Paul and Augustine: Conversion Narratives and the Retrospective Self

In response to Paula Fredriksen’s Paul and Augustine:  Conversion Narratives, Orthodox Traditions and the Retrospective Self

Conversion stories bring with them an establishment problem, that of retrospection. Conversions come in an instant; it’s that eureka moment where the light bulb goes off. One is not usually writing about the experience as it happens, instead he/she writes about it after it happens, in retrospect. Retrospection is always 20/20 because we read into our past the information we need to explain our present: to ourselves, to others, to the ones angered by our change of opinion. Paul and Augustine are no different. Augustine takes this a step further though, as he attempts to redefine Paul’s conversion to match his own. He looks for credibility by incorporating Paul into his own conversion and circularly, recreating Paul’s own conversion to match.

Augustine

            Paul has to explain himself to those that disagree or do not understand his new philosophy. His conversion story becomes rhetoric. We cannot know the moment of his conversion, nor do we have a vast autobiographical retrospective account like Augustine, but we can pull what Paul feels convicted about via his rhetorical writings to the churches. But even there, the past gets in the way. We cannot see clearly the present and present theology or philosophy without reviewing the past, where our minds automatically make assumptions to make the past match the present and vice versa. But it’s a past and present that we want to see. We cannot review the past without introducing our own bias, which is the problem of conversion narratives, Paul’s included. 

Paul

Written for my Birth of Christianity class on 2/14/12