The first thing to say is Doug Campbell is to be congratulated on the length of his new book, at under 500 pages it is half the length of his otherwise wonderful The Deliverance of God (DoG). Framing Paul is still not a short book, because likes it predecessor, Campbell once again seeks to make his argument as thorough and tight as possible. Framing Paul seeks to solve the issue of when, where and why of Paul's letters. Campbell reconstructs the life of Paul from the letters that are present within the Bible. Like the pre-history to DoG, Campbell has been working around these questions for a long time. Over the years he has published several articles that seek to anchor the life and letters of Paul in history and has had a working timeline for well over a decade. As a student of Campbell's at King's in the early 2000s, much of what the book argues was already in place then, although Campbell has continued to fine-tune the argument in the years following.
Campbell's language of 'framing' (borrowed from Derrida) indicates that his aim is to discover the 'Pauline story that frames the letters' (p.12), that is, the Pauline biography that gives rise to the letters' occasions. Too often Pauline scholarship operates with no overarching frame, no account of how the letters are related to one another, the order they come in and the underlying account of Paul's life which explains their contingency. Campbell's argument is that a biography, that arises out of the data in the letters, and at the same time explains them, this will 'ground all subsequent interpretative work on Paul rather more accurately and firmly than hitherto has been the case' (p.404).
Campbell argues that to construct Paul's biography we must begin with his letters and leave to one side the account of Paul's life in the Book of Acts. We must begin with the primary data. Too many Pauline scholars too readily accept the account in Acts or work with an approach that borrows both from Acts and the letters as equal sources. Campbell's approach builds on that done by John Knox and John Hurd.
Campbell argues that ten of the Pauline attributed letters are authentic over against many who claim only seven are. He argues for the greater inclusion of 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians and Colossians amongst Pauline scholars. He disputes the Pauline authorship of 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus, although not without serious consideration, that is, he subjects them to the same methodology he uses with the other letters. How he constructs the order of the letters will cause much debate. He argues for Galatians to be written in the same year as Romans and close to 1 and 2 Corinthians. The years being 51-52AD. This is fairly novel for both arguing that Galatians is not the first letter Paul wrote and for placing many of Paul's letter much earlier than is usually suggested. Romans and the Corinthian correspondence share references to the 'collection' for Jerusalem, while Galatians and Romans, both have the Jewish 'teachers' (Lou Martyn's terminology) as the circumstances for their occasion. This brings these four letters close together.
Through the long biographical account in Galatians and Paul's brief mention of his escape from Damascus, Campbell argues that we can anchor Paul firmly in history, specifically through the reference to King Aretas, which can dated to 36AD. Campbell also includes Philippians in same time frame as the other letters already mentioned, here he argues that the reference to the 'palace guard' in Phil 1.13 is not a reference to Paul being in Rome (so a late date for the letter), but Paul 's imprisonment in Corinth.
Campbell's study of 1 and 2 Thessalonians argues that these are the earliest letters of Paul we have. Back in the early 2000s, Campbell had previously been arguing for locating 1 Thess. amongst the Rom-Gal-Cor-Phil letters, but in Framing Paul he claims this is the earliest letter of Paul we have. These two letters to Thessalonicia he argues were written in early 40s, on the basis of the reference in 2 Thess 2.3-4 to the Gaian crisis where Gaius planned to erect a statue of Jupiter in the temple at Jerusalem; Gaius was assassinated 41.
Ephesians, Colossians and Philemon he also argues were written close together, but while many suggest a late date, Campbell argues for them being written in the year prior to Romans et al. The chapter on these three letters is the longest in Framing Paul, which is perhaps understandable considering that in terms of Ephesians and Colossians they are disputed. Campbell argues that these letters come following his second and very important visit to Jerusalem and before the year of crisis which engulfs him in 51-52. Ephesians, Campbell claims, is the lost letter to the Laodiceans (Col 4.16) and should be renamed accordingly.
Framing Paul provides another ground-breaking work to follow DoG. Both books set out to re-write how Pauline scholarship should be undertaken. This latest book will no doubt generate as much conversation as DoG, some probably very critical. Campbell is nothing but provocative, although arising out of serious study and convictions. He suggests at one point, if his account is correct, Bibles and New Testaments should be re-ordered to reflect the order the letters were written in. Framing Paul gets into some heavy technical discussion, which makes the book tough going at points, but its result - its account of Paul's life and letters is exciting and provides much needed coherence to those of us who seek to teach and preach in churches which likewise are occasional and contingent. Framing Paul ends with some suggestion that Campbell will provide a sequel, which having established an epistolary biography, will engage with Acts. Hopefully further down the way, like Tom Wright, Campbell can also write a more accessible account for a wider audience.