 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
[ 48 ] the rise and fall of soul and self
Paul’s universalism prevailed over James and Peter’s Judaic nationalism, thanks
in part to the 70 c.e. destruction by the Romans of the Temple in Jerusalem.
That event left the
Jerusalem Christian community in disarray. Previously, the
fledgling movement had been directed and controlled by the Jerusalem commu-
nity, which was the unique source of authority in faith and discipline. After-
ward, Christian life was organized and directed by churches in Rome, Antioch,
Ephesus, and Alexandria. The consequences of this shift of power, not only for
Christians at the time but for the rest of human history, were momentous.
Paul, a well-educated Hellenistic Jew, had in his early adulthood been an
enthusiastic persecutor of Christians. He converted to Christianity on the road to
Damascus, when he had a vision of the resurrected Christ. Subsequently he became
an equally ardent defender of Christianity. In Paul’s view, Jesus was a preexistent
divine being sent into the world to rescue humankind from its state of spiritual
decay, which Paul thought was due to enslavement by demonic forces that ruled
the lower universe. He claimed that it was primarily these demonic forces, rather
than the Romans, who were responsible for the death of Jesus, who by his death
and resurrection had saved humanity. In addition, Paul believed that Jesus as
Christ might return at any moment: “We who are alive, who are left, shall be
caught up together with them [that is, the resurrected dead] in the clouds to meet
the Lord in the air” so that “we shall always be with the Lord.”
8
Although Paul
speaks highly of the church as an institution, he thought that the world itself was
fast approaching its end and, hence, did not expect the church to last for long.
Paul seems to have known a fair amount of Greek philosophy. Yet he went out
of his way to disavow any use of it, declaring that he was not going to adorn his
account with “persuasive words of wisdom.” He said that his purpose was to implant
in his listeners a “faith” that is based not on “human philosophy,” but on the “power”
and “wisdom of God.”
9
A case can be made that the Corinthians to whom Paul was
preaching this message were trying to understand his ideas about human survival
of bodily death in terms of Plato’s ideas and that Paul resisted this Platonic
interpretation.
10
For the Corinthians, as for Plato, the “inward man” (es-anthr-pos ) was a term
used for “reason” (nous), the divine and immortal part of humans that should be
nourished by education and learning.
11
Paul rejected this idea.
12
In Paul’s view,
resurrection of the person and resurrection of the body are one and the same:
“Before God there is no naked soul, only whole persons: thus the person is called
upon to make himself pleasing to God, a task of the whole man.”
13
Paul was
interested in developing not reason but receptivity, that is, such faculties as con-
science and passive understanding. In opposition to Plato, this is what he called
the “inward man.” This orientation is related to Paul’s view that one does not
 |