The “Remembered Paul” and the “Historical Paul”


Historians attempting to sketch a historical outline of Paul’s life and missionary undertakings can draw on a number of written sources, first and foremost the (proto-) Pauline epistles and the canonical Acts of Luke. These sources are all anchored, however, to specific projects from a precise time and place, each with their own rhetorical objective(s); they respond, in other words, to contemporary issues and their primary intention is not to reveal the raw facts of the past that inform their arguments. It is no coincidence, therefore, that the portrait that emerges from these sources is not so much one of a “real Paul” free from literary or theological interpretations, but rather one of a “remembered Paul” who appears in a variety of reception traditions (see Judith LIEU, “The Battle for Paul in the Second Century,” Irish Theological Quarterly 75 [2010], 3–14 or Benjamin L. WHITE, Remembering Paul. Ancient and Modern Contests over the Image of the Apostle, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).

It should therefore be clear that the genuine Pauline letters are consciously incorporated in the “Reception of Paul” approach, since in these letters Paul constructs an image of his person and “his” gospel that he wanted to be remembered by his communities. Hence, in the genuine letters we do not encounter the “historical Paul” who could be compared with the “remembered Paul.” Instead, the genuine letters provide a self-construction of Paul's conversion and mission as an apostle of Jesus Christ that belongs to the history of receptions of Paul. Remembrances of Paul thus do not begin with the deutero-Pauline letters and Acts, but with the letters which Paul wrote himself. This approach has been outlined in more detail by Jens Schröter, Simon Butticaz and Andreas Dettwiler in the introduction to the volume Receptions of Paul in Early Christianity. The Person of Paul and His Writings Through the Eyes of His Early Interpreters, ed. Jens Schröter, Simon Butticaz, Andreas Dettwiler (BZNW 234), Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter, 2018, 3–22 .

Should we thus relegate the search for a “historical Paul” to the rank of a causa desperata? Perhaps not. In short, we propose, following a suggestion by Benjamin L. White, to develop "a new historiography of Pauline Studies" (Benjamin L. WHITE, Remembering Paul, 2014, 66), that is, an innovative paradigm that presents historical accounts by bringing together both the instances of Pauline reception—in light of their socio-historical context, rhetorical presentation, and theological framework—as well as the events that triggered such phenomena of tradition (see Benjamin L. WHITE, Remembering Paul, 2014, esp. 66–69.70–107; see also Christ KEITH, “The Narratives of the Gospels and the Historical Jesus: Current Debates, Prior Debates and the Goal of Historical Jesus Research,” JSNT 38/4 [2016], 425–455).


Social Memory, Historical Criticism, Wirkungsgeschichte, Historical Paul, Remembered Paul


Simon Butticaz
University of Lausanne

Christine Jacobi
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Jens Schröter
Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin

Member Area

Wuppertal 2020 Call for Papers

Following the 2019 session of our research group, which was dedicated to methodological issues about Pauline reception, the 2020 session will be devoted to the missionary Paul, both in history and in memory. It will bring together invited speakers and submitted papers in one or two full panels. The following questions will be discussed and should be considered by those wishing to submit a proposal: How was the missionary Paul remembered in post-Pauline writings? For what purposes and in which socio-historical contexts was he recalled? Is it possible to reconstruct, on the basis of those receptions, the missionary discourse and practices of the so-called "apostle to the nations"? And what about the collaborators of Paul? In which way(s) did they continue Paul's missionary task after his death?

The Annual Conference 2020
has been cancelled.