By James M. West. Copyright © October 1, 2007;
revised
E-mail: ogdood@yahoo.com
It’s
amazing how so many Christians today still believe that
To this day the Pauline Letters still contain elements of Paul’s unique
theology and doctrine. One of the best examples can be seen in the intriguing
passage in 2 Corinthians 3:6-4:4. Scholars and theologians both ancient and
modern have recognized the unorthodox quality of this passage. Marcion and the
Gnostic theologians all recognized this passage as evidence that the God
of Moses was not identical with the Supreme Being (Irenaeus, Against
Heresies, 3.7.1.; Tertullian, Against Marcion,
We should also note that one of Paul’s interpreters, the author of Ephesians,
seems to have understood Paul in a similar theological context. Hence
the author wrote: “And you walked according to the age of this world (aion
of this cosmos), according to the prince (archonta) of the power of
the air...” (Eph. 2:2). Orthodox Christians typically believe that the words
“age of this world” simply refer to the present world age. But the Greek text
actually contains a wider scope of meaning. Ephesians 2:2 and 2 Corinthians 4:4
both share in common the word “aion” in Greek, which is translated in 2
Corinthians 4:4 as “world” and in Ephesians 2:2 as “age”. In Greek/Hellenistic
culture the word “aion” can mean an age, or it can refer to the world, or the
cosmos, or a god, such as Chronos/Saturn. In this context it is most plausible
that “the aion of this cosmos” is merely a different form of the expression
“the god of this aion.” Among the ancient Greeks the “Aion of this cosmos”
would have been construed as a reference to Chronos. Both Chronos and
Saturn were regarded as gods who were in charge of time. These gods were
identified by the word “Aion” as a name (e.g. http://www.theoi.com/Protogenos/Khronos.html ).
These gods were also identified with the seventh heaven and were
honored on the seventh day of the week.
The rhetoric in Ephesians 2:2 implies that the author identified Satan with
Chronos or Saturn. But the problem of this interpretation becomes apparent when
we notice that Paul identified Satan as the “god of this aion.” In the
paragraphs that follow I will present evidence to show that Paul actually
identified the “god of this aion” with the Lawgiver that appeared to Moses. I
will also show that Paul, and the author of Ephesians, and certain
elements of Jewish tradition, all share certain ideas which the Greeks
associated with Chronos: one example being the concept of
time-keeping.
The scholar Richard Reitzenstein noticed a correlation between the concept of
time keeping and the prayers used by Jews in the ancient Hellenistic
synagogues. In these prayers the Greek-speaking Jews referred to
their God as the “King of the Aion” who has taught the “learned scholars”
the “times of the months” (Hellenistic Mystery-Religions, ET: J.
Steely, pg.180). Thus Paul's rhetoric in 2 Corinthians 4:4, regarding the “god
of this aion”, reflected the current usage in the Hellenistic synagogues.
Certainly the expressions “king of the aion” and “god of this aion” are nearly
identical. If a Jew in this period can call his God the “King of the Aion” then
why would he also not refer his God as “God of the Aion”? In my view Paul's
expression reflects the current Jewish usage at that time. Paul also associated
the Law of Moses with the concept of time-keeping just as the Jews did – only
Paul warned against observing the law of Moses and of observing “days and
months and times and years” (Galatians 4:9-10, 5:4).
Overall it seems that there is a correlation between the Hellenistic Jewish
prayers, Paul's expression in 2 Cor. 4:4, and the expression in Eph. 2:2. The
Jewish prayers affirm the Jewish God as “King of the Aion” whereas Paul blames
the “god of this aion” for blinding Jews against the gospel (see below). In the
Jewish prayers the “King of the Aion” was said to have taught the “learned
scholars” the “times and the months.” Paul warned his disciples against
observing the “times” and “months”. And in Ephesians 2:2 there is an apparent
reference to “Aion” which can be construed as a reference to Chronos, the Aion,
the god of time.
Let
us now turn to the passage that holds the most compelling evidence of Paul’s
foreign theology. I refer to the passage in 2 Corinthians 3:6-4:4. The key
to this passage is to understand that Paul’s words reflect the Apostle's
interpretation of Exodus chapter 34. This passage contains the
account of the second giving of the Law. The first tablets of the Law had been
smashed when the Israelites lapsed into idolatry while Moses was still on
Orthodox Christians believe that Exodus 34 reports that Moses received the Law
anew from the living God after the Israelites repented from their idolatry (Ex.
32). But is this what Paul believed? Let us now see what Paul's comments were
regarding these biblical events.
In 2 Corinthians 3:7 Paul explicitly refers to the Law of Moses “written and
engraved in stones” as the “ministry of death.” Right away I must point out that
this statement runs counter to what Jesus told the rich young ruler in Matthew
19:16-18. The young man asked Jesus “Good Master, what good thing must I do to
have eternal life?” Jesus’ answered that he must “keep the commandments”
meaning, specifically, the 10 Commandments (vs. 18). Yet Paul refers to these
same commandments “written in stone” as the “ministry of death.” And in Romans
Getting back to our subject: we must note that in 2 Corinthians 3:7 Paul
portrays Moses and the Lawgiver in a negative light. Paul states that the Law
is the “ministry of death” and that Moses wore a veil so that the Israelites
would not see the “fading glory.” This same charge is made again in 2 Cor.
3:12-15:
“Seeing then that we have such hope, we use great
boldness of speech: And not as Moses, who put a veil over his face, so that the
children of
Here Paul explicitly states that Moses deceived the Israelites. He concealed
the fading glory which is indicative of a lesser god: and he mislead the
Israelites as to the true death oriented nature of the Law. By comparison we
can see that Jesus’ words in Matthew 19:17f. are consistent with the Jewish
tradition that the Law is the means to justification and immortality. Paul said
the opposite. In Galatians 1:6-9 Paul expressly condemned Jewish Christians who
demanded that Paul's converts needed to keep the Law in order to be Christians.
Paul answered that "in Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither
slave nor free, neither male nor female..." (Gal. 3:28). Paul believed
that in Christ the Law was completely abolished: neither Jews nor Gentiles were
obligated to keep the Law.
Paul had his own ideas about what the gospel stood for. And in 2 Corinthians
In the above passage there is another break with orthodoxy. Paul evidently
believes that Moses did not receive the Law through the pre-existent Jesus, or
that Jesus was somehow the face of God in the Old Testament. According to Paul,
the Law of Moses and the glory of the Lawgiver lead mankind away from the glory
and immortality that (according to Paul) are visible and potent in the face of
Jesus Christ.
Without a doubt Paul has accused Moses of leading the Israelites away from the
truth. And 2 Corinthians 3 is not the only passage where Paul actually opposes
Moses. Another example is in Galatians where Paul denies that circumcision was
given by God, as is stated plainly in Genesis 17:1-14. In opposition to
scripture, as supposedly written by Moses, Paul says that God accepted Abraham
by faith alone, and that circumcision was instituted later through Moses (Gal.
3:6-9, 15-18).
Evidently Paul did not believe that Moses told the truth in his writings. Paul
accused Moses of concealing the fading glory from the Israelites, and that
their minds remained blind in their reading of the “old testament.” Paul's
rhetoric can be construed to mean that he did not believe that Moses shared an
accurate knowledge of God. Worse, is that Paul implies that Moses
misrepresented things and concealed the truth.
Paul returns to the theme of dishonesty in 2 Corinthians 4:1-2; and the ideas
run parallel with the statements made in 2 Cor. 3:12-14. In 4:1 Paul writes “Therefore
seeing we have received this ministry, we fail not. But have renounced the
hidden things of shame, not walking in craftliness, nor handling the word of
God deceitfully...”
Certainly the words of Paul above are directed back at his adversaries among
the Jews and Jewish Christians, and the priority they placed on Moses. Paul is
probably answering a charge from them that he keeps impious secrets (Elaine
Pagels, Gnostic Paul, pg. 97). Certainly it is true that Paul wrote of
the “hidden wisdom” that is spoken of only among the “perfect” (initiates); and
that the “natural man” cannot comprehend spiritual wisdom (1 Cor. 2:6-7,
12-14). Paul explains that spiritual wisdom is “foolishness” to the natural
man. Spiritual wisdom is of course the knowledge of salvation. To display that
wisdom to the uninitiated is to risk their damnation in that they might
blaspheme and reject the truth before they can understand it (1 Cor.
Certainly this is the logic behind Paul’s words in 2 Corinthians 4:3-4,
“If our gospel is veiled, it is so
for those who are perishing: In whom the god of this aion has blinded the minds
of them which believe not, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ,
who is the image of God, should shine unto them.”
Paul’s
statements here are a natural extension and parallel of what he wrote
regarding the Law of Moses and the Lawgiver in the preceding passages. Moses is
the image of the Lawgiver who is the lesser god, viz. the god of this aion.
Moses concealed the fading glory of this god, and dictated the Law to the
Israelites. The Israelites were blinded by Moses’ veil and they were led into
believing that the Law is the path to life. Through this blindness they rejected
Paul's gospel and his doctrine that the Law is the “ministry of death.” Paul
presents Jesus as the image of the supreme God, who reveals the life giving
glory of God in his open face. The god of this aion seeks to prevent the
Israelites from beholding the glory of Christ.
Without a doubt Paul is identifying the Lawgiver with the “god of this
aion.” Obviously Paul's God was not simply the “God of the
Bible” as so many Christians presume today. If Paul’s God was not
the biblical Lawgiver then who, exactly, was the God behind Paul’s
theology? This is the greatest Mystery concealed in the letters of Paul. –jw
Readers can e-mail their comments, etc., to me at ogdood@yahoo.com