Scripture ‘Reading’ and Identity Formation in Paul: Paideia among Believing Greeks Paul and Scripture Seminar—SBL November 2006 Diana M. Swancutt “I have applied all this to myself and Apollos for your sake, that you may learn by our example (e0n h9mi~n ma/qhte) not to go beyond what is written (to\ mh\ u9pe\r a# ge/graptai)”—1 Corinthians 4:6 The authors of the pastoral epistles repeatedly characterize Paul not just as a herald and messenger of the good news (Rom. 1:1, 10:15), but also as a teacher of the gospel to non-Jews. As 1 Tim 2:7 puts it, “For this I was appointed a herald and apostle…, a teacher of nations in faith(fulness) and truth” (dida/skaloj e0qnw~n e0n pi/stei kai\ a0lhqei/a|; cf. 2 Tim 1:11). The letters also depict Paul’s instruction to the gentiles not simply as a proclamation of the gospel but as an “education” or paidei/a in faith that was central to believers’ formation. The Christian life is called a “teaching in piety” (1 Tim. 6:3), a “(gymnasium) training in piety” (1 Tim.4:7; gu/mnaze de\ seauto\n pro\j eu0se/beian), and the “government of God in faith” (1 Tim. 1:4; oi0konomi/an qeou~ th\n e0n pi/stei) based on “good instruction” (th~j kalh~j didaskali/aj; 1 Tim. 4:6). 1 Finally, the epistles characterize the scriptures as the basis of this education. Listen to the author of 2 Timothy 3:10-17 mime “Paul” to this effect in his instruction to Timothy on how to be a good pedagogue: “Now you have observed my teaching (didaskali/a), my conduct…Now you, [Timothy] continue in what you have learned (e!maqej) and believed, knowing from whom you learned it and how from childhood you have been acquainted with the sacred writings which are able to instruct you for salvation (sofi/sai ei0j swthri/an) through the faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, reproof, correction, and training in righteousness (pro\j didaskali/an, pro\j e0legmo/n, pro/j e0pano/pqhsin, pro\j paidei/an th\n e0n dikaiosu/nh|), that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” These terms and others mentioned elsewhere in the Pastorals (didaskali/a, e0legxoj, o9 maramuqh/tikoj, para/klhsij) are used with relative consistency among Greek and Roman philosophers to refer to distinct types of instruction that together comprise a paidei/a in virtue.2 Authors of the Pastorals redeploy these terms—probably without direct knowledge of their technical distinctions--to depict the Pauline way of life as an “education in righteousness” that sprang from instruction in the wisdom of scripture.3 In short, the Pastoral Epistles evoke Paul’s authority as teacher of the 1 For paidei/a, see 1 Tim. 1:20; 2 Tim. 2:24; Titus 2:11-12; and the citation of 2 Tim. 3:10-17 below. 2 See Epictetus, Disc. 3.23, 33-37; Seneca Ep. Mor. 95.1, 64-66. 3 So, e.g., “Paul” in Titus 2.1, 12, 15 tells Timothy to “teach what befits sound instruction,” to “exhort [paraka/lei] and reprove [el! egxe] with all authority,” in order that he can “train [paideu/ousa]” believers “for salvation”--to live the cardinal virtues “with self-restraint [swfro/nwj], upright [dikai/wj], and pious lives [eu0sebw~j].” Cf. 1 Tim 4:11-16, 6:2, 2 Tim 2:24-25, 4:2-3. The result is proko/ph or “progress,” which in nations to define the Christian life as a high-status, ‘philosophic’ education in righteousness that was based in large part on the communal and life-long reading, exhortation, and teaching of sacred texts (1 Tim. 4:13).4 The deutero-Pauline epistles portray Paul’s mission similarly, as an education of the nations, while also highlighting its aim: the ethnic transformation of the “nations” into the “one new man” (Eph. 2:15; 4:13), the collective body of the (Jewish) Messiah that erased the division between Jew and Greek. In Ephesians, “Paul’s best disciple” asserted that Christ’s body constituted the commonwealth of Israel within which gentiles had been made citizens (Eph. 2:11-22).5 The gospel is therefore the “word of truth” whose paideutic instruction helps transform gentiles from their former state as “children” influenced by every worldly faux-wisdom into “men” educated in the wisdom of his mysterious will—“perfect men” who attain knowledge of the Son and reach “the fullness of Christ” (ei0j a!ndra te/leion; 4:11-16).6 The ethnic character of the education logic behind the (post-)Pauline gospel explains “Paul’s” moral exhortation to the Ephesians not to live like the “nations” they formerly were, but to take up a different training, the renewal of the “spirit of their minds” (4:23) in the wisdom and knowledge of Christ (1:17-18). Rather than practicing debauchery and living in the “futility of their minds,” because they “did not so learn Christ” (4:20-21, 5:15-18), “Paul’s” former-gentiles were to practice a different ethnic paidei/a, one that comprised: the “imitation of God” (5:1); living as Spirit-filled sages (so/foi); speaking to fellow believers in “Psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs” (5:19)7; and bringing children up in the “discipline and instruction of the Lord,” as fathers do with their sons (e0n paidei/a| kai/ nouqesi/a kuri/ou; 6:4). In sum, church leaders in the Pauline tradition emphasized the centrality of home-based and communal scriptural instruction to their full ethnic transformation into the commonwealth of Israel. The earlier epistle to the Colossians contains these same themes, while also clarifying the crucial, ethnic “us”-versus-“them” dynamic that empowers this Roman Stoic parlance designated those who were on the path to virtue. In 2 Tim 4:15, it refers to Timothy’s formation, his character development as a mature person of Christ. 4 Note that it does so without ever citing scripture, a methodological issue perhaps worth discussing together. 5 Raymond Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament (New York: Doubleday, 1997), 620. 6 See Eph. 1:9-10; 4:11, 15; 5:6-14. 7 I believe that we should read yalmoi~j as a reference to the scriptural Psalms unless evidence suggests otherwise. The evidence of Paul’s letters, as well as the gospel traditions, underscores the centrality of these poetic texts to the early church’s self-understanding and emerging christologies. Contra Gerhard Delling, “u{mnoj, k.t.l.,” TDNT 8:499; Eduard Lohse, Colossians and Philemon: A Commentary on the Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon (Hermeneia; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1971), 151. The psalms (yalmoi~v) mentioned in 1 Cor 14:26 and Col 3:16 do not necessarily refer to poetic compositions of believers rather than the scriptural psalms. Philo of Alexandria (Contempl. 80) and Josephus (Ant. 2.346; 7.305) both characterized the scriptural psalms, on a Hellenistic model, as “hymns” or “odes” to God, and Tertullian (Apol. 39) said that at agape meals Christians sang songs from the Scripture or those of their own composition. There is definitional overlap between the terms yalmoij and u{mnoj Hence, references to “hymns” in the Pauline corpus could denote either scriptural psalms or newly composed hymns, and Paul’s allusion to psalms in 1 Cor 14:26 may well refer to the scriptural psalms. On this subject as it relates to Pauline community identity formation, see my essay, “Christian ‘Rock’ Music at Corinth?,” 123-143, esp. 130-131 and n. 20 in The Psalms in Jewish and Christian Textual, Liturgical, and Artistic Traditions. Edited by Harold W. Attridge and Margot Fassler. Brill and the Society of Biblical Literature, 2003. paidei/a.8 As Paul said, identifying his divine service to God as an education in Christ: “I became a servant…to make the word of God fully known” among the gentiles, “the mystery which is Christ in you…Him we proclaim, warning and teaching every man in all wisdom, that we may proclaim every man mature in Christ…knit together in love, to have all the riches of assured understanding and the knowledge of God’s mystery, of Christ, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. I say this so that no one may delude you by beguiling speech…or make prey of you by philosophy and empty conceit” (1:25-28, 2:2-4, 8).9 Colossians’ Paul claims that Israel’s Christ, who dwells within believers, is the fount of all wisdom—and not the “beguiling” Greek and Roman philosophies. Paul’s rejection of these dominant ethnopolitical sources of wisdom in favor of Christ as the source of all rule and authority (2:10) is the pivot upon which Paul turns to call the Colossians to now live in him as they had been taught (2.6-7): to reject “earthly” practices in favor of renewal-of-mind in Christ, and to let the peace of Christ that erases ethnic division rule in them (3:5-15). They were, in short, to let “the word of Christ dwell in [them] richly, teaching and admonishing one another in all wisdom, and sing[ing] Psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” to God (3:16). The question this paper asks is whether the depiction of Paul as instructor and exemplar to the nations in an ethnically superior paidei/a –the “word of Christ” rooted in the scripture of Israel–is a post-Pauline development of Paul’s missionary practice. The answer I give is “No.” At the rhetorical climax of Paul’s letter to the Romans, the apostle taught believers that “all the ancient scriptures were written for our instruction (didaskali/an) in order that through the exhortation of the scriptures (paraklh/sewj tw~n grafw~n) we might have hope” (Rom. 15:1-4). Although he knew little of the Roman Greeks to whom he wrote (1:13, 5; 15:14-16), he nevertheless flattered them for their wisdom and ability to instruct one another (1:12, 14, 15:14), exhorted them to hold fast to the teaching he gave them (16:17-20), and constructed much of his instruction to them out of citations of the scriptures of Israel, which he wed to and delivered within a larger Greco-Roman rhetorical form (i.e., a philosophic protreptic speech in Greek epistolary form).10 This strong emphasis on the importance of an education in the scriptures, framed in terms familiar to a non-Jewish audience, is consistent with Paul’s instruction of churches that he founded, churches composed largely of ethnically Greek believers in Macedonia, Achaia, and Asia Minor. In 1 Corinthians 1-4, for example, Paul argued vigorously that Christ was a wisdom far superior to that of 8 I am not at all sure that Colossians is pseudononymous, but I read it so for the purpose of this essay. 9 1:25-28, 2:2-4, 8: u9per tou~ sw/matoj au0tou~, o# e0stin h9 e0kklhsi/a, h(~j e0geno/mhn e0gw dia/konoj kata\ th\n oi0konomi/an tou~ qeou~ th\n doqei~sa/n moi ei)j u9ma~j plhrw~sai to\n lo/gon tou~ qeou~, to\ musth/rion to\ a0pokekrumme/non a0po\ tw~n ai0w/nwn kai/ a0po\ tw~n genew~n—nu~n de\ e0fanerw/qh toi~j a9gio/ ij au0tou~, oi9~j h0qe/lhsen o9 qeo\j gnwri/sai ti/ to\ plou~toj th~j do/chj tou~ musthrio/ u tout/ ou e0n toi~j e!qnesin, o# e0stin Xristo\j e0n u9min, h9 e0lpi\j th~j do/chj. O#n h9mei~j katagge/llomen nouqetou~ntej pa/nta a!nqrwpon kai\ dida/skontej pa/nta a!nqrwpon e0n pas/ h| sofia|, i#na parasth/swmen pa/nta a!nqrwpon te/leion e0n Xristw|~. Ei0j o# kai\ kopiw~ a0gwnizo/menoj kata\ th\n e0ne/rgeian au0tou~ th\n e0nergoume/nhn e0n e0moi\ e0n duna/mei…i#na paraklhqw~sin ai9 kardi/ai au0tw~n sumbibasqe/ntej e0n a0ga/ph| kai\ ei0j pa~n plou~toj th~j plhrofori/aj th~j sune/sewj, ei0j e0pi/gnwsin tou~ musthri/ou tou~ qeou~, Xristou~, e0n w|{ ei0sin pa/ntej oi( qhsauroi\ th~j sofi/aj kai\ gnw/sewj a0po/krufoi. Tou~to le/gw, i#na mhdei\j u(ma~j paralogi/zhtai e0n piqanologia/ |…Ble/pete mh/ tij u(ma~j e!stai o9 sulagwgw~n dia\ th~j filosofi/aj kai\ kenh~j a0pa/thj kata\ th\n para/dosin tw~n a0nqrw/pwn… 10 On this subject see my Pax Christi: Empire, Identity, and Protreptic Rhetoric in Paul’s Letter to the Romans (under review with Novum Testamentum Supplements). orators, philosophers, and the Roman “rulers of this age” who had killed him (1:30- 31, 2:7-8). On that basis, Paul exhorted Corinthian believers to obey his superior instruction and “not to go beyond what is written” in their behavior (4:6).11 Citing 1 Sam. 2:10, he called them to “boast only in the Lord” (1 Cor. 1:31), to focus their efforts on community upbuilding, and thus, to gather to break bread, sing Psalms, and instruct one another in the faith (1 Cor. 14:26). In other words, the scriptures taught the Corinthian Christians morality and group politics and strengthened group identity over against the sages and orators and Roman rulers “of this age.” In Pauline Christian churches, an education in the scriptures of Israel was a critical tool in the socialization of its members. My thesis is, thus, that the seeds sown in the post-Pauline understanding of the Christian life as a “training or paidei/a in the scriptures” can be found in the ministry of Paul to the nations, as it is reflected in the undisputed letters. It is not a later development of Christian self-understanding and practice that merely deployed Paul’s aura for self-authorization. It is rather an elucidation of emerging practices of identity formation that Paul and his cohorts taught gentile believers in order to reform them into the “commonwealth of Israel” (Gal 6:16; Phil. 1:27, 3:20).12 Both Paul and his cohorts used the Jewish scriptures, in a Greco-Roman cultural environment and in a dialectical relationship with Greco-Roman educational practices, to teach and enculturate communities of ethnic Greeks in how to be(come) Israel. I. Education and Identity: Paideia as Civilization into an Ethnos Let me begin this argument with the dominant Greco-Roman model of paidei/a as a cultural education of “good men” for the future of the city-state.13 Derived from the Greek term pai~j, paidei/a referred to the upbringing of children through training in literacy, numeracy, virtue, and ethnic history. Over time, it came to represent “the classical Greek system of education and training,” which could encompass gymnastics, poetry, music, mathematics, astronomy, geography, virtue ethics, and even rhetoric and philosophy. In short, it not only referred to the basic education of children, but could also connote “the complete pedagogical course of study necessary to produce a well- rounded, fully educated citizen.”14 Paidei/a was a practice of enculturation. It was also a tool of imperialism. As is well-known, the expansion of the Macedonian Empire under and after Alexander brought with it paidei/a (in the latter sense) as a tool of Hellenization. Recognizing its power to enculturate, imperial-era Roman also embraced Greek paidei/a and its civil(izing) powers as they stretched the arms of their empire to assimilate even the Hellenes.15 Feeling the press of such military expansion, Jews in Palestine and elsewhere responded, in turns, by fighting or 11 See Dt. 13:1, Rev. 22:18-19. 12 I say “emerging” because there is little evidence in 1 Thess. for this view, but a good deal in his later letters. I think Paul wrote Philippians and possibly also Colossians during his Roman imprisonment. 13 Which I merely summarize here for the sake of space. 14 Richard Tarnas, The Passion of the Western Mind, 29-30. 15 As Gwynn indicates, the work of Roman educators like Quintilian, Seneca, Vitruvius, and Pliny indicate that little change in its basic character took place in the process. A. Gwynn, Roman Education from Cicero to Quintilian, 146. embracing it. Sometimes, as under Antiochus IV Epiphanes, they battled paidei/a as a perceived threat to Jewish religious identity and political sovereignty. But in other times and locales, they assimilated its powers to elevate their individual and collective status. Examples of the latter impulse, produced during periods of both Hellenic and Roman domination, include: the Antiquities of Josephus, written for his Roman patrons; the Stoicized middle Platonic exegesis of Philo of Alexandria, written for himself and other Hellenized Alexandrian Jews under Roman and local Egyptian rule; and the so-called genre of Jewish “apologetic” literature, written largely for fellow diaspora Jews under the governance of other peoples. It is thus no accident that Josephus repeatedly depicted the Jewish sects as “philosophies” (Ant. 18.1.2, 6, 13.5.9; War 2.117-66) and that Philo circumcised the Greek category of “nature” to name Abraham an “unwritten law and statute” in On Abraham. The Wisdom of Solomon even depicted the Torah-wisdom as a pneu~ma paidei/aj that lived in all who approached her for instruction and Israel’s ancestors as heroic exemplars of the philosophic, Jewish way of life. In short, these Jews under empire infused both “scripture” and “Judaism” with the power of Hellenistic paidei/a (philosophy and rhetoric), simultaneously recasting the latter as Judaic, in order to sanction, sustain, and protect their ethnic identities. Two recent studies on paidei/a and imitation help us understand how Paul may have done likewise in his instruction of Greek believers in Christ. The first, Teresa Morgan’s Literate Education in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds, demonstrates two main things. First, despite the relative paucity of functional literates, the Greek and Roman worlds were “profoundly literate societies” in which, “from the early third century BCE until the end of the Roman empire, you could be fairly sure of finding a teacher, or more than one, in most towns and villages, in the forum, at the crossroads, in the gymnasium, or in a private house or garden.” Second, the typical course of “common” literate education, e0gku/klioj paidei/a, was remarkably consistent “across vast geographical distances, a wide social spectrum and a timespan of nearly a thousand years,” with “much the same exercises in the same order taught, from the third century BCE onwards, everywhere from the palaces of kinds and emperors to the village street.”16 While it varied in locale and precise textual content, the typical course of instruction (e0gku/klioj paidei/a)—a course with which Paul’s audiences would have been familiar— is therefore relatively easy to characterize. At the age of 6 or so, a child typically accompanied by an attendant or paidagogue could either be educated at home or was taken to an instructor to learn to write and say his letters .17 Once the child had mastered these preliminaries, he was given short passages to copy from the sacred stories and great heroes of Greece’s noble past, typically from Homer, the gnomic poets, and a few other popular authors (e.g., Euripedes). Over time, by copying these passages repeatedly and memorizing and reciting them orally, the child thereby learned not only to read and write, but to imbibe and embrace and take pride in the sacred stories, great sayings, and deeds of his people. Among Romans this cycle of primary education changed little, with only an increase in the number of heroic exempla used in school exercises to mark their ethnic difference. Evidence of the early common era indicates that urban Jews participated in e0gku/klioj 16 Literate Education in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds (Cambridge: Cambridge, 1998), 3-4. 17 Who went by a variety of titles, dida/skaloj being the most common. While it most often referred to an attendant, paidagog/ oj could also refer to an instructor. Morgan, 17-18. paidei/a, while also using synagogal settings for oral, community education in the scriptures.18 Thus, whether Greek or Roman (or Jewish), those who learned to read and write embarked on a path of education that not only could progress to training in practical wisdom and other arts and could lead, for an elite few, to advanced training in rhetoric and philosophy.19 They also participated in a prime means of enculturation in the Greco-Roman world, a practice of learning that embraced not only those from the highest levels of society but also those hoping to break into such groups and those, who while they would never do so, gained some status and identity through this instruction. Even in its most rudimentary form, e0gku/klioj paidei/a was thus a marker of social status, cultural and ethnic group belonging and difference (for those who did not know it or know it well). As Morgan says, “literate education [was] a binding and differential force, an indicator and transformer of cultural status.”20 In his extraordinary book, Greek Literature and the Roman Empire: The Politics of Imitation, Tim Whitmarsh explores the ways in which Greeks living under Roman rule during the second century CE employed paideia in this way, (re)constructing their identities as Greeks and empowering themselves as a subject people by creatively retelling the sacred stories of their collective past through (re)articulate poesis in their present, the period of the “Second Sophistic.”21 Whitmarsh sets the stage for this argument by articulating the power of paideutic mimesis or “imitation” to form the “soul” of a man and by extension, a people. He begins with a comparison of Plato’s and Plutarch’s views of philosophic education. As is well-known, among Greek philosophers, Plato is most famous for placing education in the service of the soul and making it a quest of the intellect, a mimetic process of the mind copying and seeking after (but never fully experiencing) union with the ideal. Unlike Plato, who was famous for dividing shadow from substance, copy from original in the philosophic education of the will, Aristotle and Plutarch argued that the practice of imitating cultural and philosophical ideals actually altered the soul through repetition: the repeated act of imitative doing effected a somatic naturalization of what was repeated in the mind and soul of learners. Put another way, both learners’ mimesis of the poetry and Homeric stories copied in primary education and philosophic education in the Good were practices of repetition that inculcated the pattern of the original into learners’ souls. Learners, whether children or sages, were made and could be remade by what they repeatedly, habitually learned. Building on this understanding of mimesis as somatically transformative, Whitmarsh then reads Greek literature of the “Second Sophistic” as productive performances of identity, showing how Greeks of the “Second Sophistic” who mimed and renarrated sacred stories from Homer and the gnomic poets remade themselves— (re)constructing cultural continuity with their high-status past by creating imagined communities of “universal Hellenism.”22 Not only this, he showed that their mimesis of stories of their sacred past was powerful enough to subvert and redistribute social power, even effecting ethnic transformation among the Romans: by reconstituting the heroes of Greece’s past in the present and renarrating Hellenism convincingly as true 18 Early: James Crenshaw; David Carr. 1st century: articles on synagogal education. 19 Morgan, 7. 20 Ibid., 4. 21 Whitmarsh, 71-88. 22 66. It was an organic means of maintaining vitality of Greeks’ past in their present (58). civilization, Greeks under Roman rule led some of their political “betters” to imitate Greeks anew, to seek to become Greeker than Greeks in their quest for cultural domination of the known world.23 This cultural power of paideutic mimesis to elevate social status and define group identity transactionally (that is, in inter-group ideological and social exchanges across intercultural and interethnic boundaries) largely explains the impulse of Christian teachers of the second century CE onward—the same period Whitmarsh studied--to characterize believers’ disciplined growth in the Christian life as paideutic learning. Like Greeks and Hellenized and Romanized Jews also had, second-century Christian teachers redirected the hegemonic cultural power of paidei/a, imitating it within Christian communities, to create a uniquely Christian paideia that was thought, quite literally, to somatically (re)make “catechumens” into mature men (telei/oi) in this new, civilized faith. It was a “system of education in the faith that the early Christians created through a combination of biblical revelation and the cultural patterns suggested by Hellenistic literature and philosophy, that is, Greek paideia. It had as its objective the achieving of the wisdom of God through spiritual formation under the divine Pedagogue, the Logos or Word of God. Christian paideia looked to the formation of character and appreciation of virtues as much as it did the acquisition of knowledge. Its final aim was the true knowledge—Christian philosophy or worldview— whose end was fellowship and imitation of Jesus Christ.”24 II. Paidei/a in Pauline Community Identity Formation In the mid-first century CE, Paul was engaged in an earlier form of this process of educational enculturation—imitating the model of literate and oral Greco-Roman education, transforming it through conflation with a community-based, oral practice of instruction in the scriptures (as had his Jewish contemporaries), and thereby reconstellating its hegemonic powers of ethnic and cultural formation—to convince the gentiles he missionized of the high status of his way of life and to reform them into the Israel of God. He did so, I argue, by doing several things with his communities: depicting himself as a teacher of the nations in the scriptures as the source of true wisdom; portraying himself and Timothy as exemplars of his paidei/a to be imitated; depicting Christ as the content and voice of scripture; using the scriptures to undermine rival pedagogues; teaching believers the Christian meaning of Israel’s sacred stories in letters (and in person); and exhorting believers to sing the Scriptures (especially the Psalms) together and instruct one another in faith—all to form them, individually and collectively, into the Good Man in Christ. 23 117-120. 24 Find reference, my emphasis. Contributors included Epistle of Clement, Shepherd of Hermas, the catechumenal schools, the Great Catechism of Gregory of Nyssa, catecheses of Cyril of Jerusalem, and Augustine De Catechizandis Rudibus, De Doctrina Christiana; De Beata Vita. At Alexandria, see also Clement of Alexandria, Paidagogos. In the East, see the Cappadocian Fathers, including Gregory of Nazianzus, Panegyric on Basil; Basil of Caesarea, To Young Men On How They Might Profit, From Pagan Literature; John Chrysostom, De Inani Gloria et de Educandis Liberis. In the West, Lactantius, Hilary of Poitiers, Ambrose, and Jerome. Paideia under Christian auspices). See also Boethius, The Consolation of Philosophy, and Cassiodorus’s Institutes. Space prohibits both a full accounting of even a few of these arguments25 and a full articulation of the methodological presuppositions that go into my reading of the letters as evidence of identity formation.26 I am also going to hand a hostage to fortune (and us fodder for discussion) by assuming rather than arguing that when Pauline communities gathered, they sang Psalms together and over time, came to be instructed and exhorted out of some of Israel’s scriptures like Torah and Isaiah, possibly as Paul’s fellow Jews were in synagogal gatherings (1 Cor. 14). These practices would undoubtedly have worked to form gentile believers’ identities. But in the sketch that follows, I want rather to provide arguments in favor of a couple of the points made above, which may be difficult to “see” on standard readings of Paul’s letters. A. Paidei/a and Pauline Self-Presentation in 1 Corinthians 4 I have argued elsewhere that Paul’s letter to the Romans is an extended protreptic demonstration of Paul’s prowess as an educator of the Roman Greeks to whom he writes.27 But 1 Corinthians 4 provides a blessedly shorter example of Paul’s use of educational commonplaces to underscore his authority as instructor of the Corinthians. A deliciously subtle argument, 1 Cor. 1-4 assumes and deploys a series of assumptions about good education that function to put the haughty-minded subset of his Corinthian audience in their place, and to underscore that they must follow his example in not going “beyond what is written” in their behavior (4:6). Much ink has been spilled over the phrase “not going beyond what is written,” and it is not my intention to undermine the now-commonplace assumption that Paul intended the Corinthians to pattern their behavior on what they learned from the scriptures of Israel. A number of scholars commenting on 1 Cor. 1-4 as a whole have also recognized that the whole is a (heated) reminder of Paul’s singular standing in the community as founder and herald of the “word of Christ.” But few scholars focusing on 25 This is the subject of my current book-in-process, The Paideia of Paul. Projected date of completion December 2008. 26 These include: reading the letters performatively, as rhetorics and moments of identity formation rather than only as static evidence of Pauline thought and practice; reading Paul primarily for practices; reading Pauline thought and practice for socialization (viewing paideia as practices of socialization and reading for mimesis, the call to imitate Paul as educational); and reading Paul for his practice of ethnic transactionalism and reconstellation (bringing together Greek philosophical, Roman political, and Jewish scriptural motifs) for identity formation. I also do not assume that the (rhetorical) audiences of Paul’s letters can all be presumed to have an equal baseline education in Judaism or its scriptures. Mirror-reading 1 Thess, for example, there is no evidence that the Thessalonians have any education of this sort. Paul’s letter to the high-minded folk at Corinth seems to presume a baseline knowledge of and identification with at least some of the stories of Israel (See Paul’s “our fathers” in 1 Cor. 10:1, implicitly writes the Corinthians into the Exodus story, which he presumes they know), and I have argued that they may well have been steeped at least in a cycle of Psalmic poetry from their initial formation. Moreover, if the phrase “what is written” (1 Cor. 4) refers to scripture, then Paul expects that they will have known enough of it to follow his lead. Paul’s letter to the Romans explicitly assumes that some members of the gentile rhetorical audience knew Torah—which means that others did not (Rom. 7:1). For the folk who knew Torah, Paul’s citations of scripture will have read differently than for those who did not. This evidence suggests that audience competency in scripture was hardly uniform, and that if audience expertise be deemed important to meaning-making, our claims about “the meaning” of scripture use must account for these differences. Our answers to such questions as “what scripture did (or could) they know?” will necessarily be complex. 27 Pax Christi. “Paul and Scripture” have integrated these points. For, doing so requires us to pause long over the seminal first half of the exhortation of 4:6, “that you may learn by us [—that is, by our example--] not to go beyond what is written.” For Paul’s emphasis is not on scripture per se but on himself as an exemplum of Scripture, on himself as a living, breathing, embodiment of the “word of the cross” (1:18) whom the Corinthians must imitate in order to live (into) “what is written.” Paul is the paidei/a of scripture that they are “not to go beyond” in their behavior toward each other. Paul deploys several educational commonplaces in 1 Cor. 1-4 to give this argument wings. The first of these is the antithetical dualism established between “children” and the “mature,” which comes to the fore most vividly in 1 Corinthians 4:14, “I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children.” The second is a contrast Paul offers between the status-reversing “wisdom of the cross” (1:17, 27) and the high-status, philosophic “wisdom of the world” (1:18-25, 2:7-8). Recall that in the Greco-Roman e0gku/klioj paidei/a, “children” were instructed in the mere rudiments of education--given bits of sacred and gnomic texts and heroic past narratives to copy, memorize, and make their own—whereas philosophy (the height of paidei/a) was reserved for the mature, those who had imbibed not just these bits of wisdom but had long ago writ into their skin and bones the “truths” to which this preliminary course of education pointed—the superior wisdom of their way of life. In 1 Cor. 1-4, Paul weds these “truths” of Greco-Roman education to the truth of his gospel message, whose veracity he proves with punctuated citations of Israel’s scripture,28 to instruct the Corinthians, an audience who seemingly think themselves worldly wise, that he teaches the “mature” a wisdom superior to the world’s philosophies (2:6). But, he says, the Corinthians don’t know this wisdom because they are mere babes in Christ (3:1). Still suckling at the breast of truth, they don’t understand that the wisdom Paul proclaims may be folly to philosophers and world rulers, but it is the power and strength and wisdom of the Corinthians’ vastly superior God (1:18, 24). The fact that the Corinthians don’t recognize so basic a point about their way of life means that they aren’t ready for the solid food of the faith, the ‘philosophic’ wisdom that comes from the mind of Christ within them (2:16, 3:1-4). Paul underscores the irony of this point—given the Corinthians’ high opinion of themselves—by identifying himself as their father and contrasting them with Timothy as his children in faith. After launching a devastating censure of their self-concept as “wise” “kings” in comparison to his identity as a “fool for Christ’s sake” (4:8-13), Paul elevates his paternal “home instruction” of them in “the word of the cross” over that which they might have gained from worldly pedagogues (4:15)—intimating that their worldly paidei/a had taught them nothing. He then compares their factious behavior as his children with that of Timothy, who has faithfully imitated his example. Timothy, Paul implies, has imitated Paul’s consistent example as a real pedagogue--his status- inverting realization of the suffering of Christ in his self-lowering for them—and through his mimesis has become “mature” in faith. In short, Paul implies that Timothy has done what any good advancing student should, embarked on a practice of repetition of his teacher’s wise example that inculcated into his person the pattern of his teacher’s 28 See 1:19, 1:31, 2:9, 2:16, 3:19-20. Throughout 1 Cor. 1-4, esp. in 1:26-27 and 4:10-12, I believe that he also echoes 1 Sam 2:1-10 OG. I argued this case in “Christian ‘Rock’ Music in Corinth?’ See below for more discussion of Paul’s citational practice in 1 Corinthians. paidei/a, Christ-in-Paul, in such a way that it actually, somatically formed his character into the likeness of Christ.29 It is for that reason that Timothy has been sent to remind the Corinthians of Paul’s ‘ways in Christ, as he teaches them everywhere in every church’ (4:17): he actually embodies Paul’s instruction to them just as Paul embodies Christ’s “word” or instruction to him. This is why Paul repeatedly adjures followers to follow his example, becoming “imitators of me, as I am of Christ” (11:1). Put precisely, Paul uses the commonplaces of Greco-Roman education in 1 Cor. 1-4, wed to scriptural citations and allusions to scriptural imitation, to teach the Corinthians how they shall know and fully realize in their persons the wisdom of Christ. It is by following Paul’s example as their instructor that they will learn “not to go beyond what is written.” B. Performance of the Word: Scripture as the Word of Christ/ the Word of Christ as Scripture (1 Cor. 1-2, Rom. 10) This example builds on the first by focusing on Paul’s rhetorical performance of scripture in his letters. My goal is to underscore how reading Paul’s letters performatively teaches us how they may have functioned to instruct Paul’s audiences, even those who knew little or nothing of scripture, in scripture’s “true” meaning and authority for Paul—that it was written to be the living, spiritual foundation for their instruction and exhortation in Christ (15:4). Recall from Colossians and Ephesians the central paideutic emphasis on Christ dwelling within gentile believers in such a way that they may avoid the beguiling false- wisdom of the Greco-Roman philosophies; may know and do the good, imitating God; and thus, may be formed and transformed through their acts into the body of Christ that comprised the “commonwealth of Israel.” In 1 Cor. 1:30, Paul likewise asserts that Christ is true wisdom for believers, a secret kind of wisdom imparted not among philosophers or Roman rulers but among the “mature” in Christ (telei/oi, 2:6-10). Continuing this line of argument in 2:11-15, Paul asserts that the Corinthians possess “not the spirit of the world but the spirit from God” (so that they might understand God’s gifts to them. He also argues that he imparts these truths to believers in words of spiritual instruction (e0n didaktoi~j pneu/matoj) rather than “words taught by human wisdom” so that those who possess this spirit may be able to judge all things. Not insignificantly, Paul punctuates all three of these main points with terse citational proofs from scripture (1:31, 2:9, 2:16), the second of which is an “Isaianic” composition of his own making. Beyond the fact that the second citation may not even exist (for the Corinthians to have known), there is little evidence in the text for broad intertextual echo of the second and third of these 29 As Jo-Ann Brant shows, the mimesis to which Paul referred was not a mere copying, but a practice of repetition that inculcated the pattern of the original, Christ, into the souls of acting subjects. See Jo-Ann Brant, ‘‘The Place of Mimesis in Paul’s Thought,’’ Studies in Religion 22 (1993) 285–300.