What Would Christianity Be Like Without Paul?

The influence of Pauline theology upon present-era Christianity is so overwhelming that it is difficult to conceive of the faith even existing sans Paul. It can be observed as typical in many contemporary Bible study groups that Paul's writings will receive more attention and authority than the teachings of Jesus as recorded in the four Gospels. What would Christianity be like without Paul?

A clue can be found in Paul J. Achtemeier's book, The Quest for Unity in the New Testament Church (Fortress, 1987). Achtemeier suggests that Paul "... was not the conquering theological hero of the early church which Protestants have made of him since the Reformation. Rather, he has appeared to be the one who lost in the struggle to influence the theological mind of the early church" (p. 79).

Achtemeier presents an hypothesis that counters the traditional interpretation that the Council in Jerusalem described in Acts 15 resolved the dispute between Paul and the Jerusalem apostles over the matter of Jewish legal requirements upon gentile believers. Achtemeier does not believe Paul and the Jerusalem church ever attained unity together after the council. Paul continued to resolutely cling to his conviction that gentile believers were free from even the minimal requirements imposed by the Council, that to accept such requirements legalistically would be a denial of the all-sufficiency of salvific grace of Christ. The Jerusalem church, headed by James, was just as adamant. As Jewish believers, they could not bear to relinquish the Mosaic law; they re-validated the Leviticus commands for gentile converts to Christ.

Achtemeier claims that it was Paul's reputation, rather than his writings, that the Church was to give prominence to for the next several centuries. The battle for theology was won by James and the Jerusalem church. "To that extent the dispute at Antioch meant that an interpretation of the faith other than Paul's would become normative for some fourteen centuries" (p. 62) ... at least until an obscure, depressed monk named Luther read in a passage in Paul's letter to the Romans that "...the just shall live by faith."

II

To draw out Achtemeier's conclusions, we might state that Christianity prior to the dawn of the 16th century was non-Pauline. We would therefore need only to differentiate between pre-reformation and post-reformation theology and practice (filtering out certain historical considerations), to see what Christianity without Paul would be like.

Paul emphasized in numerous texts a priesthood of believers [Eph. 4:11-13; 1 Cor. 12; Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11-12; Rom. 3:3-13; etc.]. Judaism was essentially a religious class system. Professional religionists (priests, levites) were distinct from other people in authority to understand, interpret, and conduct religious affairs. One might presume the early Jerusalem church continued this mindset, and thus, if their theology did prevail as Achtemeier suggests, church history would continue the course of hierarchical religious specialists.

Indeed, Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholicism (and close spin-offs such as Anglicanism) have maintained a priestly class in sharp distinction to a laity. In contrast, reformation churches (protestant) influenced strongly by Pauline theology have had significantly more lay involvement with less (and in some cases, minimal) clergical centrality and function. One might observe, although less strikingly, an increased participatory role for woment co-existent with men in the Pauline-influenced reformation churches (protestant).

Another related significant aspect, congruent with this line of reasoning, involves the use of ritual. Eastern and Catholic churches intensively utilize ritual. Protestant churches by contrast utilize relatively little. One might conjecture that Paul minimized ritual during his preaching among the gentiles as detraction from the sufficiency of Christ alone for salvation, while Jerusalem Church christianity, proximate to the Temple and its cult, contained cultic theology and practice.

To summarize, Christianity without Paul would look much like contemporary Eastern and Catholic churches — emphasis on a priestly intermediary and intercessory class; cultic ritual; importance of ceremonies, special days, dietary observances [see Paul's warning, Col. 2:16]; high importance of shrines, temples, "holy" buildings; works of penitence for absolution; and centralized ecclesiastical authority and apostlicity.

Nevertheless, many protestant churches still only go so far with radical Pauline theology. My conjecture is that purer Pauline forms are to be found in some groups within the house church movement.

III

Besides the Pauline theology which was to kick in to major play beginning in the 1500's, Paul made significant contributions to the development of early Christianity. Most significant was his pioneering role as a missionary. Paul established churches which would each develop its own leadership and consequent autonomy from centralized control; personality and characteristics which would reflect the cultural and distinctiveness of the geographical setting; a willingness to contribute financially to other groups; missionary zeal of their own; and a charismatic style of corporate working.

Of course, the distinctiveness of Paul's missionary work was in its effectiveness with gentiles. This was not necessarily Paul's preference — he always sought first of all to win Jews to faith in Christ. Nonetheless, Paul broke through many barriers (particularly Jewish legalistic requirements) to bring Christ to the gentiles.

Even though Paul might not have been fully successful in preventing legalism from entering into Church theology, he likely moderated that development from becoming full-blown. After all, Paul did argue persuasively and effectively to keep full-blown Jewish law, such as circumscision, from being imposed upon gentile believers. If Paul had lost this argument, in all liklihood, Christianity would not have taken root among gentiles, and could consequently have dissipated as one of many esoteric Jewish sects destined for obscurity.

Paul was a hellenist Jew, a pharisee, and a Roman citizen. Within this potent brew, Paul combined zeal for God, a world view encompassing intellectual and philosophical sophistication, and an esteem for social order and proper authority. This combination certainly must have facilitated within Paul's lifetime the introduction and maturation of the gospel faith from an obscure Jewish sect into a world religion comprised primarily of gentiles throughout much of the Roman world, a phenomenon which would continue to gain ascendancy even to this present day.

Finally, in conclusion, mention must be made of the theology of grace so core to the heart of Paul's preaching. Without Paul's incessant press for the message of grace, Christianity night have been totally swallowed up by legalism. Throughout the centuries churches have often become ossified in tradition, regulation, and works justification. Paul's message of grace, contained in the canonical works, always stands poised to detonate paralysis and cold religiosity with the healing, saving, empowering message of grace.

*********

How Did the Church Respond to the Delay of the Parousia?

During the last two decades of the first century the Christian movement faced new challenges and issues. By then, most of the eyewitnesses to the ministry of Jesus and to the extraordinary miracles of the early church were dead. The early church had anticipated an imminent Parousia, certainly within their lifetime. This delay of the coming again of Jesus had significant theological and ecclesiastical ramifications. The church began to prepare itself for "the long haul," that is, to set up more structured church protocol to ensure stability and continued transmission and maturation of the faith for future generations.

One of several lines of criticism which disputes authorship of Paul to the pastoral epistles (1,2 Timothy; Titus) is that these epistles clearly indicate a sense of church permanency instead of the sense of urgency and church temporality that is prevalent in the letters of undisputed Pauline authorship. (Colossians and Ephesians, of disputed Pauline authorship, also show both high christology and cosmology as well as exhortation to church maturation, indicating a possible later date of their writing than of Paul's time.)

Indicative, too, of reaction to the Parousia delay was movement from highly charismatic, communistic church communities to more formal, standardized units. The Didache bears this out, as also do the writings of early church "fathers" of the next century. In other words, the early church stressed an all out thrust to witness and evangelize. Marriage, children, employment, material possessions were considered encumbrances to this all-out task — Christ was to return any day! Yet with the delay of the Parousia, Christians began to get on with their lives, marrying, begetting children, and working in business and employment. The church shaped itself around the necessities of daily human living.

Another significant issue facing the second generation church was that of persecution. Although sporadic at the beginning, persecution became increasingly commonplace toward the end of the century as its impact both to Roman society and Jewish religion intensified. Prosyletism was illegal under Roman law; only Judaism was exempted. As the church increasingly became predominantly gentile, and the connecting threads with Judaism more tenuous, Christians came under persecution for their missionary zeal.

Furthermore, Christians refused to acknowledge the deification of the Roman Emperor. Although this cult had not fully developed to the extent seen in later decades with its even more intense persecution, Domitian clearly was antagonized by the existence of "atheistic" Christians, and had many put to death. Thus, the attitude of the earliest church as one of support for the governing authorities (Rom. 13) changed in a sense to an attitude that the state incarnated demonic opposition to God (Rev. 13).

The increasing schism between Christians and Jews further fomented persecution and division. Christians prosyletizing Jews could be exposed by Jewish leaders to the Roman authorities.

Of considerable significance, too, was the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 AD and the subsequent Diaspora of Jews. With Jerusalem no longer a central base, gentile Christianity further developed apart from the historic Jewish roots.

By the end of the century, heresies were attacking the church with significant effect. Indeed, many speculate that a major reason for the institutionalization of the church was to counter heresy. Although false teachers had existed from the beginning, they could be countered directly by apostolic authority. With the original apostles (and Paul) gone, authoritative doctrine needed to be established to stabilize and defend the church against error. Much of church work over the next several centuries would involve promulgation of orthodox doctrine.

A major emerging heresy was docetism, a precursor of second century gnosticism. Docetism taught that Jesus had only seemed to be in a human body. This exaltation of the spiritual and denigration of the physical realm was emphatically denounced by orthodox Christians writings, such as in 1 John.

Finally, the continued growth of the church, both numerically and geographically, necessitated changes. Foremost in significance perhaps was the writing down of oral stories into what we know as the Gospels, and the preservation of important letters and writings such as of Paul. The Bible as we know it did not take final shape for several centuries, but circulating writings were making a significant impact by the end of the first century.

In conclusion, the church at the close of the first century was a growing church throughout the Roman empire, under persecution, fighting for doctrinal purity, and becoming institutional as a way to cope with the delay of the parousia.

********