Customer Reviews

Paul: A Critical Life

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

From a Pauline scholar of Murphy-O'Connor caliber, it is no surprise to find an exhaustive appraisal of the details associated with the chronology of Paul's career. Once the hard stuff is out of the way, however, Murphy-O'Connor gives his readers a fascinating glimpse into the life of Paul. Of great interest is the educational opportunities afforded to a diaspora Jew in Tarsus, the breakdown between Paul and the Antiochian church, the strategy employed by Paul in his missionary work, the precise nature of the "Judaizers" who plagued Paul in Galatia and elsewhere, and the troubled relationship of Paul to the Corinthian church. Paul emerges as passionate, occasionally biased, but always intensely involved and fascinating. References and bibiographic material abound. The bit on 2 Thessalonians is unique and well-argued. Murphy-O'Connor tries to round out Paul's career as much as possible with what can be known of Thessalonika, Ephesus, Antioch Pisidia, Philippi, and the associates involved in Paul's ministries in Asia Minor, so it offers a picture of Paul's relationships beyond the overshadowing portrait of the Corinthian correspondence. It is a book that you will go back to over the years, even if you don't agree with all of it. Enjoy.

"Paul: A Critical Life" by Murphy-O'Connor is a very detailed book written for those seeking a very detailed account of his life and work. The book focuses a lot of attention to the historical aspects of Paul, rather than focusing on his theology. However, the book does discuss the developments in Paul's theology and philosophy under the impact of historical events in his ministry.

The book uses a wide range of sources, both Christian and otherwise, along with a large selection from other scholars dealing with the same subject. Although Murphy-O'Connor uses the New Testament books, he is not shy of pointing out where the New Testament record has holes, (sometimes gaping). This is particularly in regard to the record of Luke in "Acts", which is often the source of the author's criticisms. For those who hold to the 100% veracity of the New Testament idea, this may be something of an issue.

"Paul" also gives a good variety of other scholar's opinions, and interacts well with other theories. Murphy-O'Connor has taken some trouble to build up a case for his own ideas, though he is also open and honest enough to admit where he is "merely speculating". What you end up with is a fairly solid overview of Paul's life and even his character.

A lot of the book gives a broad overview to the history and background of Paul's writing activities in relation to different Christian groups he started. This is particularly interesting, and helps give one a deeper view of the character of the man himself.

I was particular interested to note that Murphy-O'Connor describes Paul as a deeply feeling and emotional man who tended to run with whatever was foremost in his mind at any given moment. Additionally, a lot of the emotion comes through his letters, which can be missed. This was a personal insight into Paul for me that I had previously missed.

This is an interesting and valuable addition to the increasingly corpus of material on the Apostle to the Gentiles. Even for people with a broad familiarity with Paul, there should be something new in this for them. It is an insightful and enjoyable book to read. I did not find it at all dry, as one other reviewer did.

Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, Paul, A Critical Life (Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1996)

There are many decent `biographies' of the Apostle Paul, hundreds of books on various aspects of his doctrines, and thousands of commentaries, monographs, and articles on his genuine and attributed letters. Among all these, of which I can say I have barely scratched the surface, I strongly suggest that this volume is one you should read first, before you read anything else.

Since the amount of reliable biographical information on Paul is slim, and since the two primary sources, Paul's letters and Luke's book of Acts, do not always agree, it is not surprising to find the author doing quite a bit of hypothesizing on the evidence. To a great extent, this book is to Paul what the many books on the `historical Jesus' are to the Christ. It is also a very nice introduction to the lifestyle of the Greco-Roman world in the time of Paul and Jesus.

One of the first conclusions which surprised me is that the author adduces the claim that Paul and Jesus were of approximately the same age. This means that while there is no evidence that Paul met Jesus in Jerusalem, that event was not impossible. It certainly means Paul had first hand contact with those who did meet Jesus face to face.

Another interesting conclusion is the author's finding that while Paul did know and practice a manual craft, either tent-making or leather working, or both, Murphy-O'Connor concludes that Paul was not happy about having to resort to that craft to make ends meet. On the other hand, it was a very portable craft. The raw materials, canvas and hides, could be found in any larger city. All the practitioner had to do was to carry a few simple tools, an awl, a heavy curved needle, moon-shaped knife, and waxed thread. Tents and awnings were in constant demand in cities and in all seasons, not just among nomadic tribes while they were migrating.

In order to adduce as much historical material as he can out of Paul's letters, Professor Murphy-O'Connor elicits many facts about the letters which one may not notice, or even find in the commentaries on the letters. For example, he points out that Paul's first letter, 1 Thessalonians, is actually a composite of two different letters, sent at two different times. He also offers what sound like good reasons for believing that 2 Thessalonians was written by Paul and not by one of his disciples.

The author spends a fair amount of time on the letter to the Galatians, about which there are a fair number of mysteries. For example, who were the teachers who were coming in behind Paul and trying to lure the Galatians away from Paul's teaching. The answer is that it was probably missionaries from Antioch. The book gives a surprising conclusion on the church in Antioch. The author reaches the conclusion that rather than being a center for gentile Christians, the city, relatively early, was turned over to being a center for Jewish Christians, who believed in retaining circumcision, dietary laws, and other traditional Jewish practices.

Another problem with Galatians was the matter of where, in Galatia, were Paul's churches. The author reaches the conclusion that they were in the northern part of Galatia, in a region settled by Celts. This conclusion was astonishing. Not the geographical conclusion, but the social and ethnic one. This means that each and every one of Paul's churches was based in a city with a strong Gentile population sympathetic to the Roman government. Corinth and Philippi were established as `retirement communities' for Roman soldiers. Ephesus was a center of a Greco-Roman cult in Asia. Colossae was an important Gentile trading center. Thessalonica was a major Greek port in Macedonia right on the Roman road running from the Adriatic to the Bosporus.

Most of us are familiar with the importance of Galatians in shaping the doctrines of the Reformation. It was one of Martin Luther's favorite books. But how did it get that way? Once you read this, it makes all the sense in the world, but it is not something you which may occur to you on your own. It is also not something which a commentary may be inclined to cover, as it deals with the `sociology' of Paul's theology. The issue is this. By being faced with preachers of a `Jewish' flavor of Christianity to his Galatians, Paul is forced to hone his position to a finer point in order to argue it to his Galatians. In considering this point, it suddenly dawns on us that from a doctrinal point of view, one must really question whether the `Jewish Christians' really understood what this new faith was all about. If a `Christian' was firm in the belief that Jesus' sacrifice replaced the law, then why are the Jewish Christians so intent on maintaining all those signs of the covenant and the law?

The author lays out the practicality behind Paul's travels and bases of operation. His two bases, Corinth and Ephesus, were both seaports, and in most cases, travel by sea was far easier and faster than travel by land.

This book is eminently readable, and eminently scholarly at the same time. I have read other biographies of Paul which are either too arcane to speak to the layman or too simplistic to handle the details. This one does both tasks in marvelous fashion. I strongly recommend this as an introduction to understanding Paul's letters.

Anyone looking for an excellent synopsis of Paul, his travels, and spiritual growth would do well to read this book. We follow Paul as he develops his thoughts and philosophy, and as he travels throughout the Judaic world of the time. In addition, you are also given great insight into the lives of the people he meets and the travelling conditions of the times.

All in all, a fascinating insight into the mind and spirit of the man who brought Christian thought into the world.

I will not repeat all the great things already said about this fantastic book. I should only like to add that Murphy-O'Connor, without seeking directly to do this, shows how in an uncanny way Paul of Tarsus predicted how narrowly pettifoggingly legalistic Judaism would be without faith in the freedom given by Jesus. ALL the disputes about circumcision and the Law highlight how doomed and negative even the Jewish Christians led by James of Jerusalem were. It supports the view of Robert Eisenman, who writes totally from a very different perspective, that the earliest Christians without Paul would have remained xenophobic Jews doomed to be destroyed by Rome.