St. Paul versus Nietzsche: Part 3, He Taught Us How to be Human

This series came to mind during the last of our Bible classes at church doing a study of 2 Corinthians. 

In the second to last chapter of 2 Corinthians we encounter Paul's famous line: "When I am weak, then I am strong." It forcibly struck me in our class how Paul completely flips "weakness" upside down in 1 and 2 Corinthians against the backdrop of Roman culture and virtue. 

As described over the last two posts, for the Romans weakness was clearly a bad thing, something shameful and to be avoided. And yet, Paul flips that assessment on its head. Paul effects a transvaluation of weakness. And the world has never been the same. Here is the Christian revolution that Nietzsche came to hate.

To paint a picture of how Paul conducts a transvaluation of weakness in the Corinthian correspondence, consider that the Greek word translated as weakness occurs 43 times in the New Testament. Twenty-three of those occurrences, over half of the NT usage, are found in 1 and 2 Corinthians. Paul talks a lot about weakness in these letters.

As Paul talks about weakness, he flips the Roman script. What was considered bad by the Romans--weakness--is now good:
"The weakness of God is stronger than men." (1 Cor. 1.25)

"God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong." (1 Cor. 1.27)

"We are fools for Christ's sake, but you are wise in Christ. We are weak, but you are strong." (1 Cor. 4.10)

"The parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable." (1 Cor. 12.22)

"It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power." (1 Cor. 15.43)

"If I must boast, I will boast of the things that show my weakness." (2 Cor. 11.30)

“My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” (2 Cor. 12.9)

"For when I am weak, then I am strong." (2 Cor. 12.10)

"For he was crucified in weakness, but lives by the power of God." (2 Cor. 13.4)

"For we are glad when we are weak and you are strong." (2 Cor. 13.9)
It is difficult to describe just how crazy all this would have sounded to Roman audiences. In his transvaluation of weakness Paul turned the Roman world upside down. Our world as well. 

And not just in how we show a very anti-Roman, anti-Nietzsche concern for the weak, oppressed, and victimized. That much of the Christian revolution is obvious as we described in the last post. But consider here how Paul also changed our vision of being human

For the Romans being "fully human" meant maximizing power, vigor, and strength. But after Paul's transvaluation of Roman values, being "fully human" became embracing our weakness. Here's how Paul describes it in 2 Corinthians: 
But we have this treasure in jars of clay, to show that the surpassing power belongs to God and not to us. We are afflicted in every way, but not crushed; perplexed, but not driven to despair; persecuted, but not forsaken; struck down, but not destroyed; always carrying in the body the death of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus may also be manifested in our bodies.
We're breakable, not bulletproof. Being human means embracing our vulnerability and our fragility. 

Ponder the many modern voices who follow Paul here, from the "gifts of imperfection" of Brene Brown to Kate Bowler's "no cure for being human." Today we assume the truth that being "fully human" means embracing our weakness. But this pervasive, modern assumption is far from obvious. From Brown to Bowler, we owe this insight to St. Paul's transvaluation of weakness.

As surprising as this might sound, St. Paul is the one who taught the world how to be human.

Addendum:
I expect some readers will quibble with my final line. Isn't Jesus the one who taught us to be human? The answer is, yes, of course. Paul undergoes his own transvaluation of values on the road to Damascus when he encounters the crucified and risen Lord Jesus. And yet, I wanted to underline the role of Paul for a few reasons. 

First, Paul always gets hammered in comparison to Jesus. Everyone loves Jesus and Paul is just so...problematic. At least for some folks. 

Given that, I wanted to provoke a little bit (as I like to do) by highlighting the role of Paul in effecting the Christian revolution in the West. This is historically justifiable. Jesus didn't write anything down, and he never left Palestine. Paul's writings are the earliest Christian writings we possess. Given these writings and his mission work, Paul was the first to proclaim and communicate Christ's transvaluation of values to the Greco-Roman world. 

This entry was posted by Richard Beck. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply