Abstract
“The Kingdom of God, Paul proclaimed, was at hand. His firm belief that he lived and worked in history’s final hour is absolutely foundational, shaping everything else that Paul says and does” (xi). As Paula Fredriksen astutely asks, how can Paul be so sure, especially into the mid-first century when he writes his letters (cf. Rom. 13:11–12)? To answer this question F. explores both the Jewish and Mediterranean world of Paul but with the view that Paul always remained a committed Jew so that he never denied or abandoned his native Judaism. The apocalyptic framework of Judaism combined with the apocalyptic “event” of Jesus’ resurrection reinforced the orientation of Jesus’ own proclamation that the kingdom of heaven is “at hand.” This “urgent timetable” (6) of Jesus is developed by Paul within “two generative contexts” (7): the scriptural traditions of Israel and the social context of the Greco-Roman city. Chapter 1 treats God, the nations, and Israel under the expectation of redemption. The attitude toward the nations can be both negative (judgment) and positive (partners). Chapter 2 treats both Jews “in pagan places” and Gentiles “in Jewish places” to indicate the close interaction. “Pagan” implies religion whereas Gentile is more neutral, but both translate ta ethne.
Chapter 3, after reviewing who Paul was and how we know it, considers two crucial issues: “circumcising missions” on the part of Jews and why Paul persecuted followers of Christ and why he himself was persecuted. There is no hard evidence of active proselytizing and while some foreigners became Jews before the End (Isa. 56:3–7), inclusion at the end of the age does not mean conversion (75, 76). Gentiles remain gentiles and Jews remain Jews but both worship the God of Israel. Various reasons are given for persecution (83–87) but Paul was persecuted by both Jews and Romans because he insists on turning away from pagan gods to the God of Israel (1 Cor. 8:5–6). Hence, all the actors in Paul’s social world, both human and divine, are key actors in the final apocalyptic battle (1 Cor. 15:24–26). Chapter 4, in turn, discusses Paul’s attitude toward the Law. “Paul speaks both positively and negatively about the Law. . . . As a point of orientation for any interpretation, though, the audience of Paul’s remarks must always be kept in mind. All of his extant letters are addressed to gentiles” (130). Paul sees the Law as a curse for gentiles who without Christ cannot live according to its demands (Rom. 7) but who enabled by the Spirit (Rom. 7:24–5; 8:1–2) can do what the Law requires. Thus Paul rejects Judaizing that insists that gentiles become Jews through circumcision but affirms Judaism for the Law is holy, just, and good (Rom. 7:12). The gentiles are to live as hagioi observing especially the ten commandments (118), summarized by Jesus as love of God and love of neighbor.
The “drive wheel of this study” is Paul’s sense of urgency, which is addressed in chapter 5. Paul’s use of titles such as christos and kurios function not in an ontological sense (“as a metaphysical divine entity”) but “as an indicator of Jesus’ royal, Davidic, messianic role—thus, his status as God’s eschatological champion” (145). F. analyzes Phil. 2:6–11 and Rom. 1:3–4 as focused upon “the return of the conquering Messiah” (143). The distinction between resurrection from (ek) the dead referring to Jesus and resurrection of the dead referring to the final resurrection at the end is often missed (143; citing 1 Cor. 15:12–21 using both expressions). Translations can often be misleading in this regard. Finally, the analysis of Rom. 2–7 as compared to Rom. 9–11 is insightful and makes good sense of both. F. interprets the first as addressing a “fictive interlocutor” who is a Judaizing gentile, one “who calls himself a Jew” (2:17; 156). This helps to illuminate Paul’s rhetorical devices, for example, in Rom. 7. Rom. 9–11 on the other hand is speaking of the actual Israel of the Law and the promises but has not yet arrived at the end (telos) of the Law that is the acceptance of Christ. F. concludes: “By working to turn pagans from their gods to his god, Paul worked as well, beneath a canopy of biblical promises, for the redemption of his own people” (166).
F. offers a wonderful study with copious notes and abundant bibliography that inspires the reader to reconsider many traditional assumptions about Paul. I have highlighted some of the insights but the argument is cogent and needs to be read in its creative sequence. I highly recommend it for anyone interested in the original Paul as the pagans’ apostle.