REL 2240 Fall 2009 Highlights and Lowlights from Paper 3

Remember to plan your papers carefully. For example, the following is taken from the opening paragraph of one paper:

Paul once persecuted Christians, which we will get into a bit more later on, and now he is sometimes known as the "second founder of Christianity." (The Theology of the Apostle Paul, Dunn, D. G. James, Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, p.10)

It sounds more professional to say "as we will see below" rather than "which we will get into a bit more later on". The trouble is, in this essay, we never did. That is a sign of poor planning: when you write the opening paragraph, you should know what is going to be in the rest of the paper. If you promise to tell me something, you had better keep the promise. If you change your mind when writing the paper, make sure you go back and correct any statements like this. It isn't essential that your paper contains a discussion of Paul's period persecuting Christians, but the promise to present such a section could easily have been deleted.

There are many accounts in Hebrews where important people are rewarded through faith...

Yes, but Paul didn't write The Letter to the Hebrews. A paper about Paul may contain passages from other New Testament writings - e.g. Acts of the Apostles, but you must demonstrate that they really do cast light on Paul. In this case, as far as I could tell, passages from Hebrews were quoted as though they were direct evidence for Paul's own thinking. That shows a lack of attention to primary sources. It is true that in some older editions of the Bible, the letter is entitled The Letter of St. Paul to the Hebrews, but there is nothing in the original text to justify this title, and it has now been dropped. If you use a good edition of the Bible, or do some basic reading about Paul's epistles - e.g. using the Oxford One Volume Bible Commentary, you would know this.

Sanctification through the Holy Spirit is achieved by one's behavior and choice of living. When Jesus was resurrectedand in his holy bodily form many wanted him to stay on earth but he was not able to because he had to meet with his father in order for the holy spirit to be sent down from heaven to mankind.

In this case, no source is given, but if you were looking for a source, you might turn to the Gospel of John, 16:7-11 or Luke 24:49. Again, these passages are not from Paul's letters. If you were majoring in Theology (which you cannot do at FSU, this being a secular institution), then you would probably study Systematic Theology, and draw up a consistent account of Christian origins incorporating material from all the New Testament writings. However, your project in this case was to focus on one author, Paul. Before you can try producing a synthesis of all the New Testament writings, you need to study each individually.

I said that I wanted you to demonstrate you can enter into controversies. Most of you are sticking to safe ground, simply giving the type of information you could find in any encyclopedia article. Consider the following conclusion:

Paul was a great influence on modern Christianity due to his writings of the letters and his missionary work. His teaching on faith still carries on.

This would be a reasonable opening sentence for an essay about Paul, but as a conclusion, it is too weak. It doesn't show that you've attained a level of understanding beyond what you could gain from reading a Wikipedia article. It may be acceptable at high school, but not in a university paper. When you do take a stand on something difficult, you should be aware of the fact, and have some kind of defense ready. Consider the following:

Paul also leaves room for those who 'follow the law' or 'act with faith' even without knowledge of their having been saved by Jesus Christ.

In Chapter 2 of Romans, Paul certainly states the Gentiles can be judged or excused by the law that is written on their hearts without knowledge of Jewish revelation. But does he think one can have faith without knowledge of Jesus? This has been a big point of controversy. Consider the following from the Vatican document 'Dominus Iesus':

For this reason the distinction between theological faith and belief in the other religions, must be firmly held. If faith is the acceptance in grace of revealed truth which "makes it possible to penetrate the mystery in a way that allows us to understand it coherently" (John Paul II, Fides et Ratio, 13) then belief in other religions, is that sum of experience and thought that constitutes the human treasury of wisdom and religious aspiration, which man in his search for truth has conceived and acted upon in his relationship to God and the Absolute.(Ibid, 31-32)



Dominus Iesus was issued by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, as he then was, and was perceived as being an attack on the works of his former teacher, Karl Rahner. Rahner was dead by the time 'Dominus Iesus' was written, and he was not mentioned by name. But, reading his works, one does get the impression that Rahner would have described non-Christians as having faith in the theological sense. He is best known for his doctrine of the "anonymous Christian", which states that a follower of another religion who has never heard of Jesus can still be classed as a Christian.

The passage quoted from the student paper implies that Rahner was right and Ratzinger was wrong. This is an acceptable point of view for you to advance. However, it needs to be backed up with evidence from Paul's letters, followed by detailed discussion. You may not think that Ratzinger is infallible, but he is not likely to have overlooked clear and obvious evidence from Paul's letters saying that non-Christians have faith. The pro-Rahner position is one that needs to be defended.

Back to REL 2240