Sarah Ruden's "Paul among the People"

I recently read Sarah Ruden’s Paul among the People (New York: Pantheon Books, 2010). In this volume Ruden, a trained classicist, examines several aspects of Paul’s writings by comparing them with ancient Greco-Roman writings. The topics she covers include perspectives on sin and sinful behavior, sex, homosexuality, marriage, slavery, and submission to rulers. In each case she brings clarity to Greek and Roman perspectives on these topics, and sheds light on Paul’s meaning by reading Paul against the Greco-Roman backdrop. In some cases, her readings are very plausible and provide much needed correctives to contemporary mis-readings of such passages (chapters 2, 4, 6, for example). In other cases, in spite of creative effort, the results are not as persuasive (chapter 5, on Paul and the state). Even in cases where her readings do not convince, she offers a rich treasury of primary source materials for contemporary readers of Paul to consider.

In this regard, Ruden is to be commended for her fresh approach to reading Paul in his Greco-Roman context. She seeks to defend Paul from negative interpretations and views such as she herself had previously had. As she began reading Paul in context, she writes,

It seemed to me that many reactions to him across the centuries had been distorted or incomplete in ways that would not have survived a look at his main contemporary and near-contemporary audiences through their own books. For every implausible reading of Paul, there were Greco-Roman works through the lens of which he showed more plausibly (4)

Ruden, in spite of having been what she refers to as a “knee-jerk anti-Paulist” (5), has a high view of Paul and his contributions to the history of Western thought. She credits Paul with foundational ideas that shape all of Western history: “no other intellect contributed as much to making us who we are” (xix). Nevertheless, she still seems to maintain some commonplace stereotypes of Paul: “His faults are obvious enough: his bad temper, his self-righteousness, his anxiety” (4-5). And “he never overcame his touchiness, his fussiness, or his arrogance” (26). On the buildup to 1 Cor 13 in 1 Cor 12:29-30, she writes, “The lecture is showing typical irritability” (171).  She seems to cast events and conflicts in Paul’s life in the worst light: “Paul is just not a nice guy” (183).

It seems to me that greater attention to another aspect of Paul’s Greco-Roman context might have helped Ruden position Paul even a little more sympathetically. Specifically, attention to the context of ancient rhetoric and debate, particularly the agonistic paradigm in which Paul wrote, could perhaps help to reframe those otherwise stereotypical ways of reading Paul. It may be that his apparent arrogance, bad temper, and so forth, as Ruden (and others) have perceived them, were simply reflections of how an educated person wrote to persuade others in antiquity (cf. the work of Margaret Mitchell). Sensibilities about how to persuade others in the first century were indeed quite different than our own.

Regardless of this omission about the significance of Pauline rhetoric, overall Ruden rightly appraises Paul’s approach: “The first efforts at setting Paul’s words against the words of polytheistic authors helped explain why early Christianity was so compelling, growing as no popular movement ever had before” (7). In coming to grips with the essence of Paul's message to his communities of believers, Ruden explains: “To those asking, ‘But how do we live, right here, right now?’ his answer was always in essence the same: ‘In a way worthy of God’s infinite love for each of you” (7). Ruden's volume provides some new perspectives on how contemporary readers of Paul can ask and answer that same question.

I hope this volume will also encourage its readers toward additional efforts to read Paul more fully within his Greco-Roman context.