Transcript Acts – second lecture: the taming of Paul?

Acts 10-15: the taming of
Paul?
And the smoothing of relations
between Judaism, gentiles?
But first, Caravaggio again
The conversion of St. Paul, in Santa Maria
del Popolo, in Rome
Rare moment in the NT
• We can compare two independent
accounts of the same event.
• Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians speaks of
encounters – and disagreement -centered on the circumcision question.
• So does Acts 15.
• But there are important differences.
• Which can give us insight into the
purposes of Acts.
Paul’s account in Galatians (written
in mid ’50s)
• Apparently someone (from Jerusalem) has persuaded the
Galatians that they should observe circumcision, keep kosher.
• And Paul is furious.
• Insists first on the absolute independence of his proclamation of
gospel: 1: 16.
• “I did not confer with any human being.”
• Only later did I briefly confer with Cephas (Peter) and James.
• Then 14 years later he went up to Jerusalem.
• Paul insists that he is the one who has brought the gospel to
the gentiles.
• In a “private meeting” he spelled out his gentile gospel for the
“acknowledged leaders” [Jerusalem leaders, presumably
James, Peter, John].
• Paul didn’t back down for a second on the circumcision issue.
• And finally James, Cephas/Peter, and John made up with him
and let him go to the Gentiles, while they work with the Jewish
believers (“the circumcised”).
But now the agreement has come
unraveled
• Cephas, Paul says, has acted hypocritically on the issue
of kosher food; he ate non-kosher before, but now he’s
afraid of the circumcision group.
• So how can they demand kosher and circumcision of
gentiles, when Cephas has lived like a gentile?
• So now the Jerusalem people, or at least Cephas, have
apparently backed away from the previous agreement on
circumcision.
• And want the Galatians to accept circumcision.
• “You foolish Galatians!” What are you thinking?!
• Paul forbids them from accepting circumcision.
• It’s belief, faith, that matters, not fulfilling Law.
The opening to the gentiles
• Historically this was Paul’s work.
• But the narrative of chapter 10 of Acts assigns the
opening to Peter.
• Story of Cornelius – does it make us recall the centurion
of the gospel: Luke 7: 1-10?
• Caesarea, a Roman seaside town, Joppa a Jewish town.
• Double visions.
• Peter’s is a vision of non-kosher food.
• Peter goes to Caesarea (as Jesus had accompanied the
centurion’s men), but now enters a gentile house.
• Peter announces that Jesus appeared “not to all the
people” but only to disciples.
• But now all the prophets testify that everyone who
believes receives forgiveness.
• And gentiles are baptized! A first in Luke’s account of
things.
Luke’s revisionist account
• Opening to gentiles is embodied in a story of two
visions, that of Cornelius and that of Peter.
• Peter’s vision is understood to end the role of
the Law and to open The Way to gentiles.
• Peter is the leader in this new direction (10: 34ff,
47ff).
• Peter defends the new position to Jerusalem
authorities (“circumcision believers” 11: 2).
• And retells the narrative of his vision: 11: 4ff.
• And they easily accept his interpretation: 11: 18.
Paul and Peter
• Acts 15 tells of a meeting in Jerusalem, presumable the
same event reflected in Galatians.
• Paul and Barnabas have “no small dissension” (15:2)
with Judean group insisting on circumcision.
• And in Jerusalem “some believers . . . Pharisees” agree
with Judean group (15:5).
• But Peter easily agrees with Paul’s position (15: 10-11).
• And James makes the final statement: 15: 19.
• Only requirement is abstention from “things polluted by
idols,” fornication, and “whatever has been strangled and
from blood.”
• No requirement of circumcision.
• Everything concluded peaceably.
The effect of Luke’s retrospective
account
• The “opening to the Gentiles” is now initiated by Peter, and only
secondarily by Paul.
• Paul’s anger is reduced to one verse (15: 2) and placed before the summit
in Jerusalem.
• Barnabas and Paul simply tell their story (Acts 15: 12).
• Paul’s role in the council in Jerusalem is diminished – it’s Peter who
speaks, James who decides.
• Barnabas and Paul simply sent off with confirming delegation of Jerusalem
people (15: 22ff) and a letter confirming decision.
• But in Galatians, Paul’s anger had continued – no sign that he ever made
up with Peter and others who wanted circumcision.
• Look at Galatians 5: 12. Paul wishes the circumciser’s knives might
circumcise themselves – and worse!
• Luke has given readers a story of the resolution of a tense history, one
that reduces Paul’s role – and his bitterness and anger
• -- in favor of a narrative of smooth unfolding of the “opening to the
Gentiles.”
• In Chapter 16 Luke even says that Paul had Timothy circumcised as a
concession to Jewish believers.
• Does the Paul of Galatians suggest he would ever make such a
Significance of Galatians
•Begins with the issue of circumcision, kosher.
•But moves to larger theoretical question of the nature
of identity, faith and law.
•Works toward a larger universalism.
•“No longer Jew and Greek, no longer slave or free, no
longer male and female” (3:28).
•“Law” – the Law of Israel – is no longer binding on
believers: 3:10-18.
•The original purpose of Law: Paul’s intellectual
challenge.
•It was added “because of transgressions”
•But temporary – “until the offspring” (Christ).
But the divisive character of Paul’s
position
•His “allegory” at 4:22-26.
•How does this revise the actual Genesis
story?
•Israel takes it descent from Abraham and
Sarah -- not from Hagar!
•This allegory would be deeply offensive to
Jews – and Jewish Christians.
•And Paul himself will later revise it when he
re-uses the allegory in Romans 4:1-25. (See
also Romans 11, where he reconciles himself
to Israel’s salvation.)
Acts and the “historical Paul”
•Acts seems to tame or reconcile the Paul
of Galatians.
•He has to share his role as apostle to
gentiles with Peter.
•And he is shown to make up with Peter
and the Jerusalem group.
•But perhaps this is what Paul himself will
do in his letter to the Romans.