Reading Philippians after Supersessionism

Jews, Gentiles, and Covenant Identity

Zoccali

• Publisher: Cascade Books
• Year: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781532639883
• Topic: Teologia e religione
• Subtopic: Studi biblici

Paul's letter to the Philippians has often been read as one of the apostle's clearest denials of his (previous) Jewish identity in order to preempt the "Judaizing" tactics of false teachers who might infiltrate the congregation. But is this really the problem that Paul is confronting? And did Paul really abandon his identity as a Jew in order to "know Christ"? Furthermore, what should Paul's gospel converts understand about their own identity "in Christ"? Zoccali provides fresh answers to these questions, offering a more probable alternative to the traditional view that Christianity has replaced Judaism (supersessionism). Tracing Paul's theology in the light of social theory, Zoccali demonstrates that, for Paul, the ethnic distinction between Jew and gentile necessarily remains unabated, and the Torah continues to have a crucial role within the Christ-community as a whole. Rather than rejecting all things Jewish (or gentile), Paul seeks in this letter to more firmly establish the congregation's identity as members of God's holy, multiethnic people.

1

Paul, Supersessionism, and the Letter to the Philippians

[T]he apostle’s real adversary is the devout Jew, not only as the mirror-image of his own past—though that, too—but as the reality of the religious man. . . . Paul sees this possibility realized in the devout Jew: inasmuch as the announcement of God’s will in the law is here misunderstood as a summons to human achievement and therefore as a means to a righteousness of one’s own. But that is for him the root sin . . . . Right and righteousness can only be ours in so far as God gives them anew every day—i.e. in faith.1

Adherence to Torah, in the ways that Paul’s opponents are advocating it, is no better than pagan idolatry. To undergo circumcision is, in effect, to give in to the principalities and powers. It is a step back into a scheme of blood, soil, race and tribe.2

The argumentation of Philippians . . . can be more precisely discussed in terms of the rhetorics of unity and sameness and the rhetorics of hierarchy and modeling. The letter seeks to establish the authority of a series of model figures, especially Paul, while fashioning a vision of the community unified by both their sameness and their subjugation in a hierarchical pattern.3

These three seemingly disparate quotations from Ernst Käsemann, N. T. Wright, and Joseph A. Marchal do well in collectively synopsizing the matter that this volume seeks to address. What these characterizations of Paul and his first-century Jewish context have in common is a prevailing assumption impacting a great deal of contemporary scholarship, regardless of the otherwise wide-ranging interpretive conclusions that have been drawn. With a relative minority of contrary voices, it is generally understood that Paul’s letter to the Philippians presupposes a notion in which uniformity is intrinsic to the Christ movement, and, further, that the Christ movement seeks to replace Jewish identity (as well as all other social identities) and concomitant Torah4 obedience. However else the character of the letter is construed, the idea that Jewish identity is rendered, for Paul, effectively obsolete “in Christ” is largely taken for granted.5

In my view, supersessionism, correctly understood, is this very idea that “Christian” or “Christ community” identity6 is ultimately irreconcilable with Jewish identity. One can legitimately expand this definition by suggesting that supersessionism means all prior identities are to be abandoned upon entrance into the Christ community.7 Thus, the question occupying this study is whether Paul’s theology, as represented in his letter to the Philippians, can be accurately characterized as supersessionist.8 And, if not, how can Paul be faithfully read in ways that move beyond this traditional Christian paradigm, which dates back at least as far as the writings of Justin Martyr in the middle of the second century CE,9 and continues to have proponents in contemporary Pauline scholarship.

The Question of “Identity”

A basic definition of “identity” may include the following elements:

1. Identity indicates who/what individuals and groups believe they are, and also what they do.

2. Identity is affected by human agency as well as social structures, and thus may involve a number of both internal and external factors.

3. Persons and groups invariably possess multiple, nested identities.

4. Identity can be a dynamic phenomenon, subject to negotiation (and influenced by, e.g., various discursive strategies), though it may also contain both malleable/open (i.e., constructed) and more stable/closed (i.e., essential/primordial) aspects.

5. Constructed and evolving identities are sometimes perceived, or otherwise affirmed, as if they were essential/primordial, and therefore not having undergone any change, and neither being permeable.

6. Whether an identity is understood to be constructed or essential (or in some sense both)—and thus whether it is ultimately open or closed—may be a contested matter for insiders and/or outsiders.

In view of, though moving beyond, these basic considerations of identity, at several points this study will utilize insights from contemporary social-psychological theory, including Social Identity and Self-Categorization theories (SIT and SCT, respectively). Simply stated, SIT is a theory that seeks to predict intergroup behavior vis-à-vis social identity. SCT is a related theory that concerns the matter of how individuals understand themselves and others in relation to groups to which they respectively belong.10 “Social identity” is defined as “that part of an individual’s self-concept which derives from his [sic] knowledge of his [sic] membership of a social group (or groups) together with the value and emotional significance attached to that membership.”11 The importance of social groups is especially significant to the study of the New Testament. As Sergio Rosell Nebreda points out,

People of the Mediterranean in ancient times tended to view themselves as mirrored in others. Membership in a group is, therefore, a must in such corporate societies, and one of the prime values that characterized people of the Mediterranean. And this is crucial, since the groups to which people belong, whether by assignment or by choice, will be massively significant in determining their life experiences.12

An aspect of SIT/SCT that will be integral to my reading of Paul (and which especially relates to #3 above) concerns the role of superordinate social identities. A superordinate identity is a higher aggregate identity category to which persons may belong in addition to possessing other group affiliations. Such larger social identifications function in creating a common in-group social identity, which may, in turn, reduce inter-group bias, and thus promote greater harmony and a basis for unified action among subordinate groups. Contemporary social-scientific research has evidenced the success of creating a common in-group social identity, particularly when a superordinate identity is made salient while simultaneously allowing (in some fashion) for group members’ continued identification with and commitment to their respective subordinate group affiliations.13

It is my contention that Paul understood Christ-movement identity as a superordinate identity that allowed for the continuing saliency, however transformed, of subgroup identities, particularly that of Jew and gentile. He thus utilizes several higher aggregate identity descriptors for his addressees, as relevant to the particular occasions and rhetorical demands of his respective letters. What I will attempt to demonstrate in this study is that through various discursive measures Paul fundamentally seeks to intensify the saliency of the Philippians’ “in Christ” identity. Yet he does so in a fashion in which their prior ethnic identities—though subordinated, relativized, and transformed—nevertheless remain salient and enduring in light of the Philippians’ offering of allegiance to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, and consequent entrance into the people of God.

First-century Jewish Identity

It is important to clarify that Judaism in the first century represented not foremost a “religion” (especially not one in competition with a religion called “Christianity”), but what perhaps can best be described (however in etic fashion) as an ethnicity defined by various cultural indicia, including a shared myth of ancestry, geographic origins, history, beliefs, customs, etc., which thus functioned to demarcate Jews from other social groups of the period.14 Some scholars, such as Philip F. Esler, prefer to utilize the geo-ethnic designation, “Judean,” as the appropriate English translation for Ἰουδαῖος, to emphasize both the ethnic character of first-century Judaism, and also its discontinuity with later groups self-identifying as Jews.

Notwithstanding Esler’s important insights on the matter, I have chosen to utilize the conventional English translation, “Jew,” both because there is a strong religious component to Paul’s discourse concerning Jewish identity, and also in light of the significant continuity between first-century Judaism, and later forms.

Additionally, it is in my view critical to recognize that reference to “Judaism” in the first-century would necessarily include the Christ movement, as this was a decidedly a Jewish movement, though, as I will argue below, it consisted of gentiles qua gentiles alongside Jews qua Jews.

The Philippians as God’s Holy People

In order to demonstrate my view, it will be helpful to first examine the basis for Paul’s construction and negotiation of the Philippians’ identity, as the founder and leader of their community.15 Accordingly, in the next chapter I will be asking: who are the “holy ones” (ἁγίοις) (Phil 1:1; cf. Rom 1:7; 1 Cor 1:2; 2 Cor 1:1; 1 Thess 3:13; s...

Table of contents

• Title Page
• Acknowledgements
• List of Abbreviations
• Chapter 1: Paul, Supersessionism, and the Letter to the Philippians
• Chapter 2: Jews, Gentiles, and the “Holy Ones” (Philippians 1:1)
• Chapter 3: “Rejoice, O Gentiles, with His People”: Paul’s Intra-Jewish Rhetoric in Philippians 3, Part I
• Chapter 4: “Rejoice, O Gentiles, with His People”: Paul’s Intra-Jewish Rhetoric in Philippians 3, Part II
• Chapter 5: Concluding Reflections
• Bibliography