Ezra Delahaye

This article examines the so-called “turn to Paul” in contemporary, continental philosophy: Why do continental philosophers read Paul? After dividing the philosophers who deal with Paul into groups which have similar philosophical motives, the author argues that there are two main approaches to Paul in contemporary philosophy, the universalist approach and the ontological approach. Delahaye, then, argues that the main difference between these groups can be understood through the Pauline text which serves a reading key for the members of these groups, these texts being Gal. 3:28 and 1 Cor. 7:29-31. Delahaye elaborates on the differences in these groups by taking the most well-known philosopher of each group and analyzing how they start from the above-mentioned Pauline texts in their analysis of Paul. Delahaye shows how Badiou-the representative of the universalist approach-reads Paul as a political thinker based on Gal. 3:28. Badiou, then, develops this towards an ontology of the event. The representative of the ontological approach-Agamben-centers his reading of Paul on 1 Cor. 7:29-31 and the ontological interpretation of this text. Agamben, then, develops this ontology into political ontology in his reading of Paul. Both approaches, then, ultimately read Paul as a political ontological thinker. A thinker who tries to reground the political order in a renewed ontology. Delahaye’s conclusion is that the main philosophical reason these philosophers read Paul is that Paul allows them to overcome contemporary, political problems by renewing and re-grounding ontology.

In 1920/1921 Martin Heidegger lectured on religion. In these lectures he turned to the letters of Paul, which had – until that point – exclusively been studied by theologians. Because of this, Heidegger's reading of Paul has to be understood against the background of early twentieth century theology. Heidegger approaches these letters phenomenologically, which leads him to discover eschatology as the core. By confronting Heidegger's interpretation of eschatology with the history of eschatology can the true novelty of his approach be shown.