1 1. Paul in the Twenty-First Century Murray J. Smith The apostle Paul was a controversial figure from the start. His letters provide ample evidence of the debate that almost universally followed his proclamation of the gospel, and the earliest sources indicate that his letters themselves generated further discussion (2 Pet 3:16). This lively conversation did not die with the apostle. It has been going on now for almost two thousand years. The result is that our current readings of Paul are shaped, more than we often realize, by those of Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and a host of others down through the centuries. Indeed, the discussion of Paul and his letters shows no signs of abeyance. In recent years, the literature on Paul at both scholarly and popular levels has grown exponentially. This chapter attempts, then, what has been called—by one who knows well—an “impossible task.” 1 It traces the major contours of Pauline scholarship over the last century and a half, with an emphasis on the present state of Pauline research. It is hoped that this sketch may lead to greater understanding of the apostle himself, and of the letters through which we principally know him. 2 To provide a kind of outline for this sketch, we take as a starting point the review of the literature on Paul offered almost exactly one hundred years ago by Albert Schweitzer. 3 In characteristic fashion, Schweitzer summed up and dismissed the vast bulk of scholarship on Paul to 1911 and set the trajectory for what was eventually to become the majority consensus of the twentieth century. As Schweitzer saw things, the great question for interpreters of Paul is how to make sense of Paulצs place between the Jewish proclamation of Jesus, and the significantly Hellenized Christian orthodoxy that developed in the second century. 4 As Schweitzer recognized, this “great and still undischarged task” 1 D. E. Aune, “Recent Readings of Paul Relating to Justification by όaith,” in D. E. Aune, ed., Rereading Paul Together: Protestant and Catholic Perspectives on Justification (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2006), 188. 2 For alternative recent reviews, see: M. Zetterholm, Approaches to Paul: A Student’s Guide to Recent Scholarship (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2009); σ. T. Wright, “Paul in Current Anglophone Scholarship,” ExpT 123 (2012): 367-81. For an interesting discussion between some major recent interpreters of Paul, see M. F. Bird, Four Views on the Apostle Paul (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2012). 3 A. Schweitzer, Geschichte der Paulinischen Forschung: von der Reformation bis auf die Gegenwart (Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1911). 4 A. Schweitzer, Paul and his Interpreters: A Critical History (trans. W. Montgomery; London: A. & C. Black, 1912), v.