On Paul and Identity

 

By Rook Hawkins

 

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

            INTRODUCTION

1. ESTABLISHING PAUL’S IDENTITY: Who is Paul?
   

2. BAPTIZED IN THE DEATH OF CHRIST: Paul as a Christian
   

3. PUTTING ON CHRIST: Paul’s historical Jesus Christ or his spiritual Anointed Savior?
   

4. SOME CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

 

 

INTRODUCTION

“Yet among the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are doomed to pass away. But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages for our glory. None of the rulers of this age understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” – Paul, 1 Corinthians 2:6-8

For too long I have put off the necessary compilation of the research I have done on Paul and his epistles. It is not out of lack of interest that I have been putting this off. I have been promising an article to my readers for a very long time, but because I have had to direct my attention elsewhere due to book research it was not possible for me to sit down and compose an essay on one of my favorite characters in antiquity.  Paul is, in my opinion, the most fascinating character in the New Testament, and when it comes to classical literature, I find more enjoyment reading Paul than reading Aristotle.  The little snippet above is one of my favorite selections of Paul’s letters and the avid reader will see why as the article progresses.

The intent of this article is not the same in concept or construction as it would have been had I written it a year ago.  That reflects my own change of opinion that comes with research and study more than it reflects my reading of Paul.  Although to be very honest, my research has allowed me to see Paul a lot differently than I did last year.  The title of this article may come across as vague and illusive.  After all, what identity am I discussing?  Is it the identity of Paul historically or abstractly?  Paul’s Christian identity?  Does it refer to how we identify with Paul and his letters?  What about early Christians and how they identify with them?  Are we going to discuss the identity of Jesus in Paul’s letters?  The short answer is: All of the above. 

Paul is as abstract as the title.  His identity is shrouded in mystery and illusion.  Who was Paul?  Who was Paul’s crucified Lord?  What does Paul mean in the selection of verses above and just why do they sound so esoteric?   The passages from 1 Corinthians can give us a lot of insight into these questions, and open for us the doors of the early days of Christianity.  It is a Christian world that has been fought over and debated on for thousands of years, and it is a world that is nearly lost to us because of it.  This article will attempt to lay out that ancient past in a manner that will reflect Paul’s own understanding of this world and his faith through it all.    

 

1. ESTABLISHING PAUL’S IDENTITY

“To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order to win Jews. To those under the law I became as one under the law…that I might win those under the law. To those outside the law I became as one outside the law…that I might win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak.  I have become all things to all people, that by all means I might save some. I do it all for the sake of the gospel, that I may share with them in its blessings.” – Paul,

1 Corinthians 9:20-23

At this point you may be asking yourselves, “Have we not an accurate understanding of Paul’s faith and theology?”  It depends.  Do you feel that Paul knew of a historical Jesus?  If so, you probably do not know what Paul’s faith and theology consisted of.  And do not let the fiction called the Acts of the Apostles fool you, Paul had (and in many ways he still has) a very different story to tell than the one given of him and by him in that account. In fact, Paul would not agree with the conclusions of the church today, nor of the ones that Augustine drew of Paul from his own letters just a few lifetimes after him.

To be clear, I will probably be criticized by my peers on both sides.  I will most certainly come under fire by Christians who will not like my interpretation of Paul, even though the points I make are the product of years of research and quite a bit of endnotes.  That is expected, and we can be relatively sure most will be personal attacks on my character.  What I feel will happen the rest of the time is that my detractors will criticize me for accepting the historicity of Paul while not accepting the historicity of Jesus.  First let me say that I am agnostic on the existence of Paul.  To me, his existence is unknowable, but more than that it is also irrelevant to the subject of this article.  This article deals with theology and identity throughout the Pauline corpus and for that purpose I will assume his existence historically.  I want to take a moment to explain why I draw these conclusions before moving on to the rest of the commentary. 

To preface this, the reader should be cautioned.  There are some arguments which sound convincing enough to establish an ahistoricity position for Paul.  It is easy to fall into logical traps with these positions.  With that said, the first argument for establishing ahistoricity is grounded in Marcion.  Marcion in the second century was the first to collect Paul’s letters, the first to canonize them as “scripture” in a “new” testament, and use them against other Christian sects.  He called this corpus the Apostolicon.  It has been suggested that Marcion fabricated some of the letters himself, and that other Marcionites redacted those letters before the so-called Orthodox Christians got their hands on them and redacted them further.  There is clear evidence, for example, that Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians has gone through a meat-grinder.  Because of these interpolations and redactions, as well as the silence by early Christians on Paul, some historians have alleged this to be an argument for establishing ahistoricity. 

Secondly, some letters appear to be a collection of multiple smaller letters gathered into one.  Paul’s letter to the Romans reflects this treatment, which is why Paul’s perspective on Jews changes and contradicts itself so frequently between the first chapters, the mid-chapters and the last chapters.  This is indicative of either two letters combined into one—where one letter was inserted in the middle of another—or three letters were collected and subsequently arranged as one.  While this argument, in itself, is substantial evidence for tampering, it does not entail that the whole letter was created.  Clearly this is not the case. 

Third, there is an interesting statement made by Tertullian in which he makes this offhanded comment that Marcion “found” the letter to Galatians;[1] “found” being a fill-in for “created” in this case.  While it is an interesting argument, it does not automatically situate Marcion as the author of every Pauline Epistle.  And just because Tertullian said it does not make it so.[2]  Even in the event that Tertullian meant that Marcion fabricated the letter and it turned out to be true—both of which are unlikely given the context and the author—it still would not be a satisfactory argument for the establishment of ahistoricity.

These arguments are not only ineffective at establishing ahistoricity for Paul, but they are also not helpful.  They confuse the issue at hand in this instance, and there are too many reasons to accept the historicity of Paul, which we do not find for the establishment of historicity in the case of Jesus.  For example, the letters of Paul are not anonymous.  The same can not be said about the Gospel accounts.  Second, the authentic letters, where there are no interpolations by later redactors, do not reflect growing legend and embellishment in the same way that we find in the Gospel accounts.  For example, we do not see Galatians reflecting a specific view of Paul—or even a supernatural one—and then come to find that in 1 Corinthians another view of Paul exists to a much greater legendary degree.[3]  Third, we can be certain that Marcion, the first to collect all of Paul’s letters, certainly felt Paul existed.[4] Fourth, the arguments for a completely pseudonymous selection of letters written in the name of Paul have, and should, be dismissed in accordance with logic.[5]  It is much easier to explain the authentic letters of Paul as imitating real historical events and reflexive socio-cultural trends in the first century than to attempt to explain them otherwise.

Because of the complexity and interpretability of Paul and Pauline thought, it is important first to establish who Paul is.  This is a difficult thing to answer, as Paul does not give us many details about himself and his life.  When he does give us some detail or another, he is generally discussing his flaws in relation to his theology and faith.  What can be said, or at least what can be assumed, whether correctly or incorrectly, is that Paul wrote in the mid-first century common era.  There are some detractors to this idea, such as the very erudite Dr. Robert M. Price, although his arguments have not proven persuasive enough to this author.[6]  In any case, it is certain he was writing some time during the period known as the Second Sophistic, given that later pseudonymous works written in the name of Paul resemble other fictional Greek letter writing of the period.[7]  Beyond that we do not have other information on Paul that is trustworthy.  Acts portrays Paul as hailing from Tarsus, but since Acts itself is a polemical work against Marcionites, it should be held under extreme suspicion.[8]  Paul claims to have a defect in his eye, and generally considers himself to be ugly, but it is difficult to determine if Paul is speaking literally or metaphorically.  When it comes down to it, we just don’t have enough information on him to know the details.  All we have are the letters of Paul, and the insight that Paul gives, and that is what tells us most about him.   Because that is the case, this article will focus on what Paul has to say.  When it comes down to it, Paul’s words more than the details of his character tell us of his identity.   

 

2. BAPTIZED IN THE DEATH OF CHRIST

“Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” – Paul, Romans 6:3-4

 

Paul’s identity as a Christian, and the teachings he converted into, are the foundation of why he speaks.  And the why is just as important as the what.   The best way to explain the why, is to consider the why.  Why does Paul speak in this esoteric and often vague way?  Take the passage from Romans above, how does one become baptized into somebody else’s death?  How does baptism relate to death, and how does being buried relate to new life?  These doctrines are often spoken of by Paul, but he never really explains them.  Or does he?  Where do all these verses, shrouded in secrecy, come from?

This sort of esotericism resembles Greek esoteric—or mystery—schools, which caught on in the centuries preceding Paul’s, due to a blending of Greek and Jewish cultures during the period known as the Hellenistic age.   Paul has a starkly different identity as a Christian than later Christians like Tertullian and Augustine.  That identity has to do with the period in which Paul is writing.  Before Christianity really started to become popular, there is barely a distinction between the Jews and the early Christians.  The Christians were, as point of fact, just very Hellenized Jews.   Nor did the early Christians not call themselves ‘Christians’ at this point.[9]  And what they did call themselves is unknown. 

The Gospels hide a clue, however.  Mark has Jesus ridiculing the impious sects of Jews, the Pharisees and the Scribes (Matthew adds Sadducees).[10]  Where are the Essenes?  Interestingly enough, Jesus travels from town to town but never encounters an Essene.  Yet Josephus says they reside in every location.[11]  The reason behind this, in this authors opinion, is that the Essenes were the early Christians, and why the Essenes sort of died out as Christianity came on the scene.[12]  Indeed, there is a stunning similarity to the Essenes[13] in the first century to those who were ‘baptized with Christ’ in Paul’s day.  I’ll give just a few examples of early Christian thought compared to the Essene way of life.

 

“Then, because of their anxious desire for an immortal and blessed existence, thinking that their mortal life has already come to an end, they leave their possessions to their sons or daughters, or perhaps to other relations, giving them up their inheritance with willing cheerfulness;” Philo, On the Contemplative Life 2.13

 

“For their doctrine is this: That bodies are corruptible, and that the matter they are made of is not permanent; but that the souls are immortal, and continue for ever; and that they come out of the most subtile air, and are united to their bodies as to prisons, into which they are drawn by a certain natural enticement; but that when they are set free from the bonds of the flesh, they then, as released from a long bondage, rejoice and mount upward.” Josephus, Jewish War 2.8.11, 154-155

 

Those reading these excerpts that may be familiar with Paul’s epistles certainly will recognize the clear similarity between the theologies.  Who can not see the stunning parallels between Philo and Josephus’ recounts of the Essene traditions and not see that reflected in Paul’s own words. 

 

“Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.” – Paul, Romans 7:4-6

 

But the similarities do not end there.  Consider the following example:

 

“They also furnish us with many proofs of a love of virtue, such as abstinence from all covetousness of money, from ambition, from indulgence in pleasures, temperance, endurance, and also moderation, simplicity, good temper, the absence of pride, obedience to the laws, steadiness, and everything of that kind; and, lastly, they bring forward as proofs of the love of mankind, goodwill, equality beyond all power of description, and fellowship, about which it is not unreasonable to say a few words.” Philo, Every Good Man is Free 11:84

 

Paul gives a similar list of vices to remain abstinent of in Romans as well.

 

“And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done. They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips, slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.” – Paul, Romans 1:28-31

 

Paul constantly equates the evil and unrighteous acts of man to the flesh.  And to live by the flesh means death.  “For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live.” (Romans 8:13)  This is an often ignored quality of Pauline theology, the Gnostic Paul that evangelicals try to distance themselves from.  But what is missed is this connectivity and identity that is so dear to Paul, is also so very Greek.  Paul is as much a part of this assimilation as any other person living in the Roman world at that time.  Too often scholars will distance Paul from this by placing him in a uniquely Christian world, which is itself a product of Hellenism not separate from it.  Indeed, the Gospels are part of a genre of literary fiction popular among Diasporic Jews.[14]  I have discussed elsewhere that antiquity is a period full of endless superstition.  Paul’s Christianity was a Christianity in this era dominated by, what they thought were, cosmic powers and evil Gods who sought to make life as miserable as possible.  The way to achieve salvation from these evils, not only of the flesh but of these entities, was through the wisdom of his Savior.   

 

3. PUTTING ON CHRIST

“For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” – Paul, Galatians 3:26-28

 

The figure of this Jesus in Pauline theology is the hardest to identify.  He is never spoken of like Paul speaks of Peter or James or Chloe.  Before this section discusses the identity of this Jesus, let’s make it clear who he wasn’t.  I would first bring forth a challenge to all my detractors.  Show me a passage in the authentic letters of Paul[15] that give the following information: (1) The name of Jesus’ parents. (2) A trial before the Sanhedrin and Pilate (named at least). (3) The location of the death of Jesus. (4) Information regarding his life, any event. (5) Any miracle Jesus performed (aside from resurrecting – which Paul suggests was not something Jesus performed by that God, his father, performed) that can be found in the Gospels.  This challenge has been presented because frankly, there are no such passages that exist anywhere in Paul’s letters.  Paul does not bring up this data precisely because he did not know of it.[16]  Paul does not believe Jesus ever walked on earth – to Paul, such ideas are blasphemous.  In the odd circumstance where Paul seems to allude to Jesus as a historical person, the verses are shrouded in allegory and esotericism; another product of his time. 

Remember the initial quote from 1 Corinthians at the start of this article?  Despite what pastors or priests may tell you, the above quote from 1 Corinthians does not reflect a physical death and resurrection of Jesus.  Nor does it reflect Paul’s awareness of Pilate or the Sanhedrin as executioners.  To show this, a look at the context of the passage is important.  And the best way to show context is by analyzing the original language the verse was written in.

 

“Yet among the mature (teleiois) we do impart wisdom, although it is not a wisdom of this age (aionos) or of the rulers (archonton) of this age (aionos), who are doomed to pass away. But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God, which God decreed before the ages (aionos) for our glory. None of the rulers (archonton) of this age (aionos) understood this, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.” – Paul, 1 Corinthians 2:6-8

 

The context of the verse implies something much more Greek than is generally assumed.  First, Paul is speaking to other initiates (teleiois).[17]  The context implies a mystery religion, in the same way that the Essenes practiced their own initiations and mysteries.[18]  The knowledge Paul is imparted is not implicit but interpreted from his parables.  Paul’s discussion on the “rulers (archonton) of this age (aionos)” in this passage represents one of these parables.  These archons are not to be confused with earthly rulers.  Archons are those who arche or begin.[19]  They are the initiators of the beginning.  They rule over the aeons (aionos), or the ages.[20]  Particularly, in this context, Paul is calling these beings the initiators of his age.[21]  Paul believes that through the wisdom attained by direct revelation of his Jesus Christ, or rather his Anointed Savior, that these other heavenly principalities will be supplanted.[22]  Early Christians knew of this interpretation, as one of the manuscripts discovered at Nag Hammadi is entitled Hypostasis of the Archons[23] or the ‘Reality of the Rulers’.   The context also implies a different type of death, in the different realm.[24]  Paul believed that Jesus died the way Paul felt he died. 

 

“For apart from the law, sin lies dead. I was once alive apart from the law, but when the commandment came, sin came alive and I died. The very commandment that promised life proved to be death to me. For sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me.”  -- Paul, Romans 7:8-11

 

Death, to Paul, does not represent a psychical death.  Paul feels the ‘death of the flesh’, as he calls it, is much worse.  This death is not separate from birth, but specifically connected to it.  Paul explains these parables through the explanation of his revelations (apokalupseôs) through Jesus Christ.[25]  I have stated earlier that Paul did not believe Jesus was a man, or at least, anything of the flesh.[26]  According to Paul, however, Jesus did not ascend to earth as in Marcionite theology, nor was he born the way that might be perceived by reading Matthew and Luke.[27]  Nor did Jesus die in the way we imagine it, nailed to a crucifix and impaled with a centurion’s spear.  To Paul, Jesus was born the way Paul felt we were all born.  Far too often this message has been taken out of its original context, and distorted to imply a natural birth through Mary.  The message is, as stated before, told in allegorical form found in Galatians 4:

 

“So we also, when we were children, were held in slavery under the elemental spirits of the cosmos. But when the fullness of the time came, God sent out his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, that he might redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because you are sons, God sent out the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, "Abba, Father!" So you are no longer a slave, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.” – Paul, Galatians 4:3-7

 

Those out to verify the historical Jesus are quick to jump on this verse without considering what Paul is actually saying here.  This verse is taken for granted, presupposed to be about a person which Paul never knew.  For Jesus was not born at all but made (genomenon), specifically, under the law. What is the law?  Paul actually tells us what “the law” (tou nomou) means.  “It was added because of transgressions, until the seed should come to whom the promise has been made. It was ordained through angels by the hand of a mediator (mesitou).” (Gal. 3:19)  Paul clarifies for us, “For we know that the law (ho nomos) is spiritual (pneumatikos), but I am of the flesh (sarkinos), sold under sin.” (Rom. 7:14)  To Paul, what comes from the flesh is corruption and sinful. “For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh.”  (Rom. 7:18)  The law is the spiritual custodian (ephrouroumetha) of the flesh, a teacher by which Paul feels leads one to life.  It is through this custodian, the spirit, per Paul, that we are also saved.  There is also an underlining allegory to this passage that most scholars seem to ignore.[28]  Do those who want to understand Paul so easily forget the allegory of the two women, Sarah and Hagar, for which we are all a part of?[29]  This chapter (Galatians 4) is not about Jesus at all.  It is entirely about the law and how to be saved under the law.[30]

 

“Tell me, you that desire to be under the law, don't you listen to the law?  For it is written that Abraham had two sons, one by the handmaid, and one by the free woman. However, the son by the handmaid was made according to the flesh, but the son by the free woman was made through promise. These things contain an allegory, for these are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children to bondage, which is Hagar. For this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia, and answers to the Jerusalem that exists now, for she is in bondage with her children. But the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, "Rejoice, you barren who don't bear. Break forth and shout, you that don't travail. For more are the children of the desolate than of her who has a husband." Now we, brothers, as Isaac was, are children of promise.  But as then, he who was born according to the flesh persecuted him who was born according to the Spirit, so also it is now. However what does the Scripture say? "Throw out the handmaid and her son, for the son of the handmaid will not inherit with the son of the free woman."  So then, brothers, we are not children of a handmaid, but of the free woman.” – Paul, Galatians 4:21-31

 

The context is very important.  Jesus is made under the law—the spiritual custodian—by a “woman” or specifically, “the Jerusalem above” (hê de anô Ierousalêm), which also happens to allegorically be the mother to everyone. Not everyone in a worldly sense, Paul makes this clear, “for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” (Rom. 1:16) But Paul was speaking specifically to everyone who is adopted into the death of Jesus Christ, “but you have received the Spirit of adoption as sons, by whom we cry, ‘Abba! Father!’” (Rom. 8:15) And here the understanding of the parable comes back around. We die, the same way Jesus dies.  We call out to our father, allegorically, as we become kin with Jesus through the spirit.  But through this death we are saved, from the flesh which is corrupt, through a rebirth.  This rebirth is of this allegorical woman in the same way that Paul’s Jesus is born through the same allegorical woman.  Indirectly we, like Jesus, are born again spiritually by way of the heavens, or directly, by God. 

This is also made explicit in his Epistle to the Romans, where he writes that God sent Jesus to fulfill the prophecies “concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh.”  Immediately following this verse, Paul states that we can also be called “to belong to Jesus Christ.”   It’s more allegory.  I’d like to call attention to the formalistic style in which Paul is using.  Paul does not say, “from the womb of Mary” or “from the seed of Joseph”.  Paul does not once mention the names of Jesus’ parents.  Instead, he utilizes this allegorical language.  David was not the father of Jesus.  But, that is a testament to the parable of Paul’s savior.  David is representative of Israel.  Once more, Jesus is not the subject of the chapter, but salvation for the Israelites is.  Paul is in Rome,[31] he writes why; “So, as much as is in me, I am eager to preach the gospel to you also who are in Rome. For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God for salvation for everyone who believes; for the Jew first, and also for the Greek.” (Rom. 1:16)  For Paul, his goal is the salvation of everyone, but specifically his intent is to show the promise of God fulfilled.  Paul, shortly after making his intentions clear, goes on about this very issue for the rest of the chapter, talking about the wickedness of Israel in the past, and how God gave the wicked up to their “dishonorable passions” (pathê atimias).  The works of man are irrelevant to the Grace of God.  He cements this into his discussion of circumcision, which again is allegory.  Circumcision is representative of the law, and those who follow the law, where as those who are uncircumcised—the Greek who does not follow the law—but still have faith are no different.  The tie in with the seed of David is that Jesus, to Paul, reveals himself to all men, just as David counts men righteous who do not follow the law. 

 

“Even as David also pronounces blessing on the man to whom God counts righteousness apart from works, ‘Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, Whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man whom the Lord will by no means charge with sin.’ Is this blessing then pronounced on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say that faith was accounted to Abraham for righteousness. How then was it counted? When he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.” – Paul, Romans 4:9

 

To Paul, the seed of David is likened to the seed of Abraham, the children of Israel, who are deemed righteous by their faith, not through works of the laws.  “For the promise to Abraham and to his seed that he should be heir of the world wasn't through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.” (Rom. 4:13)  Paul explains further the salvation of Israel, while making it clear that there is a “partial hardening” (pôrôsis apo merous) upon the sons of Israel, “And in this way all Israel will be saved”. According to Paul, this salvation will occur when there is a specific amount of Greeks who are also saved. (Rom. 11:25-26) Paul speaks this mystery (mustêrion)[32] to his brethren because he seeks to “somehow…make my fellow Jews jealous, and thus save some of them”.[33] (ibid.)  He again relates this back to the patriarchs and the prophets.  God is attempting to save a remnant of Israelites, those who have faith and are deemed worthy through grace.  He brings up the passage in which Isaiah begs God to destroy Israel for their wickedness.  God, recognizing the wickedness of the Jews well in advance, allows for seven thousand Israelites who did not “knee to Baal.” (Rom. 11:6)  Paul sums up this allegory, “Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect (eklogê) obtained it, but the rest were hardened”. (Rom. 11:7)  Bringing this allegorical interpretation of scripture back around, to “belong to Christ” you must become a seed of David, by specifically identifying your faith in God through Christ.  This is accomplished through understanding the mysteries Paul teaches, and by becoming one of the mature (teleiois). 

One final example that needs to be given of Paul’s identity with his savior comes from 1 Corinthians 11.  This is, like earlier representations, not about Jesus.  Instead, it is once more about salvation of mankind.  Paul uses Jesus as an allegory, which he claims to have received personally through revelation from Jesus Christ. 

 

“For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, ‘This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.’  In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, ‘This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.’ For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.” – Paul, 1 Corinthians 11:23-26

 

The allegory is further understood in the context of the chapter.  Paul is speaking of divisions in the church at Corinth.[34]  He is angered by the fact that so many people are separate in personal belief instead of a unified belief through Jesus Christ. (1 Cor. 11:17-19) He is likening a communal meal to the church of God (1 Cor. 11:22).  He says, “When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk.” (1 Cor. 11:20-21)  Indeed, Paul asks, “Is Christ divided?” (1 Cor. 1:13)  Paul follows this up with more evidence of the allegory of the upcoming passage on the last supper when he asks, “Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God…?”  Paul’s meal with Christ is indicative to his message of faith and renewal to the church at Corinth.  He states that he received (parelabon) this message “from the Lord what I also delivered to you”, which is this new covenant which he has received from Jesus.  But Paul never met Jesus, so certainly he did not learn of this episode from Jesus the man.  And in Galatians he makes it clear “the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel. For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation (apokalupseôs) of Jesus Christ.” (Gal. 1:11-12) He did not get this information from any other individual, such that it might be considered evidence of Paul knowing of a historical supper.  Remember, Paul is citing this scene allegorically.  Paul has elsewhere said that Jesus is the cup of God.[35]  But the scene of the meal is also symbolic of the scene in Exodus 24:10-11:

 

“And they saw the God of Israel. There was under his feet as it were a pavement of sapphire stone, like the very heaven for clearness. And he did not lay his hand on the chief men of the people of Israel; they beheld God, and ate and drank.”

 

To Paul, this supper is the very message of salvation he is offering.  Immediately following this story in Exodus, God gives Moses the new covenant, which was made in blood.  “Behold, the blood of the covenant, which Yahweh has made with you in accordance to all these words” (Ex. 24: Paul is probably also aware of Zechariah’s words on the covenant, “Because of the blood of my covenant with you, I have freed prisoners from the dry pit.” (Zech. 9:11) Through these revelations of God through Jesus, Paul is bringing Isaiah’s “good news” to the world.[36]  A new blood covenant, in which Jesus had to shed blood in order to free everyone from the old covenant, is the concept behind Paul’s question, “The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?” (1 Cor. 10:16)  Paul is interpreting all of this from scripture.  Christ is the rock which everyone drinks from in 1 Corinthians 10:3-4, because Paul is interpreting Exodus 17.  The Hebrew people demand a drink because they are thirsty for walking in the desert for so long.  Moses is annoyed that they have challenged God, and asks, “Why do you quarrel with me? Why do you test the LORD?” The Hebrews were angered and lacked faith, and demanded, “Why did you bring us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our livestock with thirst?” (Ex. 17:1-3) Paul shows u he is interpreting scripture from the very opening of his narrative in Chapter 10:

 

“For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers, that our forefathers were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea. They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea….Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered over the desert.” – Paul, 1 Corinthians 10:1-5

 

So who is Paul’s Christ?  Paul’s Jesus Christ is exactly what Paul interprets from scripture.  Paul finds his anointed savior in Isaiah, in Moses, he is in the wilderness, stranded in the Diaspora, an exile himself.  Paul’s Jesus was one of spiritual salvation now.  The identity of Jesus in Paul’s letters is not of a man, crucified under Pilate, born of Mary and Joseph, who walked Galilee and calmed storms.  Paul never knew of that Jesus, and never tells of us that Jesus.  If Paul believed in that Jesus, his message of the flesh would not make sense.  How could the flesh be corrupt, and nothing good can come of flesh, if his savior was of the flesh?  Of course this cannot be.  And with every account of Jesus there follows scripture.  It is not that Paul is recounting fulfilled prophecy, but rather Paul is giving us his interpretation of scripture through the new covenant of God, through his mediator Jesus Christ—his teacher of mysteries. 

 

4. SOME CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

“I, Paul, write this greeting in my own hand. If anyone does not love the Lord—a curse be on him. Our Lord has come! The grace of the Lord Jesus be with you. My love to all of you in Christ Jesus.” – Paul, 1 Corinthians 16:21-24

Paul’s identity has been indefinitely connected with his identity of Jesus.  It is a shame that this should be so.  Paul’s character is as fascinating as his identity, the identity of the period in which he lived, and even his savior’s identity.  To Paul, the salvation offered by his Jesus Christ was available at any time, to anybody with the faith to accept him.  When scholarship can stop putting on their gospel-colored glasses, and read Paul as Paul meant it to be read, Paul’s message can finally be understood.  I will leave my readers and my detractors with this short little message:  What is your goal when you read Paul?  Is it to find out his intent or to validate your own?