Paul and Twentieth Century Philosophy in the Philosophical Theology Session
I listened to three fascinating presentations on the apostle Paul from a continental philosophical perspective, especially Alain Badiou, Jacques Derrida, and Slavoj Zizek. I partly blame these three presenters for my current interest in Derrida and Zizek.
Some food for thought from the presentations:
- Paul’s thought on salvation: not individualistic. Justice achieved without the law. From the book
Justice, not righteousness should be the translation of the Greek word often translated as such. (as an added point, I would like to say the same for the German term for righteousness as justice as well.
Wickedness, then, should be injustice.
Justice as law is different from Deconstruction is justice.
Derrida says that justice is infinite, rebellious, heterotopic. Law as stability, calculable. Justice is the experience. Law is inherently violent. Behind the law, there is the death penalty.
The Messiah is the Justice of God.
Both the Law of Rome and Jews is what Paul is protesting.
Paul thinks that the law can make one aware of injustice.
There is a difference between Justice of the Spirit vs. Justice of the flesh
Jesus is the Great Criminal according to Derrida.
- Paul and Badiou
Simply: Badiou badly misinterprets Paul. Death (crucifixion) all negated by the Resurrection, an ahistorical kernel.
What about hegemony?
- Giorgio Agamben: division of division in Paul. Multiplicity of groups, like the remnant. Alternative Messianic community.