The Way of the Rabbi (1)

 

I, therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, entreat you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called,  Ephesians 4:1

Walk – Paul was a Rabbi.  He thought like a Rabbi.  He taught like a Rabbi.  He wrote like a Rabbi.  He lived his life like a Rabbi.  No one doubts this.  No scholar claims that Paul’s conversion to the Lord suddenly altered his way of thinking so that Paul became a Greek philosopher or theologian.  No, Paul was a Jewish Rabbi through and through.  He was a Rabbi who believed that Yeshua was the Messiah.

This fact is immensely important when it comes to understanding what Paul writes in his letters.  If we ignore his Rabbinic background, we are like to make assumptions about his words that do not fit the context of a teaching Rabbi.  Let me give you just one small example and then you can see for yourself what this might imply.

Abraham Cohen wrote a book called Everyman’s Talmud.  It is a collection of topics from the vast literature of the Talmud, the written rabbinic discussion of the Torah and other Jewish literature.  In his introduction, Cohen makes the following point about the way that rabbis taught (please pardon the rather long quotation, but you need to realize what’s happening here).

“The miscellaneous material which constitutes the subject-matter of the Talmid is divisible into two main categories known as Halachah and Haggadah.  The former denotes ‘walking,’ and indicates the way of life to tread in conformity with the precepts of the Torah.”  This is essentially “practical religion, the doing of right actions for the service of God and man.” 

“But it is impossible to separate the Halachah from the other main constituent, the Haggadah, without creating a distorted picture of Rabbinic teaching.  The Haggadah was the concern of the same teachers who pondered over the technicalities of the Halachah.”

“Haggadah (Narration), therefore, signifies the non-legal sections of Rabbinic literature, and is equally important as the other for a correct understanding of the world of thought which generations of teachers lovingly evolved.”

“Whereas the Halachah remained the law to be observed in practice until it was abrogated by a competent authority, Haggadah was always held to be nothing more than the personal opinion of the teacher.  It possesses no binding force upon the community as a whole or any part of it.”

Did you get that?  Since Paul taught in Rabbinic fashion, and his audience was quite used to Rabbinic teaching, that means that Paul undoubtedly used the same Rabbinic techniques:  Halachah and Haggadah.  Some of his teaching was the explanation of practical religion based on Torah and some of it was simply his personal opinion, not binding on the community.  We know that Paul used these two techniques because in some places he actually says that he does.  But what we have not generally appreciated is that he is doing this all the time, moving back and forth between instructions based on Torah commentary and personal opinion and suggestion.  His audience would not have been shocked at all.  This is exactly what they expected of a Rabbi. 

In this verse you see Paul using Halachah.  “I entreat you to walk,” he says.  That’s a clear indicator that he is explaining practical steps in relation to Torah living.  That’s exactly what follows in the next verse.  Every one of the next five actions comes right from Torah.  But not all of Paul’s writings are Halachah.  Some are Haggadah.  The difference is absolutely crucial, because if we start thinking that everything Paul says is binding, we make the mistake of not understanding him as a Rabbi.

Now, go read those passages about marriage, women, submission and humility again.  Sorry about complicating your life with all this extra study material, but how else will we know what the verses say? 

Topical Index:  Halachah, Haggadah, entreat, Ephesians 4:1, Rabbi, Paul, walk

Subscribe
Notify of
19 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Vladimir

Skip, when you reference Paul’s use of Hagaddah, you seem to omit God the Holy Spirit in this. While Paul was indeed a Rabbi of Rabbi’s taught by the great Gamaliel, he is now being instructed by yet one who is greater, God. I would disagree with any notion that anything he wrote was his own.

LaVaye Ed Billings

VLADIMIR,
That sounds like a nice Russian name; I especially liked what you wrote above though. I wrote a long letter on March 9, down below. I am just learning on my own, how these blogs work. We have no Partick or children, grandchildren that live anywhere near us. But I think I got bogged down into much writing for others to read easily. As I went back and restudied all of these, I liked your concise short to the point answer, and am trying to learn from it.

BUT ALL OF YOU THAT DID NOT DO SO, Please go down to LaVaye/Ed, and skip down about two-thirds of the way, and read below the four stars****. Gal. 1:11,12. That is my concise short to the point answer!. L.B.

Michael

Hi LaVaye,

I enjoyed reading your first email very much, just the way it was. Your story was very interesting to me and your passion for the Bible was very clear. My first impression of Paul many years ago was similar to yours. My first impression was that Paul had left the Hebrew worldview behind. He seemed very Catholic to me. Maybe reading Everyman’s Talmud will help clear up this mystery …

Maria Cochrane

I like this distinction – between ‘walk this way’ and ‘this is just my opinion’
The danger is in knowing which of Paul’s teaching falls under what…wearing hats? and submission/love between spouses?

Maria cochrane
Newport News, VA

Richard

It seems to me that while the distinction may be historically accurate, it has the potential to leave more unhelpful confusion than clarity. While the Jews during Jesus’ day may have understood this distinction, they had little ability to keep it clear among themselves – a reason why, perhaps, the Pharisees were constantly confusing the interpretation of the OT Scriptures to be equal with the Scriptures themselves. If we accept this historical standard as a tool to distinguish Paul’s opinion (non-binding) versus God’s commands (binding) pt also makes me wonder about how much we can really apply 2 Tim. 3:16. Even if Paul’s opinion crept into his letters, if we hold the validity of the Canon, and inerrancy, doesn’t that imply that all Scriptural imperatives are God’s desire?

Tom White

Remember that when Paul wrote to Timothy, the only Scriptures were the TaNaK [ie “Old Testament]. He would never have considered his correspondences equal to canon or his own revelations equal to that given to Moses. 🙂

caroldopray

I am glad that you ‘complicated’ my life.
Just yesterday I was asking the Lord about this very thing. I was telling Him that I wanted to walk in His will but was confused about many of the things that Pail said. My own church history. sadly overpowered with many abuses of legalism, had put me in a place of confusion about knowing the Lord and what pleases Him, really. It perverted the personhood of Him in my mind and understanding.
It will take Him divinely interpreting the Word for me, and I will let Him do the revealing; but at least for now, I can know that some of those verses that seem ‘off’, may have a legitimate explanation in the personality of Paul.
It is liberating. I will just have to be careful that I don’t use it for license.

Michael

“until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God”

In Romans Paul talks about Adam prefiguring Christ and I’m wondering if when Yeshua says he is the Son of Man does He mean the son of Adam?

Does Adam mean mankind in Hebrew?

As I recall, Yeshua refers to himself as the Son of Man many more times than as the Son of God.

Gayle

Jesus had no difficulty teaching ‘hard things’. Why would he not have taught, in a very clearly understandable directive, the same ideas later proposed by Paul, if he expected Paul’s requirements to be a standard to which we should aspire?
Paul’s message may have been timely, but Jesus’ message is timeless.

Tom White

Wow,I knew this would be a topic that would touch nerves and step on toes! The number of posts already seems to confirm that. 🙂
We know Paul taught “traditions” that his followers were to follow [2Thes 2:15 &3:6; 1Cor 11:2], yet not all “traditons” should be followed- those that lead us away from Messiah [Col 2:8]; or those that lead us away from the commandment of GOD-(Torah) [Matt 15:3-6].
The Almighty did not want His ways to be a mystery to His people so He gave them His Torah to learn how to walk (halacha) in His ways.

Deut 19:9 NAS- … if you carefully observe all this commandment, which I [Moses] command you today, to love the LORD your God, and to walk in His ways always–

1 Kings 2:3 NAS- And keep the charge of the LORD your God, to walk in His ways, to keep His statutes, His commandments, His ordinances, and His testimonies, according to what is written in the law of Moses, that you may succeed in all that you do and wherever you turn,…

Ps 103:6-7 NAS- The LORD performs righteous deeds, And judgments for all who are oppressed.
He made known His ways to Moses, His acts to the sons of Israel.

When we study ‘hagganah’ of men (including Paul’s), we need to take it back to the foundational truths that the Almighty gave us in His Torah and compare. The Torah is His ‘plumbline’. Whatever goes against it should be discarded. All of our ‘halacha’ and ‘hagganah’ should be consistent with it. He also gave us the Living Word- Messiah as the example- and He walked blamelessly in accord with the Torah.

caroldopray

You have yourself a hot potato, Skip! I have to go to school now, but should find a lot of discussions in my mailbox when I return. I find what you said to be both enlightening and liberating. Isn’t that what the Lord should do – enlighten and liberate?

LaVaye Ed Billings

To Skip and all who read this: I am a three-fourths of a century old lady, who was in a Bible teaching church most of my days, and I always studied the Bible from the time I could read. In those days just the regularly KJ version. I worked in many areas of different churches. I graduated from a Christian College that required Bible courses along with a BS or BA. I do not think I was every in a church that was legalistic in doctrine. I married a young man from the CC, who said he wanted to walk in “The Way”. We have been married 56 years–lots of children, spouses, grandchildren and now three Greats & some” foster ones”– All that to introudce my self to the group. I have written Skip three times before, one of my daughters introduced me and dozens of others to him, about the first year he started this.
I have read , studied and appreciated the things I have learned from Skip. —- But —– I am going to jump in and write comments on some of the things written above; my time is too valuable to write all I would like. When I was in my twenties until I was about forty years old, some of Paul’s statements greatly bothered me. I decided that they were simply of a different culture. I just ignored his teachings for years. Later, I once again studied them over and over, and finally came to grips with some of them long before Skip’s teachings. II Peter 3:14- -16 are verses that helped: focus on what Peter said about Paul, his beloved Brother . “——-His ( Paul’s) letters contain some things that are hard to understand, ——–.” I found that to be true! —– Also several versions of the Bible and some with commentaries helped me immensley.— Now to another positive area on Paul: source, a booklet, ” Scriptural Chirsitanity”, compliled by Miles J. Stanford, and this article written by Wm. R. Newell. I will copy only a small part of this very meaningful article on the value of the Apostle Paul. ” Unto none of the Twelve Apostles did God directly reveal the great body of doctrine for this age. Just as He chose Moses to be the revelator to Israel of the Ten Commandments, and all connected with the Law dispensation: so God chose Saul of Tarsus to be the revelator and unfolder of those mighty truths connected with our Lord’s death, burial, resurrection and His ascended Person. And all the “mysteries,”or secrets, revealed to God’s people in this dispensation by the Holy Spirit in the Word are revealed by Paul. Finally, Paul is the unfolder of that great company of God’s elect, called the Church, the Body of Christ, which is also the Bride–Members of the Lord Jesus Himself.———No other Apostle speaks of these things. Peter himself had to learn them from Paul ( 2 Pet. 3:15, 16). When Paul finished his thirteen great epistles ( Romans – Philemon), those who belong to the Church, God indeed permits him to give a message to the Hebrews: but this is not part of the Church’s doctrine. It indeed instructs Gentile believers as to the meaning of the O.T. Scriptures concerning the priestly Person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ as carried on in heaven now. The Book of Hebrews is the great meeting place for both Gentile and Jewish believers. —- **** But Paul received his teaching all from heaven, from the Lord Jesus in glory, rather than on earth in Jewish connections.- Gal. 1:11 & 12 ” But I make known unto you, bretheren, that the Gospel which was preached by me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by revelation of Jesus Christ”. Paul’s Gospel has nothing Jewish about it. He was not even converted in Jerusalem, but near a Gentile city ( Act. 9:3. He was told by the Lord Himself that his testimony would not be received by the Jews, and he was to go far from them. ( Acts 22: 18, 21.)”—- I am not nor have I ever been affliated with the denomination of these authors , but most of their teachings on this is great! I hope it will bless many others. LB

matt woodward

Dr. Moen,
Are you talking about the book, Everymans Talmud? Not Talmid? If so it is an excellent book and has been a tremendous help in learning how to move from a Greek thought process to a Hebraic one. I still have a long way to go but peole like Cohen, Flusser, Marvin Wilson, Biven, Dwight Pryor, yourself and others have been a great resource and influence. Thanks for your work and service to the Lord.

Michael

Thanks for sharing these other great resources.

I read a little about them and was very impressed.

Going to start with Everyman’s Talmud.

LaVaye Ed Billings

Michael, Do not forget to use the Huge Webster’s New Interntional Dictionary of the English Language Second Edition Unabridged , 1934 ( probably later, too L.B.)— ( using all the experience of resources of Websters’ one hundred years prior to this date).

Lots of worthwhile definitions & valuable information under: Talmud——and Halakah – halacha; Haggada, etc. —- Helps reinforce this for speaking and teaching it, or just remembering it. I enjoyed reading and writing down most of the information from mine, today.

I must get off of this, and get to the kitchen and soon to the sewing room. L.B.