Ehrman's choice of these three letters of the Apostle Paul as the topic of this chapter might seem like an odd collection. The only thing they have in common is that they are the three shorter letters of Paul that are considered "undisputed" by historical critical scholars. All of the other shorter letters attributed to Paul (Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians) are considered "Deutero-Pauline"by Ehrman and many other historical critical scholars. "Deutero-Pauline" may best be described as written by disciples of Paul in Paul's name, presumably well after Paul's death (but more on this in the next Blog entry).
The letters to Timothy and Titus (often called "Pastorals" by scholars since they address pastoral concerns within the churches about whom these letters are written) are believed to be written long after the time of Paul, according to historical critical scholars, usually being placed at the end of the first century. Conservative scholars who believe that Paul actually wrote the letters to Timothy and Titus often postulate that they were written during a time of freedom for Paul after the imprisonment mentioned at the end of Acts, and before and during a second imprisonment in Rome that actually led to his death. This is because there is no indication in Paul's other letters that Timothy and Titus were ever placed in charge of a geographically clustered group of churches in the time frame covered in the book of Acts. Both the setting and the issues are very different in the letters to Timothy and Titus than what we find in any of the other letters of Paul, leading most scholars (liberal and conservative) to recognize that a much different setting lies behind these letters.
The letter to the Hebrews was once believed to have been written by Paul, due to the mention of Timothy and Italy at the end of the letter (Hebrews 13:23-24). But today, few conservative scholars still believe that Paul might have written this letter. Most scholars believe it is truly anonymous, but this has not stopped scholars from concocting theories of authorship. My favorite is that it was written by Paul's colleague in ministry, Apollos, mentioned in 1 Corinthians, for reasons I will mention in a later Blog entry on Hebrews.
Galatians is unique in the situation that has occasioned the writing of this letter. We are not even sure exactly where these Galatians churches were located. Galatia refers to a large Roman province, not a city. We do not know if they were located in the southern part of the province of Galatia (see Figure 15.1 on page 235) which would be the Galatian churches mentioned in Acts (green shaded area), or northern Galatia (shaded in lavender) of which we know nothing, except what we know from this letter, if the letter was actually written to churches in northern Galatia. I prefer the southern Galatia theory, simply because we do know Paul evangelized in this area from what is written in Acts.
The unique situation about the letter to the Galatians is that from Paul's information, he has been led to believe that some of the Christian believers in these churches that he had established have been persuaded by other Christian missionaries to adopt a Jewish lifestyle. They were persuaded to do so my some evangelizing missionaries who believed that Christian converts from paganism still had to live the Jewish lifestyle, because that is the way the Jerusalem Christians live, who live that way because Jesus lived the Jewish lifestyle.
Paul is positively incensed and furious that these believers he converted from paganism are falling prey to a different version of Christianity than what he preached to them. That is why Paul spends the first two chapters giving us some autobiographical information about his beginnings in ministry. The point being that the Apostles in Jerusalem endorsed his version of Christianity, which is that you can claim Jesus as your savior even if you do not live a Jewish lifestyle. And now, many years later, Paul is confronting the fact that Christian missionaries (maybe from Jerusalem) have gone to his churches in Galatia and taught the believers in Galatia that their salvation cannot be assured unless they adopt the Jewish lifestyle.
Be sure to read Ehrman's discussion of Galatians carefully as he does a fine job of explaining the main theological issue, which is the relationship of the Jewish Law and Justification by faith (pages 234-241). The same theological issue comes up again in Paul's letter to the Romans, but Ehrman does not take the time to explain it there, since he already covered the topic in his discussion of Galatians.
While it is sometimes hard to follow Paul's logic in Galatians chapters 3 & 4, these chapters are theologically important for the development of Christian religious ideas. Paul ask his readers, what was the point of Jesus' sacrificial death on the cross if you still have to keep the Jewish Law to get right with God? In Paul's mind (and what he believes the risen Jesus personally told him) is that Jesus' death on the cross not only ended the need for ritual sacrifices in the Jewish temple, but also ended the need to keep the other ritualistic parts of the Jewish Law (circumcision, kosher rules, festivals & ceremonies, etc). Paul makes it very clear that in his mind that people get right with God (are "justified") by faith in Jesus, because of what God has done in Jesus' sacrificial death on the cross, which is validated by his resurrection from the dead. Paul finds this whole business in Galatia so unsettling that he rants that he wishes the teachers in Galatia proposing the necessity of male circumcision for all Christians would not only take off their own foreskins, but with a slip of the knife cut too deep and cut off the whole tip (see Galatians 5:12), thereby receiving their just desserts.
PHILIPPIANS is a letter that is the difference between night and day compared to Galatians. In Galatians, Paul is seriously worried that he might lose control of what is being taught in those churches. In Philippians we have a letter written to a congregation (or cluster of house churches) that have always been a source of joy for Paul. We do find some concerns expressed in chapter 3 and warnings about false teachers, but there is no indication that Paul is worried these Christians in the city of Philippi might desert his teaching for another version of Christianity.
It is quite clear that Paul is imprisoned under Roman guard as he writes this letter. It may be house arrest, but Paul is still confined and limited, even if he is not being mistreated or deprived of food. He obviously is able to receive visitors and able to dictate letters. Traditionally this has been understood to have been in Rome, because of the mention of greetings from the Christian believers who are part of "Caesar's household." For reasons of the logistics of travel implied in the letter, some scholars have proposed that maybe the incarceration was in Ephesus, also because the concerns mentioned in Philippians seem to fit better with the (reconstructed) time frame of Paul's work in and around Ephesus. But the mention of "Caesar's household" (4:22) and the mention of the "imperial guard" (in 1:13) would lend credibility to the theory that Philippians was written while Paul was incarcerated in Rome, during the imprisonment mentioned at the end of Acts.
The immediate occasion of this letter would seem to be that the Christian believers in Philippi (whose congregations were established by Paul) have heard that the courier they sent with money for Paul (Epaphroditus by name) became ill and nearly died. By the time Paul is aware of their concerns about Epaphroditus, Epaphroditus' health is much improved and Paul proposes to send him back to Philippi bearing this letter.
In this letter Paul covers a variety of topics, all of which are loosely connected. Even though Paul does not know how his imprisonment will turn out (either release or death), he has lost no opportunity to tell anyone willing to listen - about Jesus as their savior (1:12-14). Paul also thanks the Philippian Christians for the money they sent by way of Epaphroditus (4:10-20). This is important for Paul since in that day and time, there is no guarantee that captors would feed their prisoners. Often the prisoners would have to rely on the generosity of others, most often family. In Paul's case, his church family. Paul says he hopes also to send Timothy their way to check on how things are going in the churches back in Philippi, if his situation looks like he will be allowed to live (2:19).
In chapter 3, it would appear that Paul is worried about false teachers with a Jewish background and a Jewish lifestyle agenda, but these are just warnings about the possibilities of such teachers visiting them. In chapter 2, the section on Christ's humility would seem to be related to some reported discord between two influential women in the congregation(s), Euodia and Syntyche (see 4:2). In any church situation, when influential people disagree, others begin choosing sides and that only makes matters worse. Paul states that they are important workers in the cause of Christ and harmony between them is essential to the well being of the church(es) in Philippi.
The primary purpose of the letter to the Philippians is to encourage and confirm in the faith a group of Christians that has always been both loyal and helpful to Paul, and a model of Christianity for other churches. Paul encourages them to continue in what he had taught them by affirming how much joy Paul has experienced in knowing of their continued faithfulness to Jesus Christ.
Traditionally, PHILEMON was always connected with Colossians, because both letters mention the names of Mark, Aristarchus, Demas and Luke as people with whom Paul has contact while in prison at the time he is dictating these letters, and also both mention Archippus as being on the receiving end of the letter. That being the case, traditionally scholars have placed Philemon and Colossians as being written together and delivered to churches close to each other by the same courier. However, for reasons that Ehrman discusses in chapter 17, many modern historical critical scholars believe Paul did not himself write Colossians, for reasons that Ehrman states in his discussion of Colossians (pages 369-272).
The whole gist of Philemon is that a runaway slave (by the name of Onesimus) who was owned by a man named Philemon (who was converted to Christianity by Paul), that this Onesimus had second thoughts about running away and comes to Paul in prison (either to seek Paul's advice or to ask Paul to smooth the way for his return to Onesimus without receiving brutal punishment). During this time, Paul also converts Onesimus to Christianity. And then, being sufficiently impressed with the usefulness of Onesimus (of course it is a play on words since the name of Onesimus is also the adjective in Greek meaning "useful"), Paul writes this letter letter to Philemon, properly buttering him up to both welcome Onesimus back as a brother in Christ, but also to make him available to Paul to assist Paul in his work as a Christian missionary.
An interesting point that Ehrman makes in his discussion on Philemon is to question the traditional interpretation that Paul is asking Philemon to give Onesimus his freedom from slavery. Rather, thinks Ehrman, all Paul is asking for is that Philemon approve of Onesimus working for Paul, either on loan or signing his ownership over to Paul. I am not sure if I agree with Ehrman, but he does have a point that no where does Paul actually request that Onesimus be released from his slave status. Whereas, Paul certainly makes it very clear he would find Onesimus very useful for his work. Most modern scholars have assumed that implicit in Paul's request for the use of Onesimus is that Onesimus be freed from his slave bondage.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete