A Theological Introduction to Paul's Letters

Exploring a Threefold Theology of Paul

Yung Suk Kim

• Publisher: Cascade Books
• Year: 2011
• ISBN:
  9781621897293
• Topic: Theology & Religion
• Subtopic: Biblical Studies

In this study Kim explores a new way of reading Paul's letters and understanding his theology with a focus on three aspects of Paul's gospel: "the righteousness of God, " "faith of Christ, " and "the body of Christ." Kim argues that Paul's thought can be best understood by reading these genitives as the subjective or attributive genitives, rather than as the objective genitives. The subjective or attributive reading places an emphasis on the subject's participation: God's participatory righteousness, Christ's faithful obedience to God, and the believer's living of Christ's body. Using this approach, Kim investigates the root of Paul's theology in a wide array of texts and contexts: in the Hebrew Bible, Second Temple Judaism, the Greco-Roman world, and Paul's canonical letters. In doing so, Kim synthesizes Paul's theology and ethics seamlessly, balancing the roles of God, Christ, and believers in Paul's gospel.For the website: Study/Discussion Questions and Sample Syllabus available at http://youaregood.com/threefoldtheology.htm

1

Overview of Pauline Interpretation

Paul and his letters have been read variously. As during his lifetime, Paul is intensely disliked by some and intensely loved by others, depending on their life contexts and theological perspectives. Differences among scholars are as great as the distance between heaven and earth. Overall, Paul has been understood either fairly but partially or unfairly and poorly, in some cases with an emphasis on a certain view of life at the expense of diversity.1 For our review, the current Pauline interpretation will be divided into the following five categories: a forensic salvation perspective, a social-scientific or sociological approach, the New Perspective on Paul, an apocalyptic theology perspective, and a political or ideological reading.2 The breakdown of Pauline scholarship here is heuristic, and it provides us with an overall picture of the current scholarship. We will see major differences among them and compare them with each other. The goal of this chapter is, while surfacing limitedness or partiality in the various scholarly approaches to Paul and his letters, to implicate an alternative reading of Paul’s theology that involves God, Christ, and the believer.

Forensic Salvation Perspective

The forensic salvation perspective focuses in Rom 3:21–26 on individual righteousness (“a righteousness from God,” an objective genitive case), which comes from God through a believer’s “faith in Christ” (an objective genitive case).3 “Faith in Christ” means believers’ acceptance of Christ’s sacrifice once and for all. From the perspective of forensic salvation, Jesus’ death is understood in any of the following ways: (1) it satisfies “God’s justice” (satisfaction theory of atonement), and as a result sinners are forgiven and declared to be innocent or righteous (like a judge’s verdict in the court);4 (2) it is the price of the ransom for sinners’ release from the devil’s hold (ransom theory);5 (3) it is substitutionary punishment on behalf of sinners (penal substitution).6 Though all of these options are different in their particularities, they all agree that Jesus’ death has to do with an individual righteousness. This forensic reading certainly helps individual Christians to appreciate the importance of the personal salvation secured in Christ’s sacrifice and the joy of belonging to God. But if the whole gospel of Paul is read only through this lens of forensic salvation, we will lose the significance of Paul’s gospel in relation to the sociopolitical dimensions of life and the world.

Therefore, the major weakness of this forensic reading has to do with an individualization of God’s righteousness (“a righteousness from God”) and the believer’s lack of participation in Christ (“faith in Christ” instead of “Christ’s faith”). Because of this individualization of God’s righteousness, God is treated as a mere distributer of righteousness to individuals who have faith in Christ. The scope of God’s children is confined to the church only. The implication is that there are two kinds of people: people who belong to Christ and people who belong to the world (non-believers). Because of this kind of individualization of God’s righteousness and a possible danger of exclusivism, what is sacrificed is not only God’s “universal” righteousness that concerns all people, but also the role of God as an actor of love and righteousness, not merely a source of it or a judge in the court. At the core of this kind of reductionism is a “feel-good gospel that Jesus died instead of me; so I do not die.” But if we take the theory of “moral sacrifice” on the meaning of Jesus’ death, the message is very different from the previous perspective of forensic salvation: “Jesus died because we did not want to die.” That is, the problem is human disobedience to the law of God (equivalent to God’s righteousness).7

In sum, despite some benefits of the forensic salvation understanding, such as secure identity in Christ, the primary weakness is that there is no participation of the subjects (God, Christ, and the believer). That is, God is a mere judge or source of righteousness, Christ Jesus is a perfect sacrifice for individual justification once and for all, and the believer receives benefits without a cost. Likewise, the problem is there is a separation between theology and ethics. Because the believer’s identity is fixed and secured in Christ once and for all, ethics is only secondary, and so there is no room for self-criticism.

Social-Scientific or Sociological Approach

The social-scientific or sociological approach analyzes Paul and his letters with a focus on the social aspects of Paul’s communities and beyond them. Various forms of social and community life are examined through social-scientific or sociological approaches. Though these two approaches are different in terms of their different models or theories, their purpose is, more or less, the same: to understand and explain social issues such as boundary and identity of the community. The basic assumption of this social-scientific approach starts with the nature of humanity as a social being, which finds meaning in the community or in the society in which even theology is formed. While the social body metaphor, borrowed from the Stoic concord (homonoia) speeches,8 aims at the unity of community, social and cultural anthropology looks at culturally constructed boundary issues.9 Functionalist sociology relates to how the entire community or society functions for the goal of harmony and perpetual survival likely in biological organism;10 sociology of knowledge explains how a certain diffident community (members’ lack of confidence in the community, for example) is maintained because of special knowledge that serves as a “symbolic universe” or “social canopy.”11 Despite all these different foci, the common ground in these social-scientific, sociological approaches is that Paul is viewed as a skillful, realistic thinker in the matters of community,12 as a community organizer who is concerned about the purity and maintenance of it. Paul is known for adopting the conventional value or philosophy of the time, especially the ideal of Hellenistic unity (homonoia), around which Paul’s communities are constructed.13 Likewise, Paul becomes a revelatory power or authority—a privileged apostle because of his work and identity that were given by God.

In conclusion, all of the readings in this approach shed new light on Paul’s handling of the community by focusing on the social behavior of individuals and of the community. However, the major weakness is in this approach is that it also does not look into the role of God’s righteousness nor does it look into Christ’s radical faith in terms of his challenge to society’s norm. Faith in Christ (rather than Christ’s faithfulness) becomes a sort of bonding glue that allows members to stay in the community with a comfortable sense of identity. Likewise, there is no active role of the believer. In fact, we can even read Paul’s metaphor of “the body of Christ” with a focus on the believer’s radical Christ-like faith. If “the body of Christ” mentioned in Romans and 1 Corinthians can be reimagined as the body of Christ crucified, then this body metaphor goes beyond a metaphoric organism or “symbolic universe.” In this case, the body metaphor serves as both a critique of and comfort for Paul’s community. The strong in the community and/or in society are challenged by ignoring the power and wisdom of God, because the cross of Christ is the price of justice. The weak or the marginalized are comforted because the cross is a symbol of God’s solidarity with them.

The New Perspective on Paul

The reading of the New Perspective on Paul shifts the interpretive gauge from an individual justification issue to a communal relational issue (how to become people of God).14 In this reading Paul does not negate Judaism or the law just because it is outdated or an impossible means for human righteousness. As E. P. Sanders points out, works righteousness is not a primary paradigm for Jewish people in first-century CE Palestine. Jews also believe in the grace of God and stay in the covenantal community by keeping the law—not to earn salvation but to love God. In this reading the primary issue is not an individual one, that is, how the individual is to be saved, but a communal, relational issue, that is, how Jews and Gentiles alike b...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Preface
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction
• Chapter 1: Overview of Pauline Interpretation
• Chapter 2: Toward a Threefold Theology of Paul
• Chapter 3: A Threefold Theology of Paul
• Chapter 4: God’s Righteousness (Dikaiosyne Theou)
• Chapter 5: Christ’s Faith (Pistis Christou)
• Chapter 6: The Believer’s “Body of Christ” (Soma Christou)
• Chapter 7: “Imitators” (Mimetai) in 1 Cor 4:16 and 11:1
• Chapter 8: Reading Paul Today
• Bibliography