do is to tell his correspondents (or the modern
   reader) much about the life and teachings of Jesus. His most explicit
   references are to the Last Supper ( 1 Cor 11:17-34), the crucifixion
   and resurrection ( 1 Cor 15). His references to Jesus' teaching are
   likewise scant: that against divorce ( 1 Cor 7:10-16) and the
   commandment to love one another ( Romans 13:8-10, Gal 5:14); raising
   the question, still disputed, as to how consistent his version of the
   Christian faith is with that of the canonical Gospels of the Four
   Evangelists. (See below).

   Paul's influence on Christian thinking has, arguably, been more
   significant than any other single New Testament author. His writings
   were taken up by non-orthodox groups (called heretics by orthodox
   Christians; such as Marcion and Valentinus). His influence on the main
   strands of Christian thought have been massive, from St. Augustine of
   Hippo to the controversies between Gottschalk and Hincmar of Reims,
   between Thomism and Molinism, Martin Luther, Calvin and the Arminians,
   Jansenism and the Jesuit theologians and even to the German church of
   the twentieth century through the writings of the scholar Karl Barth,
   whose commentary on the Letter to the Romans had a political as well
   theological impact.

   St. Paul is the patron saint of Malta and the City of London, and has
   also had several cities named in his honour (including São Paulo,
   Brazil, and Saint Paul, Minnesota).

Early life

   St. Paul's conversion, by Jean Fouquet
   Enlarge
   St. Paul's conversion, by Jean Fouquet

   According to his own account, Paul was born in Tarsus in Cilicia in
   Minor Asia with the name Saul, "an Israelite of the tribe of Benjamin,
   circumcised on the eighth day" (Phil.3:5). Acts records that Paul was a
   Roman citizen—a privilege he used a number of times in his defense,
   appealing convictions in Judea to Rome (Acts 22:25 and 27–29).
   According to Acts 22:3, he studied in Jerusalem under the Rabbi
   Gamaliel, well known in Paul's time. He supported himself during his
   travels and while preaching — a fact he alludes to a number of times
   (e.g., 1 Cor 9:13–15); according to Acts 18:3, he worked as a
   tentmaker.
   The alleged house of St. Ananias in Damascus.
   Enlarge
   The alleged house of St. Ananias in Damascus.

   He first appears in the pages of the New Testament as a witness to the
   martyrdom of Saint Stephen ( Acts 7:57-8:3). He was, as he described
   himself, a persistent persecutor of the Church ( 1 Cor 15:9, Gal 1:13),
   almost all of whose members were Jewish or Jewish proselytes, until his
   experience on the Road to Damascus which resulted in his conversion.
   According to Acts, after a bolt of light from the skies brighter than
   the sun, he heard the voice of Jesus saying to him in Aramaic: "Saul,
   Saul, why do you persecute me? ." (Acts|9: 5) RSV). He fell to the
   ground and found himself blinded, a condition which was not relieved
   until he had been taken to Damascus where Ananias laid hands on him,
   cured him, and baptised him. There are three versions of the story told
   in Acts: the first is a description of the event ( 9:1-19a); the second
   is Paul’s account of the event in Aramaic before the crowd in Jerusalem
   ( 22:1-22); the third is Paul's account before King Agrippa II (
   26:1-24). His own account, in his letter to the Galatians ( 1:11-24),
   is more circumspect, emphasising his independence from the apostles in
   Jerusalem but not describing his conversion in any detail.

   In trying to reconstruct the events of Paul's life, it is necessary to
   compare Acts and the letters. Different views are held as to the
   reliability of the former, whose usefulness is strongly disputed by
   some scholars. Even allowing for omissions in St. Paul’s own account,
   which is found particularly in Galatians, it is difficult, even
   impossible in places, to reconcile his account with that in Acts (as is
   shown below). It is also difficult to ascertain when the letters were
   written. Acts makes no reference to his letter writing and it never
   quotes any of his letters. Omissions, of course, present less of a
   problem than apparent contradictions. The general line taken is to
   prefer Paul's own account, from his authentic letters, to that of Acts.

   Some argue that the historicity of Acts may be discerned from within
   the book itself by the so-called "we" passages. In Acts 16:11, the
   descriptions of events suddenly change from "he" and "they" to "we", as
   if the narrator Luke himself had joined them; these "he" sections
   include the trip to Philippi and the conversion of Lydia. Thereafter,
   the narrator appears to be present with Paul as he sails from Philippi
   to Troas to Jerusalem and again on the journey to Rome. (See below)

Mission

   Bab Kisan, where Paul escaped from Damascus
   Enlarge
   Bab Kisan, where Paul escaped from Damascus

   Following his stay in Damascus after his conversion, where he was
   baptised, Paul says that he first went to Arabia, and then came back to
   Damascus ( Gal 1:17). According to Acts, his preaching in the local
   synagogues got him into trouble there, and he was forced to escape,
   being let down over the wall in a basket (Acts 9:23). He describes in
   Galatians, how three years after his conversion, he went to Jerusalem,
   where he met James, and stayed with Simon Peter for fifteen days ( Gal
   1:13–24). According to Acts, he apparently attempted to join the
   disciples and was accepted only owing to the intercession of Barnabas –
   they were all understandably afraid of him as one who had been a
   persecutor of the Church (Acts 9: 26-27). Again, according to Acts, he
   got into trouble for disputing with "Hellenists" (Greek speaking Jews
   and Gentile "God-fearers") and so he was sent back to Tarsus.

   We do not know exactly what happened in the fourteen years that elapsed
   before he went again to Jerusalem. At the end of this time, Barnabas
   went to find Saul and brought him back to Antioch (Acts 11:26). As he
   had been the object of suspicion by the Christians at Jerusalem, it is
   impossible to deduce how he might have been received when he returned
   to Tarsus and if he stayed without incident.

   When a famine occurred in Judaea (which can be dated to around AD 44),
   help was sent by the hands of Barnabas and Saul (as Paul was then still
   called (Acts 11:30)); Saul then returned to Antioch. According to Acts,
   Antioch had become an alternative centre for Christians, following the
   dispersion after the death of Stephen. In Antioch, the followers of
   Jesus were first called Christians.

First Missionary Journey

   According to Acts 13-14 , Barnabas took Saul on what is often called
   the First Missionary Journey which took them to the towns of southern
   Turkey: Perga, Antioch, Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra and Derbe. However,
   Paul's own letters only mention that he preached in Syria and Cilicia
   (Gal 1:18–20). Acts records that Paul later "went through Syria and
   Cilicia, strengthening the churches" (15:41), but it does not
   explicitly state who founded the churches or when they were founded.

The "Council of Jerusalem"

   According to Acts 15, Paul and the apostles held a meeting at Jerusalem
   at which they discussed the question of circumcision of Gentile
   Christians; scholars usually date this meeting around AD 50.
   Traditionally, this meeting is called the Council of Jerusalem, though
   nowhere is it called so in any of the biblical texts.

   Paul and the apostles apparently met at Jerusalem several times;
   determining the order of these meetings has direct bearing upon the
   dating of several of Paul's letters, including Galatians.
   Unfortunately, there is some difficulty in determining the sequence of
   the meetings and exact course of events. Some Jerusalem meetings are
   mentioned in Acts, some meetings are mentioned in Paul's letters, and
   some are mentioned in both. For example, in Galatians Paul makes no
   separate mention of the Jerusalem visit implied in Acts 11:27-30 when
   he and Barnabas brought famine relief to Judea. In Galatians 2:1, Paul
   describes a possible second visit to Jerusalem as a private occasion,
   whereas Acts describes a public meeting in Jerusalem addressed by James
   at its conclusion. Thus some scholars think that Paul in Galatians is
   referring to the meeting in Acts 11 (the 'famine visit') and that the
   letter to the Galatians was written after the men had come to Antioch
   demanding circumcision and before the Council of Jerusalem, the public
   meeting, had taken place— or even as he was setting out for it— this
   interpretation would make Galatians the earliest letter to be written
   (it is generally dated between 48 and 55). If the meeting was private,
   Luke’s informants might have had no knowledge of it; however, it could
   not have taken place fourteen years after the first encounter (or
   seventeen from the date of Paul’s conversion), because the famine
   relief took place in the reign of King Herod Agrippa who died in AD 44.
   That would put Paul's conversion at AD 27, before Jesus' death! (The
   crucifixion is generally dated between AD 28 and 36, 28 being the year
   that John the Baptist began his ministry according to Luke 3, 36 being
   the year of Pilate's recall to Rome; the traditional date is c. 33.) In
   any case the famine did not develop until after Herod's death, reaching
   its greatest severity in 48 AD. Many other conjectures have been
   offered: fourteen years should be four; Acts 11 and 15 are two
   alternative accounts of the same visit; the visit is recorded in Acts
   18:22. If there was a public rather than a private meeting, it seems
   likely that it look place after Galatians was written.

   According to Acts, Paul and Barnabas were appointed to go to Jerusalem
   to speak with the apostles and elders and were welcomed by them. The
   key question raised (in both Acts and Galatians and which is not in
   dispute) was whether Gentile converts needed to be circumcised Acts
   15:2ff; Gal.2:1ff). Paul states that he had attended "in response to a
   revelation and to lay before them the gospel that I preached among the
   Gentiles" (Gal 2:2). Peter publicly reaffirmed a decision he had made
   previously (see Acts 10 and 11), proclaiming: "[God] put no difference
   between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith" (Acts15:9),
   echoing an earlier statement: "Of a truth I perceive that God is no
   respecter of persons" (Acts10:34). James concurred: "We should not
   trouble those of the Gentiles who are turning to God" (Acts15:19–21),
   and a letter (later known as the Apostolic Decree) was sent back with
   Paul enjoining them from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the
   meat of strangled animals, and from sexual immorality (Acts 15:29),
   which some consider to be Noahide Law.

   Despite the agreement they achieved at the meeting as understood by
   Paul, Paul recounts how he later publicly confronted Peter (accusing
   him of Judaizing, also called the "Incident at Antioch") over his
   reluctance to share a meal with Gentile Christians in Antioch. Paul
   later wrote: "I opposed [Peter] to his face, because he was clearly in
   the wrong" and said to the apostle: "You are a Jew, yet you live like a
   Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to
   follow Jewish customs?" (Gal. 2:11–14). Paul also mentioned that even
   Barnabas sided with Peter. Acts does not record this event, saying only
   that "some time later", Paul decided to leave Antioch (usually
   considered the beginning of his "Second Missionary Journey",
   (Acts15:36–18:22) with the object of visiting the believers in the
   towns where he and Barnabas had preached earlier, but this time without
   Barnabas. At this point the Galatians witness ceases. Thereafter, only
   fragmentary information about Paul survives.

Second Missionary Journey

   Following a dispute between Paul and Barnabas over whether they should
   take John Mark with them, they went on separate journeys ( Acts
   15:36–41) — Barnabas with John Mark, and Paul with Silas. Following
   Acts 16:1-18:22, Paul and Silas went to Derbe and Lystra, the Phrygia
   and northern Galatia, to Troas, when, inspired by a vision they set off
   for Greece. At Philippi they met and brought to faith Lydia, whom they
   baptised together with her family; there Paul was also arrested and
   badly beaten. According to Acts, Paul then set off for Thessalonica.
   This accords with Paul’s own account (1 Thess. 2:2), though some
   question that having been in Philippi only "some days", Paul could
   found a church based on Lydia’s house;it may have may have been founded
   earlier by someone else. According to Acts, Paul then came to Athens
   where he gave his speech in the Areopagus; in this speech, he told
   Athenians that the " Unknown God" to whom they had a shrine was in fact
   "known", as the God who had raised Jesus from the dead. (Acts
   17:16–34). Thereafter Paul travelled to Corinth, where he settled for
   three years and where he may have written 1 Thessalonians, possibly the
   earliest of his surviving letters. At Corinth, ( 18:12–17), the "Jews
   united" and charged Paul with "persuading the people to worship God in
   ways contrary to the law"; the proconsul Gallio then judged that it was
   a minor matter not worth his attention and dismissed the charges. "Then
   all of them (Other ancient authorities read all the Greeks) seized
   Sosthenes, the official of the synagogue, and beat him in front of the
   tribunal. But Gallio paid no attention to any of these things." ( 18:17
   NRSV) From an inscription in Delphi that mentions Gallio, the year of
   the hearing is known to be AD 52, which aids in reconstructing the
   chronology of Paul's life.

Third Missionary Journey

   Following this hearing, Paul continued his preaching, usually called
   his "Third Missionary Journey" ( Acts 18:23–21:26), travelling again
   through Asia Minor and Macedonia, to Antioch and back. He caused a
   great uproar in the theatre in Ephesus, where local silversmiths feared
   loss of income due to Paul's activities. Their income relied on the
   sale of silver statues (called by Paul "idols") of the goddess Artemis,
   whom they worshipped; the resulting mob almost killed Paul (Acts
   19:21–41) and his companions. Later, as Paul was passing near Ephesus
   on his way to Jerusalem, Paul chose not to stop, since he was in haste
   to reach Jerusalem by Pentecost. The church here, however, was so
   highly regarded by Paul that he called the elders to Miletus to meet
   with him (Acts 20:16–38).

Arrest and death

   Upon Paul's arrival in Jerusalem, he gave account of his work of
   bringing Gentiles to faith to the apostles. According to Acts, James
   the Just confronted Paul with the charge that he was teaching the Jews
   to ignore the law and asked him to demonstrate that he was a
   law-abiding Jew by taking a Nazirite vow (21:26). However, that Paul
   did so is difficult to reconcile with his personally expressed attitude
   both in Galatians and Philippians, where he utterly opposed any idea
   that the law was binding on Christians, declaring that even Peter did
   not live by the law ( Gal 2:14). Various attempts have been made to
   reconcile Paul's views as expressed in his different letters and in
   Acts, notably the 1910 Catholic Encyclopedia article on Judaizers
   states:

          "Paul, on the other hand, not only did not object to the
          observance of the Mosaic Law, as long as it did not interfere
          with the liberty of the Gentiles, but he conformed to its
          prescriptions when occasion required ( 1 Cor 9:20). Thus he
          shortly after [the Council of Jerusalem] circumcised Timothy (
          Acts 16:1–3), and he was in the very act of observing the Mosaic
          ritual when he was arrested at Jerusalem ( 21:26 sqq.)".

   In any case, after about a week after Paul had taken his vow at the
   temple, some Jews from "Asia" (Asia Minor or modern Turkey, Paul's
   homeland) spotted him in Jerusalem and stirred up the crowd shouting:
   "Men of Israel, help us! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere
   against our people and our law and this place. And besides, he has
   brought Greeks into the temple area and defiled this holy place." (
   21:28). The crowd was about to kill Paul but the Roman guard rescued
   him, and after an unsuccessful speech in Aramaic ( 21:37-22:22),
   imprisoned him in Caesarea. Paul claimed his right as a Roman citizen
   to be tried in Rome, but owing to the inaction of the governor Antonius
   Felix, Paul languished in confinement at Caesarea for two years. When a
   new governor (Porcius Festus) took office, he held a hearing and sent
   Paul by sea to Rome. According to Acts, Paul spent another two years in
   Rome under house arrest, "Boldly and without hindrance he preached the
   kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ." ( 28:30-31) Of
   his detention in Rome, Philippians provides some additional support. It
   was clearly written from prison and references to the "praetorian
   guard" and "Caesar’s household" may suggest that it was written from
   Rome.

   Whether Paul died in Rome or was able to go to Spain as in his letter
   to the Romans (Rom. 15:22-7) he hoped, is uncertain. Eusebius of
   Caesarea, who wrote in the fourth century, states that Paul was
   beheaded in the reign of the Roman Emperor Nero. This event has been
   dated either to the year 64, when Rome was devastated by a fire, or a
   few years later, to AD 67. An ancient liturgical solemnity of Peter and
   Paul, celebrated on 29 June, could reflect the day of martyrdom, and
   many ancient sources articulated the tradition that Peter and Paul died
   on the same day (and possibly the same year). Chronologically, the
   tradition that Paul was martyred in Rome is not inconsistent with the
   suggested mission to Spain. St. Clement of Rome, writing thirty years
   later says that Paul went to "the the limits of the west". If the
   Pastoral Epistles are genuine, which a number of modern scholars have
   doubted, he could have revisited Greece and Asia Minor after his trip
   to Spain, and might then have been arrested in Troas (2 Tim. 4:13) and
   taken to Rome and executed.

   The traditional story is that Paul died as a martyr in Rome and his
   body was interred with Saint Peter's ad Catacumbas by the via Appia.
   According to this view, his body remained there until moved by Lucina
   and Pope Cornelius into the crypts of Lucina. One Gaius, who wrote
   during the time of Pope Zephyrinus, mentions Paul's tomb as standing on
   the Via Ostensis, and the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls
   consistently claimed to be built upon Paul's tomb. Supporters of this
   view point to the recent archaeological discovery of a tomb under the
   basilica bearing Paul's name, the titles "apostle" and "martyr", and
   which date to antiquity.

   According to Bede in his Ecclesiastical History, Pope Vitalian in 665
   gave Paul's relics (including a cross made from his prison chains) from
   the crypts of Lucina to Oswy, British King of Northumbria. However,
   Bede's use of the word "relic" was not limited to corporal remains.

Writings

   Enlarge

Authorship

   Of the fourteen letters attributed to St. Paul, one, Hebrews, was
   disputed from an early date and is generally not thought to have been
   written by him. As for the rest, there is little or no dispute about
   the authorship of Romans, First Corinthians, Second Corinthians,
   Galatians, Philippians, First Thessalonians, and Philemon.

   The authenticity of Colossians has been questioned on the grounds that
   it contains an otherwise unparalleled description (amongst his
   writings) of Jesus as ‘the image of the invisible God’, a Christology
   found elsewhere only in St. John’s gospel. Nowhere is there a richer
   and more exalted estimate of the position of Christ than here. On the
   other hand, the personal notes in the letter connect it the Philemon,
   unquestionably the work of Paul. More problematic is Ephesians a very
   similar letter to Colossians, but which reads more like a manifesto
   than a letter. It is almost entirely lacking in personal reminiscences.
   Its style is unique; it lacks the emphasis on the cross to be found in
   other Pauline writings; reference to the Second Coming is missing; and
   Christian marriage is exalted in a way which contrasts with the
   grudging reference in 1 Cor 7:8-9. Finally it exalts the Church in a
   way suggestive of a second generation of Christians, ‘built upon the
   foundation of the apostles and prophets’ now past. The defenders of its
   Pauline authorship argue that it was intended to be read by a number of
   different churches and that it marks the final stage of the development
   of St. Paul's thinking.

   The Pastoral Epistles, 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus have likewise been
   put in question as Pauline works only in modern times. Three main
   reasons are advanced; first, their difference in vocabulary, style and
   theology from St. Paul’s acknowledged writings; secondly the difficulty
   in fitting them into St Paul’s biography as we have it. They, like
   Colossians and Ephesians, were written from prison but suppose St.
   Paul’s release and travel thereafter. Finally, the concerns expressed
   are very much the practical ones as to how a church should function.
   They are more about maintenance than about mission.

   Views are advanced on the basis of the balance of opinion of scholars,
   but there is no certainty and some may think that questions of
   authorship do not affect the authority of the letters.

   Two further epistles attributed by some to Paul (since some of the
   prior epistles mention them) have been lost: Epistle to the
   Alexandrians (lost), of which nothing is known letter apart from a
   brief mention in the Muratorian fragment that claims it was a forgery;
   the Epistle to the Macedonians which is lost.

Paul on Jesus

   As already stated, little can be deduced about the earthly life of
   Jesus from St. Paul’s letters. He mentions specifically only the Last
   Supper (1 Cor. 11:23ff) his death by crucifixion (1 Cor :2:2; Phil.
   2:8) and his resurrection (Phil. 2:9) . Instead Paul concentrates on
   the nature of the Christian’s relationship with Christ and, in
   particular, in Christ’s saving work. In St. Mark’s gospel, Jesus is
   recorded as saying that he was to ‘give up his life as a ransom for
   many’. St. Paul’s account of his idea of a saving act is more fully
   articulated, albeit in various places in his letters, but most notably
   in his letter to the Romans.

   What Christ has achieved for those who believe in him is variously
   described: as sinners under the law, they are ‘‘ justified by his grace
   as a gift’’; they are ‘‘ redeemed’’ by Jesus who was put forward by God
   as ‘expiation’; they are ‘’reconciled’’ by his death. The gift (grace)
   is to be received in faith. (Rom 3:24f; Rom 5: 9). These three images
   have been the subject of detailed examination.

   Justification derives from the law courts. Those who are justified are
   acquitted of an offence. Since the sinner is guilty, he or she can only
   be acquitted by someone else, Jesus, standing in for them, which has
   led many Christians to believe in the teaching known as the doctrine of
   substitutionary atonement. The sinner is, in St. Paul’s words
   ‘justified by faith’ (Rom. 5:1).]], that is, by adhering to Christ, the
   sinner becomes ‘at one’ with Christ in his death and resurrection
   (hence the word ‘atonement’). Acquittal, however, is achieved not on
   the grounds that Christ was innocent (though he was) and that we share
   his innocence but on the grounds of his sacrifice i.e. his
   crucifixion), i.e. his innocent undergoing of punishment on behalf of
   sinners who should have suffered divine retribution for their sins.
   They deserved to be punished and he took their punishment. They are
   justified by his death, and now ‘so much more we are saved by him from
   divine retribution’ (Rom. 5: 9)

   For an understanding of the meaning of faith as that which justifies,
   St. Paul turns to Abraham, who trusted God’s promise that he would be
   father of many nations. Abraham preceded the giving of the law on Mount
   Sinai. Thus law cannot save us; faith does. Abraham could not, of
   course, have faith in the living Christ but, in Paul’s view, ‘the
   gospel was preached to him beforehand’ (Gal. 3:8), which may be
   interpreted as part of Paul’s belief in the pre-existent Christ.

   Redemption has a different origin, that of the freeing of slaves; it is
   similar in character as a transaction to the paying of a ransom,
   (mentioned in St. Mark) though the circumstances are different. Money
   was paid in order to set free a slave, one who was in the ownership of
   another. Here the price was the costly act of Christ’s death. On the
   other hand, no price was paid to anyone – St. Paul does not suggest,
   for instance, that the price be paid to the devil – though this has
   been suggested by learned writers, ancient and modern, such as Origen
   and St. Augustine, as a reversal of the Fall by which the devil gained
   power over humankind.

   A third expression, Reconciliation, is about the making of friends
   which is, of course, a costly exercise where one has failed or harmed
   another . The making of peace (Col. 1:20) (Rom 5:9) is another variant
   of the same theme. Elsewhere (Eph. 2:14) he writes of Christ breaking
   down the dividing wall between Jew and Gentile, which the law
   constituted.

   As to how a person appropriates this gift, St. Paul writes of a
   mystical union with Christ through baptism: ‘we who have been baptised
   into Christ Jesus were baptised into his death’(Rom. 6:4). He writes
   also of our being ‘in Christ Jesus’ and alternately, of ‘Christ in you,
   the hope of glory’. Thus, the objection that one person cannot be
   punished on behalf of another is met with the idea of the
   identification of the Christian with Christ through baptism.

   These expressions, some of which are to be found in the course of the
   same exposition, have been interpreted by some scholars, such as the
   mediaeval teacher Peter Abelard and, much more recently, Hastings
   Rashdall as metaphors for the effects of Christ’s death upon those who
   followed him. (This is known as the subjective theory of the atonement.
   On this view, rather than writing a systematic theology, Paul is trying
   to express something inexpressible. According to Ian Markham, on the
   other hand, the letter to the Romans is ‘muddled’.

   But others, ancient and modern, Protestant and Catholic, have sought to
   elaborate from his writing objective theories of the Atonement on which
   they have, however, disagreed. The doctrine of justification by faith
   alone was the major source of the division of western Christianity
   known as the Protestant Reformation which took place in the sixteenth
   century. Justification by faith was set against salvation by works of
   the law in this case, the payment of indulgences to the Church and even
   such good works as the corporal works of mercy. The result of the
   dispute, which undermined the system of endowed prayers and the
   doctrine of purgatory, was the creation of Protestant churches in
   Western Europe, set against the Roman Catholic Church. Solifidianism
   (sola fides), the name often given to these views, is associated with
   the works of Martin Luther (1483-1546) and his followers. With thisivew
   went the notion of Christ’s substitutionary atonement for human sin.

   The various doctrines of the atonement have been associated with such
   theologians as Anselm, Calvin, and more recently Gustaf Aulen; none
   found their way into the Creeds. The substitutionary theory (above), in
   particular, has fiercely divided Christendom, some pronouncing it
   essential and others repugnant. The doctrine has thus been the focus of
   some of the ecumenical discussions between the Roman Catholic Church
   and both Lutheran churches and the Anglican Communion cf. A.R.C.I.C..

   Further, because salvation could not be achieved by merit, Paul lays
   some stress on the notion of its being a free gift, a matter of Grace.
   Whereas grace is most often associated specifically with the Holy
   Spirit, in St. Pau's writing, grace is received through Jesus
   (Rom.1:5), , from God through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus
   (Rom.3:24) and especially in 2 Cor.13:14. On the other hand, the Spirit
   he describes as the Spirit of Christ (see below). The notion of free
   gift, not the subject of entitlement has been associated with belief in
   predestinationi.e. that God has chosen whom He wills to have mercy on
   and those whose will He has hardened (Rom. 9:18f.). This belief has
   been taught by many teachers of the church throughout the ages from
   Augustine to Calvin and is held by many Protestant churches to date.
   Those who resist the idea of God's will as being exercised arbitrarily
   have taken refuge in Paul's declaration that 'God has consigned all men
   to disobedience that he may have mercy on all' (Rom. 11:32) and his
   final agnosticism on the matter: 'How unsearchable are his judgements
   and how inscrutable his ways. (ibid. 11.33) The question remains a
   philosophical as well as the theological conundrum bought practically,
   we cannot know the will of God.

   Paul's concern with what Christ had done, as described above, was
   matched by his desire to says also who he was (and is). In his letter
   to the Romans, he describes Jesus as the ‘ Son of God in power
   according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead’;
   in the letter to the Colossians, he is much more explicit, describing
   Jesus as ‘the image of the invisible God’, Col.1:15) as rich and
   exalted picture of Jesus as can be found anywhere in the New Testament
   (which is one reason why some doubt its authenticity) . On the other
   hand, in the undisputed Pauline letter to the Philippians, he describes
   Jesus as ‘in the form of God’ who ‘did not count equality with God as
   thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant,
   being born in the likeness of men he humbled himself and became
   obedient to death, even death on a cross…’

The Holy Spirit

   Paul places much emphasis on the importance of the Spirit in the
   Christian life. He contrasts the spiritual and those thoughts and
   actions which are animal (of the flesh). The difficulty come sin
   determining how this affects action. The gift of the spirit was much
   associated in Gentile mind with the gift of ecstatic speech speaking in
   tongues and is connected in Acts with becoming a Christian, even before
   baptism. In considering the manifestations of the spirit, he is
   cautious. Thus, when discussing the gift of tongues in his first letter
   to the Corinthians (Chapter 14), as against the unintelligible words of
   ecstasy, he commends, by contrast, intelligibility and order: ecstasy
   may illuminate the practitioner; coherent speech will enlighten the
   hearer. Everything should be done decently and in order.

   Secondly, the gift of the Spirit appears to have been interpreted by
   the Corinthians as a freedom from all constraints, and in particular
   the law. Paul, on the contrary, argues that not all things permissible
   are good; eating meats that have been offered to pagan idols,
   frequenting pagan temples, orgiastic feasting; none of these things
   build up the Christian community, and may offend the weaker members. On
   the contrary, the Spirit was a uniting force, manifesting itself
   through the common purpose expressed in the exercise of their different
   gifts (1 Cor. 12) He compares the Christian community to a human body,
   with its different limbs and organs, and the Spirit as the Spirit of
   Christ, whose body we are. The gifts range from administration to
   teaching; encouragement to healing; prophecy to the working of
   miracles. Its fruits are the virtues of love, joy, peace, patience,
   kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control (Gal.5:22) . Love
   is the best way of all (1 Cor. 13)

   Further, the new life is the life of the Spirit, as against the life of
   the flesh, which Spirit is the Spirit of Christ, so that one becomes a
   son of God. God is our Father and we are fellow heirs of Christ.

Relationship with Judaism

   Paul was himself a Jew, but his attitude towards his co-religionists is
   not agreed amongst all scholars. He appeared to praise Jewish
   circumcision in Romans 3:1-2, said that circumcision didn't matter in 1
   Cor 7:19 but in Galatians, accuses those who promoted circumcision of
   wanting to make a good showing in the flesh and boasting or glorying in
   the flesh in Gal 6:11-13. He also questions the authority of the law,
   see Antinomianism, and though he may have opposed observance by
   non-Jews he also opposed Peter for his partial observance.In a later
   letter, Phil 3:2, he is reported as warning Christians to beware the
   "mutilation" ( Strong's G2699) and to "watch out for those dogs". He
   writes that there is neither Jew nor Greek, but Christ in all and in
   all. On the other hand in Acts, as we have seen, he is described as
   submitting to taking a Nazirite vow, and earlier to having had Timothy
   circumcised to placate the Jews. He also wrote that among the Jews he
   became as a Jew in order to win Jews ( 1 Cor 9:20) and to the Romans:
   "So the law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just and good." (
   Rom 7:12) The task of reconciling these different views is made more
   difficult because it is not agreed whether, for instance, Galatians is
   a very early or later letter. Likewise Philippians may have been
   written late, from Rome, but not everyone is agreed on this.

   The background to the various arguments is the ongoing dispute over the
   observance of the law, which, as we have noticed, was with Jews but
   also with so-called Judaizing Gentile Christians. In Galatians and
   Philippians, St. Paul is emphatic that the law is of null effect; it
   only makes men and women aware of their sinfulness. His own sense of
   relief at discovering that what the law was incapable of doing, the
   risen Christ had done permeates his letters. The question of whether
   Christianity was a Jewish sect or included Gentiles, without their
   having to fully conform to Jewish ritual law was eventually answered
   pretty emphatically as the latter. ( but see "Council of Jerusalem
   above")

   However, considerable disagreement at the time and subsequently has
   been raised as to the significance of ‘works of the law’. In the same
   letter in which Paul writes of justification by faith , he says of the
   Gentiles ‘It is not by hearing the law, but by doing it that men will
   be justified (same word) by God.’ (Rom. 2:12) Those who think Paul
   capable of inconsistency have judged him not to be a ‘Solifidianist’
   himself; the more frequently taken line has been that he is merely
   demonstrating that both Jews and Gentiles are in the same condition of
   sin.

   E. P. Sanders in 1977 reframed the context to make law-keeping and good
   works a sign of being in the Covenant (marking out the Jews as the
   people of God) rather than deeds performed in order to accomplish
   salvation, a pattern of religion he termed ‘covenantal nomism’. If
   Sanders' perspective is regarded as valid, the traditional Protestant
   understanding of the doctrine of justification may have needed
   rethinking; for the interpretive framework of Augustine of Hippo and
   Martin Luther, which had dominated Christian thinking for almost two
   millennia, was called into question.

   Sanders's work has since been taken up by Professor James Dunn and N.T.
   Wright, Bishop of Durham, and the New Perspective has increased
   significantly in dominance in New Testament scholarship. Wright, noting
   the apparent discrepancy between Romans and Galatians, the former being
   much more positive about the continuing covenantal relationship between
   God and his ancient people, than the latter, contends that that works
   are not insignificant (Romans 2: 13ff) and that Paul distinguishes
   between works which is signs of ethnic identity and those which are a
   sign of obedience to Christ.

The resurrection

   Paul appears to develop his ideas in response to the particular
   congregation to whom he is writing. The idea of the resurrection of the
   body was foreign to the Greek (i.e. Corinthian) mind; rather the soul
   would ascend apart from the body. The Jewish conception, on the other
   hand, was of the ‘exaltation’ of the body which was assumed into
   heaven. Neither fits easily into the descriptions of the risen Christ
   walking about as described in the gospels. The Corinthians appeared to
   believe, from what Paul writes, that Jesus had avoided death, but that
   his followers would not. He wants to make clear to them that Jesus died
   but overcame death and that unless he did so we could not hope to be
   raised from the dead; because he did so, we can (1 Cor. 15:12ff.).

   However, the resurrected body is a glorified body and thus will not
   decay. He contrasts the old and the new body: the first being physical,
   the second spiritual; 'sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory; sown
   in weakness it is raised in power' (1 Cor. 15:42 (RSV) It is, in his
   view, a spiritual body which he envisages as if being put on over the
   old body of flesh; it is, in another image, like a tent which covers us
   so that ‘we may not be found naked (2 Cor. 5:3RSV)

   Thirdly, Paul has a very corporate idea of the resurrection hope of the
   Christian community. The hope given to all who belong to Christ,
   includes those who have already died but who have been baptised
   vicariously by the baptism of others on their behalf – so that they may
   be included among the saved(1 Cor. 15:29); (whether or not St. Paul
   approved of the practice he was apparently prepared to use as part of
   his argument in favour of the resurrection of the dead).

The World to come

   Paul’s teaching about the end of the world is expressed most clearly in
   his letters to the Christians at Thessalonica. Heavily persecuted, it
   appears that they had written asking him, first about those who had
   died already and secondly when they should expect the end. Paul
   regarded the age as passing and, in such difficult times, he therefore
   discouraged marriage. He assures them that the dead will rise first and
   be followed by those left alive (1 Thess. 4:16ff.) . This suggests an
   imminence of the end but he is unspecific about times and seasons, and
   encourages his hearers to expect a delay. The form of the end will be a
   battle between Jesus and ‘the man of lawlessness (2 Thess.2:3ff.RSV)
   whose conclusion is the triumph of Christ.

   The delay in the coming of the end has been interpreted in different
   ways: on one view, St. Paul and the early Christians were simply
   mistaken; on another, that of Austin Farrer his presentation of a
   single ending can be interpreted to accommodate the fact that endings
   occur all the time and that, subjectively, we all stand an instant from
   judgement. the delay is also accounted for by God’s patience (2 Thess.
   2:6)

   As for the form of the end, the Catholic Encyclopedia presents two
   distinct ideas. First, universal judgement, with neither the good nor
   the wicked shall omitted ( Rom 14:10–12), nor even the angels ( 1 Cor
   6:3). Second, and more controversially, judgment will be according to
   works, mentioned concerning sinners ( 2 Cor 11:15), the just ( 2 Tim
   4:14), and men in general ( Rom 2:6–9). This latter characterization
   has been the subject of controversy among Reformed theologians, notably
   N. T. Wright.

Social views

   A 19th-century romanticized portrait of Paul of Tarsus (his exact
   appearance is unknown).
   Enlarge
   A 19th-century romanticized portrait of Paul of Tarsus (his exact
   appearance is unknown).

   Every letter of St. Paul includes pastoral advice which most often
   arises from the doctrines he has been propounding. They are not
   afterthoughts. Thus in his letter to the Romans, having reminded his
   readers that, like branches grafted onto the olive, they thesmelves,
   like the natural branches, the Jews, may be broken off if they fail to
   persist in faith. For that reason he appeal to them to offer themselves
   to God, and not to be conformed to the world. They must use their gifts
   as part of the body which they are. He invites them to be loving,
   patient, humble and peaceable, never seeking vengeance. Their standards
   are to be heavenly not earthy standards: he condemns impurity, lust,
   greed, anger, slander, filthy language, lying, and racial divisions. In
   the same passage, Paul extolled the virtues of compassion, kindness,
   patience, forgiveness, love, peace, and gratitude (Col 3:1–17; cf.
   Galatians 5:16-26) Even so they are to be obedient to the authorities,
   paying their taxes, on the grounds that the magistrate exercises power
   which can only come from God.

   As noted above, the Corinthians were inclined to regard their freedom
   from law as a licence to do what they liked. Thus, his attitude towards
   sexual immorality, set against the mores of Greek-influenced society,
   is particularly direct: "Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a
   man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins against
   his own body" (1 Cor. 6:18). His attitude towards marriage, in writing
   to the Corinthians, is to advise his readers not to marry because of
   the ‘present distress’ but marriage is better than immoral conduct: “it
   is better to marry than to be aflame with passion"; the alternative,
   adopted by Paul himself, is celibacy. As for those who are married,
   even to unbelievers, should not seek to be parted unless the
   unbelieving partner wishes it (1 Cor 7); their faith sanctifies the
   unbeliever. In Ephesians he appears to be more positive holding
   marriage up as a parable of the relationship between Christ and the
   church. ( Eph 5:21–33. His attitude towards dietary rules manifests the
   same caution: all is permitted but some actions may seem to ‘weaker
   brethren’ to be an implicit acceptance of the legitimacy of idol
   worship – such as eating food that had been used in pagan sacrifice.

   He deals with many other questions on which he may have been asked for
   advice: their relationship with unbelievers; the duty of supporting
   other needy Christians, how to deal with church members who had fallen
   into temptation, the need for self-examination and humility, the
   conduct of family life, the importance of accepting the teaching
   authority of the leaders of the church.

   His teaching has been criticised as being conservative and even
   quietist. His view of the shortness of the time before the end is
   thought to have influenced his ethic. That what he says – for instance,
   about the appropriate attitude towards unbelievers – appears to vary
   may be the result of his responding to different questioners whose
   enquiries are unknown to us. Three particular issues, not all of them
   controversial at the time have assumed great contemporary importance.
   One is his attitude towards slaves, the second towards women and the
   third his attitude towards homosexual relations.

   The issue of slavery arises because his letter to the slave owning
   Philemon whose slave Onesimus, Paul sends with his letter. He fails to
   condemn the practice (as he does also in writing to the Corinthians)
   but his asking that Philemon should treat him “not as a slave, but
   instead of a slave, as a most dear brother, especially to me" (Phil 16)
   may be thought of as a subtle condemnation of slavery.

   He certainly treats women differently from men, though not
   unambiguously; women were created for man, but as woman was made from
   man, so many is now born of woman. And all things are from God. And
   elsewhere there is neither male nor female but all are one in Christ.
   On the other hand, the man is the head of the woman and, in the first
   letter to Timothy women are forbidden from teaching or exercising
   authority over men. The ‘headship’ argument has been used as one reason
   for opposing the ordination of women.

   Finally, on the issue of homosexuality, Paul lists a number of actions
   which are so wicked that they will deprive whoever commits them of
   their divine inheritance "Neither immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers
   nor sexual perverts nor thieves, nor the greedy nor drunkards nor
   revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God." (1 Cor. 6:9-10
   RSV) Elsewhere he he describes homosexual acts as unnatural , the
   perpetrators as being 'consumed with passion for one another and as
   having abandoned the truth about God for a lie.( Rom 1:24-27) (Attempts
   have been made to contrast the common unequal relationships common in
   the ancient world (such as pederasty with modern long-term
   relationships, but this is an argument accepted by only a few
   churches.)

Alternative views

   Most writing on St. Paul comes from the pen (or keyboard) of Christians
   and thus, as Hyam Maccoby, the Talmudic scholar, has noted, tends to
   adopt a reverential tone towards his life and teaching. He is one of a
   number of authors who has argued that not only can we learn little of
   Christ's life and teaching from his letters but that Paul of Acts and
   Paul from his own writing are very different people. Some difficulties
   have been noted in the account of his life. Additionally, the speeches
   of Paul, as recorded in Acts, have been argued to show a different turn
   of mind. Paul of Acts is much more interested in factual history, less
   in theology; ideas such as justification by faith are absent (see Acts
   13:16-41; 17:22-31) as are references to the Spirit. On the other hand,
   there is no references to John the Baptist in the letters, but Paul
   mentions him several times in Acts.

   A further charge by Maccoby is that the Gospels present Jesus as,
   essentially, a wandering rabbi and that Paul elevates him to the status
   of Son of God and Messiah, claims which Jesus did not make himself.
   Geza Vermes, in his book Jesus the Jew advances precisely this
   argument. Christian scholars, even as long ago as Wilhelm Wrede
   (1859-1906), have made similar claims: that Jesus did not claim to be
   the Messiah and the references to the secrecy of his Messiahship lead
   to this conclusion. The cogency of these arguments depends on how far
   the four evangelists themselves are to be treated as creative
   theologians and what processes took place in the editing of the gospels
   as written. Some differences can be accounted for by the different
   demands of storytelling and letterwriting. Also, the tone of the
   gospels differs between themselves. (At the beginning of St. Mark's
   gospel the expression 'Son of God' is found but it is not in all
   ancient manuscripts; the view has been expressed that Jesus somehow
   'became' the Son of God at his baptism - a doctrine known as
   adoptionism. In St. John's Gospel, Jesus is called the divine 'Word'
   who existed before Abraham.) Differences in translation yield different
   intepretations. The arguments are dense and complex and cannot be
   rehearsed in detail here. Maccoby, on the other hand, argues that the
   Gospels and other later Christian documents were written to reflect
   Paul's views rather than the authentic life and teaching of Jesus.

   Maccoby questions Paul's integrity as well:'Scholars', he says,' feel
   that, however objective their enquiry is supposed to be, ... never say
   anything to suggest that he may have bent the truth at times, though
   the evidence is strong enough in various parts of his life-story that
   he was not above deception when he felt it warranted by circumstances'.
   This conclusion, at least, is one upon which readers can make their own
   judgement by reading all of his letters.
   Retrieved from " http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_of_Tarsus"
   This reference article is mainly selected from the English Wikipedia
   with only minor checks and changes (see www.wikipedia.org for details
   of authors and sources) and is available under the GNU Free
   Documentation License. See also our Disclaimer.
