The
First Paul – Reclaiming the Radical Visionary Behind the Church’s Conservative Icon by Marcus Borg and John
Crossan (New York: HarperCollins, 2009)
Did you ever wonder why Paul in Romans 16, tells
the church to receive the two women Phoebe as a teaching deacon and Junia as an apostle, then in his letter to Corinthian
(14: 34) says that women in church should keep silent? Or have you not found it just a little strange that in his Letter to
Philemon, Paul suggests that the slave Onesimus should be freed from slavery
but then in his letter to Titus (2:9) he suggests that slaves be subject to their masters?
At last these annoying contradictions have been, explained. The letters of Paul, according Borg, Crossan and others,
were written by three authors, the first, early “radical” Paul, the second a “reactionary” writer
who was influenced by the culture of the Roman Empire and a “conservative” writer who wrote after Paul’s
death.
This is just part of wisdom shared in the book “The
First Paul” by Marcus Borg, theologian and John Dominic Crossan, a Roman Catholic scholar who has spent a lifetime studying
Jesus. We get Crossan’s scholarly theological probing and Borg’s clarity in communicating. It is a fine balance. As many of you will know, they teamed up previously to write the “The Last Week”
and “The First Christmas.”
I read Crossan and Borg with anticipated nervousness.
I get nervous because I fear I may emerge with less to believe in. This book not only gave me a new appreciation of the insight
and raw courage of this first century follower of Jesus but nourished my faith. I recognized most of the thinking as Crossan’s
since it can be found in Crossan’s earlier books.
Crossan wants the reader of Paul’s letters
to keep in mind that these were written in the shadow of a mean spirited and powerful Roman empire. Caesar was regarded as
the son of god, the lord savior and the one to establish peace in the world. When Paul took this established formula and replaced
the name Caesar with the name Jesus it was considered high treason against the state.
The following are just some of what may be new learning. In the 16th chapter of Romans, Paul commends the women and men who have
“risked their necks” (16:4) by becoming followers of The Way. Crossan suggests that Paul never intended that women
should be excluded as apostles. An all male priesthood came later through a misinterpretation, according to Crossan. He says that this mistake in translation would be funny if it were not so tragic.
When Paul calls Andronicus and Junia apostles (16:7) Junia was thought by early theologians to be a man. Crossan says that
Junia is a woman’s name and Andronicus and Junia were husband and wife. How radical is that for the first century, -
a married woman as an apostle.
Crossan reinterprets the cross and Jesus dying for
our sins and gives new meaning to Paul’s “I believe in Christ and Christ crucified.” On the subject of salvation, when Paul asks his followers to work out their salvation in fear and trembling
he meant that they should not be afraid of God if they failed but should be afraid of the authorities if they succeeded. Crossan
argues that faith, according to Paul, was not so much a statement of belief in Jesus as Savior and Lord as it was a life lived
in commitment and obedience as a result of that belief.
Because of “The First Paul” I find that
I am hearing Paul’s letters and even the gospels differently, as Borg would say “I met Paul again for the very
first time.” Paul, to use Crossan’s term has become for me, less appalling and much more appealing.
Glen Wright
