Abstract
Campbell has tackled a foundation subject for any scholar interested in studying Paul and his writings in the historical setting of his life and mission. In his opening chapter Campbell discusses the tension between those who see Paul’s writings as theologically coherent, and those who view them as contingent on specific situations. To a certain extent Campbell cuts this Gordian knot by stating that Pauline scholars ‘tend to direct far less attention to the nature of Paul’s coherence, which can be conceived in oddly stereotypical and anachronistic terms’ (p. 9). This is a helpful insight. This leads Campbell to reject the type of approach that views certain letters as authentically Pauline simply because they are consistent with some pre-determined notion of Pauline coherence. Instead, he seeks to establish the chronology of Paul’s mission and writings, and sets himself the goal of avoiding ‘judgments concerning interpretative dimensions in Paul that we are going to reach later on’ (p. 13). In other words, Campbell seeks to establish the sequence and authenticity of Paul’s work and writings without recourse to the interpretation of the writings.
There is heavy, and acknowledged, dependence on the earlier work of John Knox in the area of Pauline chronology. Two insights are key: first a differentiation in sources that takes primary evidence (chiefly Paul’s letters themselves, rather than the narrative of Acts), and, second, the conviction that a framework for Paul’s work can be established which is free from ‘begging any key questions’ (p. 19). In the second lengthy chapter (pp. 37-121) Campbell constructs the basic ‘epistolary backbone’ of his argument. He comes to the conclusion that 1 Corinthians is Paul’s ‘letter of tears’; later that same year 2 Corinthians (a single letter) was written, and in the following year the letter to the Romans was written (p. 121). In Chapter Three, ‘Augmenting the Backbone’, Galatians and Philippians are integrated, both written in 51 CE, the same year as the Corinthian correspondence. Next Campbell turns to the Thessalonian letters. He views both letters as authentic and dates these much earlier than is traditional, suggesting ‘the composition of both shortly after 40 CE’ (p. 247). In the following chapter he argues for the authenticity of Philemon, Colossians, and ‘Ephesians’, which is placed in inverted commas because Campbell identifies it with the letter to the Laodiceans (Col. 4: 16b). These three letters are dated to 50 CE. Finally, he turns to the Pastorals, where he comes to the conclusion that these were not authored by Paul.
There is much that is rich, challenging, and genuinely thought provoking in this detailed treatment. However, the argument is not always easy to follow and will often require re-reading several times to ascertain Campbell’s point. The dense prose and lack of clear sign-posting have perhaps resulted in a more convoluted treatment than was necessary. No doubt Campbell would disagree with that, and see all the steps as essential to his unfolding argument. Notwithstanding, at times there was a sense that the case could have been put forward more effectively if it had been presented in a more succinct manner. Ultimately, this is an important book that will occasion many debates in Pauline scholarship. Moreover, the study of Paul will be enriched by this provocative re-appraisal of the chronology of the life and writings of Paul.