God's Saving Grace

A Pauline Theology

Frank J. Matera

• Publisher: Eerdmans
• Year: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781467436786
• Topic: Teologia e religione
• Subtopic: Studi biblici

Distinguished biblical scholar Frank Matera here views the theology of the Pauline letters through the lens of the saving grace that Paul experienced at his call and conversion. Focusing on Christology, soteriology, theology, anthropology, ecclesiology, ethics, and eschatology, Matera explores both the unity and the diversity of the thirteen Pauline letters.Written in a clear and coherent style, God's Saving Grace presents students, professors, and pastors with a comprehensive yet concise and accessible overview of the theology found in the entire corpus of Paul's letters.

1. A Pauline Theology of God’s Saving Grace

Introduction

The Pauline letters have had an immense impact on the growth and development of Christian theology. While the Fourth Evangelist is the great theologian of the incarnation, the Apostle Paul is the great theologian of grace and redemption. Writing occasional letters rather than theological treatises, it is Paul who focuses our attention on the saving event of Christ’s death and resurrection.¹ It is Paul who lays bare the human predicament apart from Christ. It is Paul who provides us with the most important metaphors for understanding what happened on the cross. It is Paul who portrays the church as a sanctified sphere, the body of Christ. It is Paul who instructs believers, who are no longer under the law, to live a morally good life in Christ through the power of God’s Spirit. It is Paul who provides believers with an eschatological vision that embraces the destiny of creation as well as of humanity. In a word, it is Paul who laid the foundation for what theology calls theological anthropology, Christology, soteriology, ecclesiology, ethics, pneumatology, and eschatology.

Despite this theological achievement, Paul was not writing as a theologian, nor did he attempt to construct a coherent theological system. A pastor, a missionary, an apostle to Gentiles, his primary purpose was to preach the gospel to as many people as possible before the Lord’s return so that he might save as many as possible for Christ. In the midst of his missionary work, however, this extraordinary individual wrote a number of letters in which he tended to the pastoral needs of small, struggling congregations of Christ-believers in the Greco-Roman world. Responding to the needs of these believers in light of the gospel he preached, the Apostle provided them with a way to live in the world according to the gospel. More specifically, he taught them how to live in light of the saving death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. A good part of the edifice of contemporary Christian theology, then, rests on the foundation of the thirteen letters attributed to Paul, all of which are pastoral in tone and intent.

Given the important role that the Pauline letters have played in the growth and development of Christian theology, it is not surprising that New Testament scholars have sought to clarify and synthesize the central themes of Paul’s writings. This project, however, is not without its pitfalls; nor does it lack critics. Accordingly, while there are many good reasons to undertake such a project, there are objections to it. In the remainder of this chapter, I will explore the nature and challenges of writing a Pauline theology before outlining the character and methodology of my Pauline theology.

The Nature and Challenges of Writing a Pauline Theology

Anyone who embarks on the task of writing a Pauline theology must ask, What am I doing? Am I writing a work that summarizes the theology of the Apostle Paul? Or, am I writing a work that summarizes the theology of the Pauline letters? Although closely related to each other, these two projects are distinct. For the sake of clarity, I will call the first project A Theology of Paul and the second A Pauline Theology.

A theology of Paul seeks to clarify and synthesize the theology of the historical figure Paul. Consequently, it is a historical as well as theological task. Those who undertake it must deal with a number of historical questions. For example, is Paul the author of all the letters that the New Testament attributes to him?² If the answer to this question is negative, then one must inquire about the nature and character of the letters that others have written in Paul’s name. Do they contribute to an understanding of Paul’s theology, or do they deviate from it? Likewise, since Paul plays such an important role in the Acts of the Apostles, one must inquire about the historical reliability of the data regarding Paul in Acts.³ Finally, one must decide if a theology of Paul should proceed letter by letter, taking into account the chronological order in which the letters were written, or provide a synthesis of the letters whose Pauline authorship is not disputed.⁴ Writing a theology of Paul, then, requires careful historical work as well as theological insight.

The second project, a Pauline theology, seeks to clarify and synthesize the theology embedded in the thirteen canonical Pauline letters. Consequently, in addition to being a historical and theological task, it is also a canonical and literary task.⁵ Those who undertake it must address a number of questions. If certain letters were written in Paul’s name rather than by Paul, what is the relationship between the letters whose Pauline authorship is not disputed and those whose authorship is disputed? Since a Pauline theology deals with the thirteen canonical letters, should the Acts of the Apostles play a role in such a theology? What is the relationship between history and theology in Pauline theology? Is a Pauline theology unrelated to history, or does historical investigation continue to play a role in such a theology? Finally, should a Pauline theology proceed according to the canonical order of the letters in the New Testament, or should it provide a synthesis of the theological themes of the letters?

Most contemporary authors provide their readers with a theology of Paul.⁶ Accordingly, they tend to focus on the letters whose authorship is not disputed; they pay careful attention to the historical circumstances that gave rise to these letters and to the chronological order in which they were composed. Moreover, rather than proceed letter by letter, in most instances they provide a synthesis of Paul’s theology.⁷ The strength of this project is its careful attention to history. By emphasizing the historical circumstances in which Paul composed his letters, theologies of Paul offer their readers an account of the historical circumstances in which he wrote and developed his theology. The weakness of this approach, however, is that it may neglect those letters whose Pauline authorship is disputed. Consequently, whereas the voices of Romans, Galatians, the Corinthian correspondence, Philippians, and 1 Thessalonians sound forth clearly, the voices of Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, and the Pastorals are often muted. In some instances, they may even be viewed as a betrayal of Paul’s theology.⁸

In contrast to a theology of Paul, a Pauline theology focuses on the theological vision of the thirteen letters that the New Testament attributes to Paul. Rather than undertake a historical investigation of the theology of Paul, this approach directs its attention to the thirteen canonical letters attributed to the Apostle, even though Paul may not have authored all of them.⁹ While such a project must take into consideration historical questions, it must also pay attention to canonical and literary issues as well. The strength of this project, then, is the attention it gives to all of the letters. Rather than view some as more important than others, it listens to all the voices in the Pauline corpus. The weakness of this approach, however, is that it may gloss over or neglect differences among the letters for the sake of its synthesis. For example, it may overlook the different ways in which justification is presented in Romans and Galatians on the one hand and Ephesians and the Pastorals on the other. Or it may neglect the differences in the eschatology of 1 Thessalonians and 1 Corinthians on the one hand and 2 Thessalonians, Colossians, and Ephesians on the other. Finally, this approach is liable to the following objection: if certain letters attributed to Paul were not written by him, how can their theological vision be integrated into the theological vision of the letters that the Apostle wrote? If a synthesis of the disputed correspondence is artificial, it would appear that a synthesis of the Pauline corpus is even more so.

The strength of each approach, however, is also its weakness. For example, whereas the strength of writing a theology of Paul is the attention it gives to history, this approach must contend with the shifting sands of historical research.¹⁰ Likewise, whereas the strength of writing a Pauline theology is the attention it gives to the letters as literary products, this approach can result in a non-historical reading of the text. How then should we proceed? How have I approached my Pauline Theology?

The Character and Method of This Pauline Theology

My own work is a Pauline theology that deals with the theology that underlies and comes to expression in the thirteen letters the New Testament attributes to Paul (the Pauline Corpus). This work, then, is an attempt not to reconstruct the theology of the historical Paul but to summarize the theology of the canonical letters that bear his name. This statement, however, should not be construed to mean that there is no relationship between Paul’s theology and the theology of the letters that bear his name. The theology in the canonical letters attributed to him is indebted to him, even in the case of those letters that were not written by him. There is, however, an important distinction between Paul’s own theology and the theology of the Pauline letters. Whereas the theology of the Pauline letters is the theology embedded in the letters, Paul’s own theology encompasses more than the theology in his letters. For example, in addition to the Pauline letters we possess, Paul wrote letters we do not possess.¹¹ Furthermore, he regularly preached and taught the gospel. Thus there is a great deal about the theology and thought of the historical Paul we do not and cannot know. Our knowledge of Paul’s theology, then, is limited in a way that our knowledge of the theology in the Pauline letters is not. In saying this, I am not implying that we can write a definitive Pauline theology. Inasmuch as the Pauline Corpus is a literary product, it can always be interpreted anew. Such a project, however, has the advantage of focusing our attention on a specific body of writings rather than speculating about what we do not know or possess.¹²

But what do we mean by “theology” when we speak of the theology of Paul or the theology of the Pauline letters? If Paul did not write theological treatises and was not a theologian, how can we speak of his theology or of a Pauline theology? As I have already acknowledged, Paul was not a theologian in our sense of the term. Rather than speculate about the nature of God and Christ in theological treatises, he wrote about God and Christ in letters occasioned by the needs of those to whom he wrote.

Nevertheless, even though Paul did not write theological treatises, the letters he composed are informed by the gospel that he received when God revealed his Son to him and called him to be the Apostle to the nations. In light of this gospel, he speaks about Christ. In light of this gospel, he speaks about God’s work of salvation. In light of this gospel, he speaks about the human condition. In light of this gospel, he speaks about the church and the morally good life. In light of this gospel, he speaks about the hope that believers have for final salvation. Stated simply, what Paul writes about the gospel is his theology; it is his understanding of God, Christ, the Spirit, humankind, and the world.

The theology of the Pauline letters, then, is not found in carefully crafted theological ideas and concepts but in the way that Paul interprets what has happened, what is happening, and what will happen in light of the gospel of God that was revealed to him. Because Pauline theology is inseparable from the gospel that Paul preaches, it is embedded in the concrete and diverse ways that he proclaims the gospel.¹³ A few examples will clarify what I mean. When Paul says that the righteousness of God is being revealed in the gospel (Rom 1:16-17), he is affirming how God is presently acting in the world. When Paul writes that the power of God is revealed in the weakness and folly of the cross (1 Cor 1:21-25), he is making a paradoxical statement about God’s wisdom and power. When Paul calls Christ the image of God (2 Cor 4:4), he is affirming that Christ is the way we know God. When Paul insists that human beings are justified on the basis of faith apart from doing the works of the Mosaic Law (Gal 2:16), he is making a soteriological statement about what it means to stand in a right relationship to God. When Paul calls the church the body of Christ (Eph 1:22-23; Col 1:24), he is making an important ecclesiological statement about the nature and being of the church. Or when he says that those who have died in Christ will rise at the parousia (1 Thess 4:16), he is affirming that God’s victory in Christ is more powerful than death.

The difference between contemporary theology and Pauline theology is that whereas the former presents a systematic, philosophical reflection on the topics mentioned above, Paul presents a concrete pastoral reflection on these issues. He is not so much interested in developing the notion of God’s righteousness for the sake of exploring the notion of God’s being as he is concerned to show the faithfulness and reliability of God. Likewise, he is not so much interested in telling believers that Christ is the image of God as he is in teaching them that they are being transformed into the image of Christ, who is the image of God. Pauline theology, then, is embedded in the pastoral responses that Paul gives when he encourages, rebukes, and counsels the communities to which he writes in light of the gospel he has received.

If this is the nature of Pauline theology, how can we weave the theological threads of the Pauline letters into a coherent tapestry? More importantly, should we? Is not the very act of writing a Pauline theology a betrayal of the Apostle’s pastoral approach? Would it not be better to focus on aspects of Pauline theology rather than attempt to synthesize it? These are legitimate questi...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Dedication
• Contents
• Preface
• Abbreviations
• 1. A Pauline Theology of God’s Saving Grace
• 2. Paul’s Experience of God’s Saving Grace
• 3. Christ the Embodiment of God’s Saving Grace
• 4. The Saving Grace of Jesus Christ
• 5. Living in the Community of God’s Saving Grace
• 6. Living according to God’s Saving Grace
• 7. Waiting for the Final Appearance of God’s Saving Grace
• 8. The God Revealed through the Saving Grace of Jesus Christ
• Index of Subjects
• Index of Authors
• Index of Scripture Citations