Abstract
In this revision of a Durham University Ph.D. thesis, Ben Dunson undertakes to solve a classic problem in modern Pauline studies—the relation between the individual and the community in Paul’s thought—by means of a targeted exegesis of Romans and a comparison to the Stoic ethics of Epictetus. Dunson’s thesis is that the individual and the community belong together in Paul’s theology; ‘there is no Pauline individual outside of community, just as there is no community without individuals at the heart of its ongoing life’ (p. 1).
The argument of the book unfolds as follows: Chapter 1 comprises a brief survey of recent scholarship and highlights what the author sees as a prevailing anti-individualism among a range of social-scientific, New Perspective, and apocalyptic interpretations of Paul. Chapter 2 reviews the influential mid-twentieth century discussion about whether Paul conceives of human persons as individual souls standing before God (so Rudolf Bultmann) or as so many ‘concrete pieces of world’ (so Ernst Käsemann). Chapter 3 presents Epictetus’s ethics as counterevidence to the view held by some Pauline interpreters that the notion of the individual is a modern invention. Chapter 4 comprises a targeted exegesis of Rom 1-4 under the rubric of characteristic individual (Rom 2), generic individual (Rom 3), binary individual (Rom 2-3), and exemplary individual (Rom 4). Chapter 5 takes the same approach to Rom 5-16, filling out the rubric with the representative individual (Rom 5), negative exemplary individual (Rom 7), somatic individual (Rom 12), and particular individual (Rom 16). Chapter 6 briefly summarizes the argument and restates the thesis.
The strengths of this book are many. It treats a classic problem in Pauline theology with exegetical precision and theological open-mindedness. It demonstrates careful engagement with a wide range of modern scholarship on the issue, German as much as English. The incisive analysis of the Bultmann-Käsemann debate is a valuable contribution to modern Forschungsbericht.
The book is liable to certain criticisms, however. While Dunson’s central claim is probably true, his way of arriving at it is not as compelling as it might be. The treatment of Epictetus is well done, but it accomplishes both more and less than Dunson needs from that chapter. The rubric of eight Pauline perspectives on the individual, while it gives order to the exegesis, does so at the expense of conceptual clarity. Dunson carefully defines each type, but their shorthand labels are less than lucid. Moreover, Dunson concedes that the types overlap with one another and that there may be more than these eight (p. 110). There is also a point of imprecision at the heart of the argument. According to Dunson, ‘The individual and the community belong together in Paul’s theology’ (p. 1). And again, ‘In Paul’s theology the individual and the community are two necessarily (and tightly) integrated concepts’ (p. 179). And again, ‘The individual and the community form an inextricable unity in Pauline theology’ (p. 182). If this claim is as important as Dunson suggests, then one might have expected a more precise account of the relation between the two concepts, something more than just their ‘belonging together’ or ‘forming a unity.’ These criticisms notwithstanding, Dunson is surely right in what he affirms: Paul addresses himself both to individual persons and to the churches of which they are part.