| Abstract
|
:
|
In “The Difference Between a Genius and an Apostle,” Kierkegaard deploys the figure of Paul as the archetype of an apostle, who “does not develop in such a way as he gradually becomes what he is [according to potentiality].” This claim would seem at odds with much contemporary Pauline scholarship, which understands Paul’s writings as an ad hoc, developing, quasi-guerrilla sort of theology. While this may be the case, Kierkegaard’s essay is nonetheless deserving of attention, for it highlights an issue that arguably remains a tacit foundation of Pauline studies – namely, the identification and resulting allure of Paul as an inherently authoritative figure in early Christianity. In “The Difference Between a Genius and an Apostle,” Kierkegaard deploys the figure of Paul as the archetype of an apostle, who “does not develop in such a way as he gradually becomes what he is [according to potentiality].” This claim would seem at odds with much contemporary Pauline scholarship, which understands Paul’s writings as an ad hoc, developing, quasi-guerrilla sort of theology. While this may be the case, Kierkegaard’s essay is nonetheless deserving of attention, for it highlights an issue that arguably remains a tacit foundation of Pauline studies – namely, the identification and resulting allure of Paul as an inherently authoritative figure in early Christianity.
|