St. Paul Versus St. Peter: A Tale of Two Missions

Rating:
Summary: New insights on early christianity
Review: Michael Goulder is an outstanding biblical scholar, who usually writes for a scholarly audience, but this book was written for the general reader interested in the history of the Bible and of Christianity. Goulder is no Isaac Asimov, but he does manage to write a book the interested layman can understand. It requires more effort on the reader's part than it would if Asimov had written it, but the effort is still not excessive, and is well worth it.

Paul, a Jew who had been strongly opposed to the "Followers of the Way" (the proto-Christian movement within Judaism) experienced something on the road to Damascus which converted him from an opponent of the Jesus movement to an ardent supporter. Paul was convinced that Jesus' message was not just for Jews, but for all humanity. He took his mission out of Israel, where most of the people were Jews, to Turkey and elsewhere where there were few Jews. He wisely realized that few Gentiles would accept circumcision and the strict Kosher (food) laws of Judaism as a condition of joining the churches Paul was founding, so he downplayed these tough requirements, and did not seek to enforce them. Peter and Jesus' brother James, meanwhile, remained in Jerusalem and kept the Jewish Law entirely. They sent out pairs of missionaries to the churches Paul had established, and these missionaries tried to bring the far-flung churches into line with Jewish law, which Peter and James saw as essential, but which Paul saw as superseded by Jesus.

It will likely never be possible to determine which position the historical Jesus would have taken in this controversy (quite possibly somewhere between Peter and Paul), but it is clear that the Pauline position won out; it has even been suggested that Paul, rather than Jesus, was the founder of Christianity, and in a sense he surely was.

This book is a must read for anyone who wants to know and understand the beginnings of Christianity. Read it and make up your own mind!

Rating:
Summary: A Fascinating Look into the First Century, C. E.
Review: Michael Goulder is an outstanding biblical scholar, who usually writes for a scholarly audience, but this book was written for the general reader interested in the history of the Bible and of Christianity. Goulder is no Isaac Asimov, but he does manage to write a book the interested layman can understand. It requires more effort on the reader's part than it would if Asimov had written it, but the effort is still not excessive, and is well worth it.

Paul, a Jew who had been strongly opposed to the "Followers of the Way" (the proto-Christian movement within Judaism) experienced something on the road to Damascus which converted him from an opponent of the Jesus movement to an ardent supporter. Paul was convinced that Jesus' message was not just for Jews, but for all humanity. He took his mission out of Israel, where most of the people were Jews, to Turkey and elsewhere where there were few Jews. He wisely realized that few Gentiles would accept circumcision and the strict Kosher (food) laws of Judaism as a condition of joining the churches Paul was founding, so he downplayed these tough requirements, and did not seek to enforce them. Peter and Jesus' brother James, meanwhile, remained in Jerusalem and kept the Jewish Law entirely. They sent out pairs of missionaries to the churches Paul had established, and these missionaries tried to bring the far-flung churches into line with Jewish law, which Peter and James saw as essential, but which Paul saw as superseded by Jesus.

It will likely never be possible to determine which position the historical Jesus would have taken in this controversy (quite possibly somewhere between Peter and Paul), but it is clear that the Pauline position won out; it has even been suggested that Paul, rather than Jesus, was the founder of Christianity, and in a sense he surely was.

This book is a must read for anyone who wants to know and understand the beginnings of Christianity. Read it and make up your own mind!

Rating:
Summary: New insights on early christianity
Review: Michael Goulder is the most insightful voice I have encountered in the study of early Christianity. His hypothosis of two Christian churches, one headed by Peter and James in Jeruselum and the other headed by Paul during his travels is nothing short of genius. He draws almost exclusively on biblical texts to paint a picture of early Christianity struggling to remain true to its Jewish past (the Petrines) while drawing an ever-growing number of gentile followers (the Paulines). The tension in Goulder's dichotomy sheds a fascinating light on many of the more troubling passages in Acts and Paul's letters, making them instantly come into focus. This is a book which will have you wondering why you never made these connections in the first place. It will also cause you to rethink the traditional views that Paul was writing to oppose the influences of traditional Jews, gnostics, or some other faction. Goulder's insights are simply breathtaking.

Rating:
Summary: Remarkable Insight Into the First Century
Review: This little book is the most penetrating and incisive work I've come across about the very early church. History is at its best when a few straight-forward insights into well-attested sources can shift an entire historical situation into focus, and this book does just that.

Goulder starts with a fairly simple hypothesis about the gentile-focused Pauline mission and its tension with Peter, James and the other Jerusalem "pillars". The next task is simply applying "loyalty tests" to the gospels and acts -- how do they portray peter; how do they portray strict observance of the Jewish law? It's easy then to begin seeing Mark, the earliest gospel, as a fairly raw product of the Pauline school; Matthew as an adaption and expansion of Mark aimed at more Jewish sensibilities; and then Luke/Acts as the work of another Pauline attempting to reassert the Pauline theology of Mark, while incorporating and improving upon the Matthean redactions and taking a conciliatory stance toward the pillars. This isn't a book about the synoptic problem, but the insights Goulder provide here really help to illuminate his theory of Markan priority without the existence of the hypothetical "Q" document.

Some of Goulder's best observations and logical interpolations come in his analysis of the Pauline and deutero-Pauline epistles. Every problem Paul addresses in his letters comes to new life against the background of Goulder's basic hypothesis of Paul's central struggle, not with docetist and gnostic heretics, but with the Hebraic influence and ideas of Peter and James.

The closer Goulder's arguments get to the second century, the less persuasive they become, in my opinion. But they remain most thought-provoking. The book as a whole is brilliant. Many will bemoan the lack of footnotes and the failure to discuss dissenting arguments. I recall reading somewhere that Goulder planned a more scholarly version of this hypothesis, but I don't know that it ever happened. Regardless, this is a book not to miss.

Rating:
Summary: Remarkable Insight Into the First Century
Review: This little book is the most penetrating and incisive work I've come across about the very early church. History is at its best when a few straight-forward insights into well-attested sources can shift an entire historical situation into focus, and this book does just that.

Goulder starts with a fairly simple hypothesis about the gentile-focused Pauline mission and its tension with Peter, James and the other Jerusalem "pillars". The next task is simply applying "loyalty tests" to the gospels and acts -- how do they portray peter; how do they portray strict observance of the Jewish law? It's easy then to begin seeing Mark, the earliest gospel, as a fairly raw product of the Pauline school; Matthew as an adaption and expansion of Mark aimed at more Jewish sensibilities; and then Luke/Acts as the work of another Pauline attempting to reassert the Pauline theology of Mark, while incorporating and improving upon the Matthean redactions and taking a conciliatory stance toward the pillars. This isn't a book about the synoptic problem, but the insights Goulder provide here really help to illuminate his theory of Markan priority without the existence of the hypothetical "Q" document.

Some of Goulder's best observations and logical interpolations come in his analysis of the Pauline and deutero-Pauline epistles. Every problem Paul addresses in his letters comes to new life against the background of Goulder's basic hypothesis of Paul's central struggle, not with docetist and gnostic heretics, but with the Hebraic influence and ideas of Peter and James.

The closer Goulder's arguments get to the second century, the less persuasive they become, in my opinion. But they remain most thought-provoking. The book as a whole is brilliant. Many will bemoan the lack of footnotes and the failure to discuss dissenting arguments. I recall reading somewhere that Goulder planned a more scholarly version of this hypothesis, but I don't know that it ever happened. Regardless, this is a book not to miss.