Paul and Mission in a Pluralistic World
The Pluralistic Environments of the Old and New Testament.
During the 1950s the Student Christian Movement series Studies in Biblical Theology published texts that highlighted the pluralistic environments of the Old and New Testaments respectively, the one written by G.E. Wright, the other by F.V. Filson. Each pointed to the distinctiveness of the faith of each testament against the religious culture to which it came. More recently, and based on up-to-date data, a collection of essays, One God One Lord in a World of Religious Pluralism (ed. B.W. Winter and A. Clarke, Cambridge: Tyndale Press, 1991), has contributed further to this subject.
Religious pluralism, which has become new to us in western culture in recent times, was not new in the broader historical background of the New Testament era. It was, in fact and in particular, a distinguishing mark of the Graeco-Roman culture of the world in which the heralds of Jesus went forth to proclaim him as the unique Lord and Christ.
Paul’s History: from Pharisee to Apostle
I suspect that for his first thirty or so years Paul had limited exposure to the religious pluralism of the Graeco-Roman world. True, he spent his first years in Tarsus in Cilicia but seems to have been shielded from Hellenistic influence in a conservatively Jewish family, perhaps through home schooling by a tutor. His practical world was probably the home and the synagogue with little exposure in Tarsian culture. By his mid-teens Paul was living in the holy city, enrolled in the academy of Gamaliel the foremost rabbi of his generation, where he would have been immersed in the judgments of the scribes. Jerusalem was indeed the ‘holy’ city, free from the evils of the Hellenistic world. Paul’s letters, written considerably later, whilst displaying a preacher’s gift for a rhetorical turn of phrase, inhabit the intellectual universe of the Greek Bible. There is no trace of the literature of the Greek classics in the letters of Paul but echoes from the Septuagint abound.
His radical redirection from attempted destroyer of the faith to its passionate preacher began to bring him into contact with Gentiles. During his so-called ‘unknown years’, the fourteen years between the Damascus ‘call’ and the Jerusalem ‘agreement’ that he should go to the Gentiles, there is evidence of his foundation of gentile churches – in Syria and Cilicia (Acts 15:23, 41). Titus, the uncircumcised ‘Greek’ who accompanied Barnabas and Paul to Jerusalem, is a prominent example of a Gentile who had become a Christian during the decade or so that Paul spent in the ‘regions of Syria and of Cilicia’ where his proclamation of the faith he had formerly attempted to destroy had come repeatedly to the attention of the churches in Judea (Gal. 1:21-23).
The big question, though, is: Were Titus and the members of the Syrian and Cilician gentile churches God-fearers or idolaters? Francis Watson argued that Paul did not begin to evangelize outright Gentiles until the journey to Cyprus, Pisidia and Lycaonia recorded in Acts 13-14, having concentrated to that point in his ministry to Jews, a conclusion readily based on evidence from the book of Acts. The early chapters of Galatians, however, strongly imply that throughout the ‘fourteen years’ Paul had been preaching the Son of God to the uncircumcised. For their part, Martin Hengel and Anna Maria Schwemer incline to the view that these Gentiles were synagogue-connected God-fearers. This would help explain why Paul was repeatedly beaten in the synagogues (2 Cor. 11:24). He asserted that the crucified Messiah, not the Law, was the true and only route to ‘life’ with God.
The evidence from Acts 15:23, 41 points conclusively to Paul’s ministry to Gentiles through his decade in Cilicia (based in Tarsus) and Syria (based in Antioch). If Hengel and Schwemer are correct – that these Gentiles were mainly God-fearers – it would mean that the Gentiles Paul met were those who had already separated from pagan pluralism in their attendance at the synagogues, adopting instead the ways of Judaism.
In this case it would mean that Paul’s first missionary foray – which was in Cyprus and Southern Galatia – was the first occasion when Paul encountered outright pagans in any number, front on.
Paul and Idolaters
Paul’s mission letters, written during the decade of the westward missions (AD 47-57) in Galatia, Macedonia, Achaia and Asia, give abundant evidence of former idolaters who were now members of his mission churches.
In Pisidia and Lycaonia (ca. 47/48)
Formerly, when you did not know God, you were in bondage to beings that by nature are no gods (theoi); but now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits (stoicheia), whose slaves you want to be once more? You observe days, and months, and seasons, and years! I am afraid I have laboured over you in vain (Gal. 4:8-11; cf. 5:20 – ‘idolatry’/eidolatria)
In Macedonia (ca. 49)
For not only has the word of the Lord sounded forth from you in Macedonia and Achaia, but your faith in God has gone forth everywhere, so that we need not say anything. For they themselves report concerning us what a welcome we had among you, and how you turned to God from idols (eido|la), to serve a living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come (1 Thess. 1:8-10)
In Corinth (ca. 50-56)
Therefore, my beloved brothers, flee from the worship of idols (eidolatreia) (1 Cor. 10:14; cf. 1 Cor. 8-10 passim). What agreement has the temple of God with idols (eido|la)?…Therefore. Come out from them, and be separate….(2 Cor. 6:16,17)
In short, the documents of Paul from the missionary decade (AD 47-57) reveal that he gathered into his churches significant numbers of idol-worshippers as well as those ‘God-fearers’ who had already left the temples to join the synagogues.
In Paul’s letters we are able to pick up references to Jews and Gentiles within the congregations of the Pauline mission.
From Galatians the many references to ‘you’ are directed to those Gentiles who have been negatively influenced by the Jewish-Christian ‘agitators’, for example, ‘I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you’ (1:6); ‘O foolish Galatians who has bewitched you?’ (3:1); ‘Formerly when you did not know God, you were enslaved to those that by nature are no gods’ (4:8); (5:7); ‘I wish those who unsettle you would emasculate themselves’ (5:12). In Galatians the ‘you’ are Gentile Galatians.
Nonetheless, buried within the text of Galatians we also find oblique references to Jews. Paul’s review of Old Testament history and promises in chapter 3 is directed to Jewish readers, as summed up in chapter 4: ‘In the same way we also, when we were children, were enslaved to the elementary principles of the world. But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons’ (4:3-4). ‘We’ in Galatians are Jews like Paul and Cephas (‘we ourselves are Jews by birth and not gentile sinners’ – 2:15) but also the Galatian Christian Jews.
First and Second Corinthians
We know that the foundation members of the church in Corinth were God-fearers and Jews. We would expect that First Corinthians would address issues that affected them, but apart from the reminder that he originally preached ‘Christ crucified’ in the synagogue – as in ‘the “Christ” [Messiah] who ‘died for our sins’ (1 Cor. 1:23; 15:3) – it is difficult to find passages that reflect Jewish issues. Wisdom from speech, porneia, idolatry, denial of end-time resurrection were issues for Gentiles. It is otherwise in Second Corinthians where part of the excursus on New Covenant ministry (3:1-18) appears to be directed to Jews who were being influenced (by the ‘peddlers’) to think that the former covenant remained in place, unabrogated. On the other hand, however, the appeal to ‘come out’ applies to those Corinthian Gentiles who continued to frequent the temples of Corinth (2 Cor. 6:14-7:1).
In Romans Paul specifically addresses Gentiles (‘I am speaking to you Gentiles’ – 11:13) and they probably were amongst ‘the strong’ in 14:1-15:7. On the other hand, he addresses those who ‘know the law’ – that is Jews (7:1) – whom also he addresses in symbolic terms as the ‘weak’ (Rom. 14:1-15:7). The greater part of Romans is Paul’s response to criticisms that emanate from from a Jewish source or sources (e.g., 3:8; 6:1; 9:1-3).
Passages in Galatians, 2 Corinthians and Romans indicate the presence of Gentiles and Jews as members of the churches of the Pauline Mission. These remind us of the pluralism of the Graeco-Roman world where Paul preached his message of Christ crucified and risen, whose members have been included within the churches (cf. Gal. 3:27-28 – ‘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 does not necessarily signal that his readers for the moment are Gentiles or Jews but they would understand who he was addressing in various parts of his letters. Today we easily miss the nuanced references to Jews and Gentiles but the original hearers of Paul’s letters would not have been in doubt.
Pluralism in Corinth
As already mentioned most references in First Corinthians relate to Gentiles. From these we have a series of social snapshots of the kind of pluralism that marked gentile behaviour in the Achaian capital. Chapters 1-4 focus on the wisdom that comes from rhetoric; from chapters 5-6 emerge of picture of Corinthian toleration of porneia and litigiousness; from chapters 8-10 the language of temples and sacrifices takes us into the world of Graeco-Roman temple worship; the prophesying and tongues-speaking in chapters 11-14 connect us with the oracular language of Delphi and the Pythian priestess; and the denial of resurrection in chapter 15 brings us into contact with Greek soul-based eschatology; chapters 1, 4 and 11 point to the deep social stratification between the ‘not many’ who were ‘haves’ and the great majority of poor free people and slaves who were the ‘have nots’ (with whom Paul identified himself). First Corinthians reveals a pluralism of beliefs and attitudes amongst the Corinthian Christians, a pluralism that mirrors the pluralism of the city.
Tourists who visit the remains of classical civilizations like Corinth or Ephesus easily have the impression of ancient societies marked by order and beauty. However, in the course of his travels in Galatia, Asia, Macedonia and Achaia Paul would have addressed people who worshipped rocks, believed trees could be gods, owned sacred animals, accepted ritual castration and participated in temple prostitution, both heterosexual and homosexual. Moreover, these were societies that crucified ‘difficult’ slaves, sanctioned bloody combats in the arenas, exposed their unwanted children to the elements and bought and sold men, women and children like cattle. The world to which the apostle Paul came preaching the gospel of Christ was a pluralistic world, both in religion and ethics. In reality it was by no means in all matters morally elevated or spiritually enlightened.
Corinth, like other cities in the Graeco-Roman world, was pluralist in religion, with ‘many “gods” and many “lords’” (1 Cor. 8:5). Pausanias, the travel writer who visited Corinth some time after Paul, describes numerous temples and shrines to a bewildering array of deities in Corinth’s public square (agora) – for Artemis, Dionysius, Fortune, Apollo, Poseidon, Aphrodite, Hermes, Zeus, Athena, Octavia the sister of Augustus.
Paul adapts the Shema’
Paul’s proposition of the uniqueness of God and of Christ that he makes in 1 Cor. 8:6 is based on the great confession in the Shema’:
Hear, O Israel, the Lord your God is one.
And you shall love the Lord your God
with all your heart, and
with all your soul, and
with all your strength
Yahweh had revealed himself to the people he chose in word and saving act and he was jealous for his name, forbidding the worship of other or alternative deities.
In First Corinthians Paul adapts the Shema’ to encompass Yahweh’s revelation of himself as the Father of Jesus his Son who is Lord.
there is one God, the Father,
from whom are all things
and for whom we exist
one Lord, Jesus Christ,
through whom are all things
and through whom we exist (1 Cor. 8:6).
Paul applies his adapted Shema’ to the pluralism of Corinth. In First Corinthians chapter 8 he reminds them of his catechesis when he established the church in Corinth.
We know that ‘an idol has no real existence’ and
‘there is no God but one’.
Paul and the Corinthians ‘know’ that no reality exists behind man-made gods; they ‘know’ that there is ‘no God but one’. Clearly, ‘There is no God but one’, is adapted from the Shema’, and is also found in various other statements in the New Testament, for example, ‘There is one God and Father of us all’, and ‘There is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus’ (Eph. 4:5; 1 Tim. 2:5).
‘There is no God but one’ also echoes Yahweh’s own self-revelation of his uniqueness in, ‘I am the Lord, and there is no other’ (Isa. 45:5). There it is affirmation clinched by denial, ‘I am the Lord, and there is no other’. In the Pauline catechesis it is reversed, ‘there is no God but one’. In pluralist Corinth, with ‘gods many and lords many’, Paul’s denial of the gods and his affirmation ‘there is no God but one’ ruled out the worship of any other deity.
That these gods are said to be ‘in heaven and on earth’ identifies them as current objects of worship. Later he will say, ‘Flee from the worship of idols (pheugete apo te|s eido|lolatrias) and ‘what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons’ (1 Cor. 10:14,19). In the face of their stubborn continuing involvement in their temples (by some Corinthians) Paul urges in the Second Letter, ‘Come out from them and be separate from them…and touch nothing unclean’ (2 Cor. 6:17). Paul regarded the worship of idols as defiling
The temple worship in question frequently involved the sacrifice of animals, which occurred on altars outside the cultic shrine. Large drains carried away the blood from these sacrifices. Moreover, cultic prostitution often occurred within the precincts of the temple. Paul urges the Corinthians to ‘flee’ from the twin and connected evils of eido|lolatria and porneia (1 Cor. 6:18; 10:14).
The gods do not exist despite the Corinthians belief that they do. They are ‘so-called gods’ or ‘said-to-be gods’. Yet though the gods do not exist the Corinthians who worship them are connected with evil spiritual forces as they pray to the effigies of Zeus, Artemis and Poseidon. They are offering sacrifices to demons (1 Cor. 10:20).
The assertion ‘there is one God, the Father…and one Lord, Jesus Christ’ declares that only the Father and the one Lord, who is his Son, are the ways men and women are to think of God, to serve God and to worship God. As Paul commented to the Thessalonians, ‘you turned to God from idols, to serve a living and true God and to wait for his Son from heaven’ (1 Thess. 1:9-10)
Against the plethora of deities in Corinth and elsewhere Paul is insisting that ‘all things’, that is, in creation and redemption, are ‘from’ the one God, the Father, but that they are ‘through’ the one Lord, Jesus the Christ. The creation is an entity because its Creator, God is a unity.
By contrast the plurality of ‘gods many, lords many’ implied not the unity of the creation, but its fundamental dissonance, its fragmented-ness.
But according to the gospel everything is ‘from’ the Father and ‘through’ the Lord. They, who together are ‘one’, are the source and means of the unity of the creation. They, who together are ‘one’, are also the source of the objectivity, the other-ness of the Creation. ‘Gods many, lords many’ was implicitly pantheistic and implied that ‘things’ were gods, to be worshipped. Polytheism and pantheism go together. But Christian monotheism de-deified the ‘things’ and put the creation at ‘arms length’ to humankind, objectifying it, making it subject to man’s enquiry, but not his worship. Here the seeds of modern science were sown in the apostolic preaching, which would begin to bear fruit in late antiquity. (See Rodney Stark, For the Glory of God, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2003).
The Unity of the God and the ethical life
First Thessalonians: Sexuality
Two passages should be connected.
…you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God,
and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, Jesus who
delivers us from the wrath to come (1:9-10).
Finally, then, brothers, we ask and urge you in the Lord Jesus, that as you received from us how you ought to walk and to please God, just as you are doing, that you do so more and more. For you know what instructions we gave you through the Lord Jesus. For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you abstain from sexual immorality; that each one of you knows how to control his own body in holiness and honour (4:1-4).
The ‘turning’ to God from the ‘many gods’ demands at the same time a radical moral ‘turning’. In the culture of ‘many gods’ there was the acceptance of many sexual partners. The temples of the many gods were the temples of multiple sexual encounters. But the ‘turning’ to the God who is one required the commitment to one heterosexual spouse and to the care of the children of that union. Closely connected to this new commitment was the ‘work ethic’ by which parents took responsibility to provide for their families.
Marital fidelity for the whole of life as an ethical response to the unity of God in creation and redemption occurs repeatedly in the Pauline corpus, no doubt reflecting Paul’s preaching and catechesis. This in turn arose from the teaching of the Messiah, Jesus.
First Corinthians: others-centred living (agape)
All behaviour now is to be others-centred, inspired by love, for the good of others and for their moral and spiritual ‘up-building’. But this is not merely to live virtuously, as a matter of cold duty. All behaviour, whether truth telling, marital fidelity, purity of speech, sobriety, respect for the powers that be, working to support one’s family, contentment (the rejection of the idolatry of covetousness), gentleness and forgiveness all flow from the new relationship with the one, true and living God as revealed in the life, ethical teaching, death and resurrection of the Son of God.
The plurality of ‘many gods’ and ‘many lords’ allowed a plurality in behaviour, a lack of consistency, except that all behaviour was self-centred, not others-centred. In Corinth each one said, ‘I am of Paul, I am of Apollos, or I am of Cephas’ (1 Cor. 1:12) and ‘All things are lawful to me…” (1 Cor. 6:12).
The word agape| was then of uncertain meaning and rare use and its practice was foreign to the pluralistic world. But in the world that was the kingdom of God this new word agape reigned supreme, based on the revelation of the One God and the One Lord. This is the antithesis of the ‘I’/‘me’ individualism in pluralistic Corinth.
The word agape and its related words fill many pages in a concordance of the Greek New Testament. Just as advent of the computer has generated new language and acronyms, so the incarnation of Christ has generated a new agape|-based language. ‘God so loved the world…’; ‘a new commandment…love one another, as I have loved you’.
It is striking that the passage where Paul affirms that there is ‘one’ Father, ‘one’ Lord in rejection of the ‘gods many, lords many’ is a passage where he affirms the indispensability of love (agape|) for the other person (1 Cor. 8:1-13).
Now concerning food offered to idols: we know that ‘all of us possess knowledge. This ‘knowledge’ puffs up, but love builds up. If anyone imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know. But if anyone loves God, he is known by God (1 Cor. 8:1-3).
‘Knowledge puffs up but love builds up’, that is, ‘builds up’ the other. The man of ‘knowledge’ in Corinth who ‘knows’ that ‘there is no God but one’ and that there are ‘no gods’ and ‘no lords’, but yet who eats food in an idol’s temple is outwardly still an idolater, still in effect an idolater, despite his theoretically true but privatively held ‘knowledge’ about God and ‘no gods’.
‘Puffed up’ by his ‘knowledge’, true as it is, it nonetheless means that he does not ‘know as he ought to know’. For to truly to ‘know’ the One God is to express that knowledge in truly loving the other person. A self-centred knowing of God – even if the knowledge is accurate – that does not love the neighbour is not ‘a knowing’ of God at all, despite the truth and accuracy of that theoretical knowledge. These are scary words for theologians and their students. The overwhelming number of German pastors contemporary with Bonhoeffer were rock solid about justification by faith but went along with the Nazis in their hatred of the Jews, in acquiescing in the ‘final solution’.
When we read First Corinthians we find there is a single Corinthian ethic underlying the many issues Paul deals with. Underlying factionalism, fornication, litigiousness, temple attendance, the eucharistic meal, tongues-speaking and resurrection denial, there is one Corinthian foible. ‘Each one of you says, I’; ‘all things are lawful for me’. Life in pluralistic Corinth was all about ‘I…me’.
The theological worldview of ‘many gods’ and the ethic of ‘me-centredness’ went together. Societies that have a worldview of ‘many gods’ and the ethic of ‘me-first’ are societies with limited future, despite their wealth and technological achievement. Dissonant plurality in theology is inevitably expressed in the dissonant ethic of selfishness and points to inevitable social fragmentation.
It is for this reason that Paul repeatedly calls his congregations to exercise ‘truth-in-love’. The Graeco-Roman context was one of endless squabbles and discord, a dissonance that was all too easy to express in the social life of the churches of Paul’s mission, but also today. Not only is this discord debilitating for a congregation’s mission to bring Christ to the world, equally it gives expression to the ego-centred ethic that is the accompaniment of the pluralistic worldview. The body of people who together confess the great catholic creeds must also be a people united in others-centred love. Not to do so is to deny the ultimate truth of those creeds.
It is striking that in Paul’s list of 15 ‘works of the flesh’ in Galatians 5:19-21, which he says are ‘evident’, no less than 8 are social sins – enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy. (Philo’s vice list has 141 items!) Paul warns the Galatians against ‘biting and devouring one another’ and he pleads with them not to become ‘conceited, provoking one another, envying one another’. Whether Paul is addressing a congregation in Galatia, Corinth, Colossae, Philippi or Rome, again and again the message is the same, his plea for unity based on love and humility. It is not just because of a shared sinful nature that he must make these pleas. It is because a pluralistic worldview implies a me-first ethical pluralism, a worldview that they claim to have abandoned.
The apostolic message directed the hearers to the One God (unity) in place of many gods (plurality); and to a single ethic, the ethic of love (agape), a way of living that is others-centred (a source of unity) in place of me-centredness (plurality, an inevitable source of division). The agape ethic is a corollary of the of the Christo-centric theology.
Agape underlies every ethical challenge Paul makes throughout First Corinthians. But it is an agape that is informed by the ultimate expression of others-centredness, the others-centredness of the Lord who was crucified for others. Agape is no mere virtue, amongst other virtues, as proposed by the ethicists of Paul’s day. This agape| was incarnated in the crucified man, the Kyrios.
The apostolic standard agape was and is a hard standard to attain and it is never fulfilled completely. Yet our best efforts, as strengthened by the Spirit of God, make a radical difference to the way Christians live against the backdrop of the way societies are. That is the power of apostolic teaching and the power of the Spirit of God.
For example, 2 Cor. 3, which teaches the ‘end’ of the Old Covenant, was surely directed to Jewish Christians. The Old Covenant was a covenant with ‘the house of Israel and the house of Judah’ (Jer. 31:31); it was not a covenant with Gentiles/the nations. The ‘new perspectives’ on Judaism and Paul imply that the covenant with Israel still stands, despite Paul’s words in 2 Cor. 3. But the covenant with Israel/Judah ‘ended’ in Christ and the coming of the Spirit. Christian Jews in Corinth should understand that culturally they may remain Jews, but theologically they may not. A true Jew is no longer identified by a circumcised foreskin but by ‘circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter [= law]’ (Rom 2:28).
D.W.J. Gill, “Behind the Classical Facade: Local Religions of the Roman Empire,” in One God One Lord, pp. 72-87.
Pausanias, Description of Greece 2.6-7.