Alexander and Paul

But I am speaking to you who are Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry, Romans 11:13 NASB

Apostle of Gentiles – What does Alexander the Great have to do with Paul the apostle? Most people probably couldn’t answer this question, or, if they could, they would suggest that Alexander spread the Greek language across the Mediterranean and that allowed Paul to communicate with Gentiles. But the real answer is far more important and complex. In fact, you and I are still living in Alexander’s contribution.

The first century Mediterranean world was a conglomeration of many different cultures. Despite the predominance of Hellenism, oriental influences from past empires still played an important role in the thought of Roman subjects. In fact, during this time there was a resurgence of ancient religions, once coupled with the political force of ruling dictators. By the first century, even though Rome was the political power, religious fervor still grew out of the East. But now these ancient cults were transformed through Greek Hellenism. Instead of territorial cults, they adopted the Grecian penchant for universalism and abstraction. In other words, ancient religious faiths transcended their geographical boundaries and became belief systems of the mind. The parallel with Hellenism is striking. Hans Jonas points out that “one was a Hellene not by birth but by education.”[1] Ancient Eastern faiths, including rabbinic Judaism, moved out of the confines of cultic worship and onto the stage of universal principles. They adopted Greek rationalism as a means of redefining once ethnic devotion into powerful systems of thought aimed at providing salvation to adherents. In this process, a profound spiritual syncretism occurred, swallowing up former cultic conflicts into theological ideologies that incorporated mythological symbols from dualism, fatalism and transcendent monotheism.

Paul operated in this world. He didn’t write in Greek simply because Greek was the lingua franca of this world. He wrote in Greek because the religious fervor of his time was constructed on Greek ideals: the primacy of the individual, the supremacy of rational thought and the rejection of traditional mythology. As an orthodox Hebrew, Paul opposed these ideals; ideals that were sweeping through the Mediterranean world of the Jews and the Gentiles. Paul attempts to address the failure of these ideals within the culture of Hellenism. He is not simply a reformer standing on the street corner calling men back to a past age of divine intervention. He is attempting to recast orthodox Hebrew belief in Greek terms in order that the Gentile will find salvation, not in a Greek apologetic but in transcendent God who speaks salvation instruction to all men.

We notice this when we discover that Paul often invents Greek terms to express his essentially Hebraic thought. As Jonas points out, “To oppose its message [the message of the ancient East] to the dominant one [i.e., Hellenization] it had to find its own language; and to find it became a process of long toil.”[2] Paul was not simply opposing paganism. He was resisting the entire paradigm shift that Hellenism brought.

With this in mind, we must reread Paul. Far too often we read Paul as if he were a Hellene. We read him as if he were engaging in rational apologetics, employing arguments we find in Aquinas, revealing truths that align with our Hellenic universals. In other words, we read Paul according to our worldview, placing in his mind categories of thought and belief that are derived from a completely different basis than prophetic faith. All those who believe that Paul created the Church make this mistake. But Paul went to the Gentiles, not to demonstrate a superior theology but rather to provide hope in the light of the universal problem of death. Paul is not an exemplar of rational thought. He is a messenger of a particular God.

Topical Index: Paul, Gentiles, Hellenism, Alexander the Great, Romans 11:13

[1] Hans Jonas, The Gnostic Religion, 2^nd edition, (Beacon Press, 1963), p. 5.

[2] Ibid., p. 22.