Chapter VI The Aftermath of the Antioch Incident

262 Pages·2014·8.42 MB·English

Durham E-Theses
Paul, Antioch, and Jerusalem: a study in relationships
and authority in earliest Christianity
Taylor, Nicholas Hugh
How to cite:
Taylor, Nicholas Hugh (1990) Paul, Antioch, and Jerusalem: a study in relationships and authority in
earliest Christianity, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online:
http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/5959/
Use policy
Thefull-textmaybeusedand/orreproduced,andgiventothirdpartiesinanyformatormedium,withoutpriorpermissionor
charge,forpersonalresearchorstudy,educational,ornot-for-pro(cid:28)tpurposesprovidedthat:
• afullbibliographicreferenceismadetotheoriginalsource
• alinkismadetothemetadatarecordinDurhamE-Theses
• thefull-textisnotchangedinanyway
Thefull-textmustnotbesoldinanyformatormediumwithouttheformalpermissionofthecopyrightholders.
PleaseconsultthefullDurhamE-Thesespolicyforfurtherdetails.
AcademicSupportO(cid:30)ce,DurhamUniversity,UniversityO(cid:30)ce,OldElvet,DurhamDH13HP
e-mail: [email protected]: [phone]
http://etheses.dur.ac.uk
2
Abstract
Nicholas Hugh Taylor
PAUL, ANTIOCH, AND JERUSALEM
A Study ir\ Relationships and Authority in Earliest Christianity
University of Durham Ph.D. thesis 1990
Paul's life and work, including his relationship with the Jerusalem church,
were dynamic, rather than having been predetermined in his conversion. The
Antiochene church was crucial to Paul's development, to a degree not previously
appreciated.
Little is known of the years following Paul's conversion, other than it was
unsettled, and included travels and sojourns in Arabia, Damascus, Jerusalem,
and Tarsus. The encounter with the Jerusalem church did not result in a stable
relationship or social integration.
It was at Antioch that Paul was first fully incorporated into a Christian commu
nity, from which he derived his dyadic identity, and later his apostolic commission.
His relationship with the Jerusalem church consisted in corporate participation
in the noivwvta. between the churches of Jerusalem and Antioch. In this context,
Paul joined Barnabas in defending the Antiochene gospel of uncircumcision, and
not his own theology or apostleship, at the Jerusalem conference.
The Antioch incident resulted in Paul's separation from the Antiochene church,
and exclusion from its KOIVUVLOL with the Jerusalem church. His independent min
istry followed, during which he developed his conception of apostleship indepen
dent of human authority, in which his self-identity is bound up with the gospel, in
response to his isolation, and loss of dyadic identity and apostolic commission.
Paul sought to end his isolation through reconciliation with the Antiochene
church, and, through its KOLVcuvia, with the Jerusalem church. This was the object
of the collection, but the crisis in Corinth delayed completion, requiring Paul to
convey his offering separately. His implicit claim to KOIVUVUX accordingly became
overt, and the collection became the basis, rather than a correlative obligation,
of the relationship. This jeopardized the acceptability of Paul's overtures, and,
while his reception is uncertain, the journey occasioned his arrest, and ended his
missionary career.
PAUL, ANTIOCH, AND JERUSALEM
A Study in Relationships and Authority
in Earliest Christianity
by
Nicholas Hugh Taylor
MA
The copyright of this thesis rests with the author.
No quotation from it should be published without
his prior written consent and information derived
from it should be acknowledged.
A Thesis Submitted in Fulfilment of
the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in the University of Durham
October 1990
m\
2 5 APR
in memoriam
Commander
PATRICK HUGH BISSET TAYLOR
OBE DL RN
19.2.1916 - 30.7.1989
Copyright © 1990 by Nicholas Hugh Taylor
The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be
published without Nicholas Hugh Taylor's prior written consent and information
derived from it should be acknowledged.
3
I confirm that no part of the material offered has previously been submitted
by me for a degree in this or in any other University.
Nicholafe/rlugh Tayl
2 October 1990
4
Contents
Preface 7
Introduction 10
Part I PAUL'S CONVERSION AND THE BEGINNINGS OF HIS
CHRISTIAN CAREER 55
1 Paul's Conversion, and Association with the Church of
Damascus 57
1.1 The Circumstances of Paul's Conversion 58
1.2 Arabia and Damascus 62
2 Paul's Initial Contact with the Jerusalem Church 70
Part II PAUL'S WORK IN AND FROM ANTIOCH 79
3 Barnabas and Paul, and the Mission from Antioch 81
4 The Question of the Law, and the Jerusalem Conference . . 88
4.1 Circumstances giving rise to the Conference 89
4.2 The Conduct of the Conference 95
4.3 The Ruling of the Conference 101
4.3.1 The Applicability of the Law for Gentile Christians 102
4.3.2 The Missionary Work of the two Churches 103
4.3.3 The Obligations accepted by the Antiochenes 107
5 Peter and Paul at Antioch 113
5.1 Circumstances giving rise to the Confrontation 114
5.2 The Position and Conduct of the Parties 117
5.2.1 The Delegation from James 117
5.2.2 Peter 1-20
5.2.3 Barnabas and the Antiochene Christians 123
5.2.4 Paul 124
5.3 The Consequences of the Incident 127
5.4 Excursus : The Apostolic Decree 129
Part IIPAUL'S INDEPENDENT MISSION 132
6 The Aftermath of the Antioch Incident 136
6.1 Contact between Paul and the Jerusalem Church 136
6.2 The Evidence of I Thessalonians 142
6.3 The Evidence of Galatians 145
6.4 Paul's Antagonists in Galatia 158
6.5 Paul's Preaching in Corinth 163
7 The Return to Antioch 169
7.1 The Evidence of I Corinthians 170
5
7.2 The Evidence of Romans 180
7.3 The Collection 183
8 The Final Years 191
8.1 Paul's Opponents in Corinth 192
8.2 The Delivery of the Collection 198
8.3 Excursus : The Evidence of Philippians 202
Conclusions 207
Bibliography 215
6
Preface
The question of Paul's relationship with the Jerusalem church has been of
interest to me since, as a child, hearing Gal.2 read in church. The subject, how
ever, was slow to enter my academic work. I recall two or three undergraduate
papers upon which the Jerusalem conference and incident at Antioch impinged,
but it was not until I came to Durham, and then in an unpremeditated manner,
that I began to give the matter a systematic treatment, and it has all but domi
nated my thoughts for the last three years. The purpose of this thesis, however,
is not to bring to fulfillment a childhood interest, but to explore, and hopefully
to illuminate, an issue that is crucial not only for New Testament studies as a
topic of interest and controversy in its own right, but also for questions regard
ing ecclesiastical relations today. The scope of this study cannot feasibly include
discussion of the latter aspect, much as it is of concern and interest to me, and
of pressing relevance in contemporary Christianity. It is necessary in this work
to concentrate on the scholarly issues, concerning the historical and sociological
issues surrounding Paul's relationship with the Jerusalem church. In this I hope to
draw attention to the under-appreciated role of the church of Antioch in Paul's life,
and to locate Paul's apostolic self-conception in its social and historical context.
I shall seek to demonstrate that, if the significance of the Antioch church is more
fully acknowledged, our perception of Paul becomes historically more plausible,
and sociologically more-comprehensible. The author and object of much-polemic
and iconography becomes recognizable as a human being who acquired an awesome
sense of vocation, rather than a superhuman being with either a superhuman ego
or a superhuman destiny.
I write this Preface four years to the day since commencing studies in Durham,
and look back on a period in my life which has been both happy and productive.
Many thanks are due to my supervisor, Professor James Dunn, for his critical but
sympathetic scrutiny of the successive drafts of papers, some of which have even
tually found their way into this thesis. Thanks too to Mrs Meta Dunn, a gracious
hostess on numerous occasions. Other members of the Department of Theology
have also read drafts of sections of this thesis, and thanks are due particularly to
Dr George Dragas, Mr Stephen Barton and Dr Andrew Chester (now of Cambridge
University), and also to Professor James Beckford, formerly of the Department of
Sociology and now of Loyola University, Chicago, for their interest and encour
agement. A special word of appreciation is due also to Mrs Margaret Parkinson,
7