Un-believable
But I confess this to you, that in accordance with [h]the Way, which they call a sect, I do serve the God of our fathers, believing everything that is in accordance with the Law and is written in the Prophets; 15 having a hope in God, which these men cherish themselves, that there shall certainly be a resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked. 16 In view of this I also do my best to maintain a blameless conscience both before God and before other people, always. Acts 24:14-16 NASB
Maintain a blameless conscience – It won’t come as a surprise to most of you that Paul (Saul) kept the Law. He publicly said so before Felix, and he demonstrated it in action when he paid for the vows of others at the request of Peter. The extended citation from Acts (above) certainly makes it clear that Paul attempted to live in accordance with the traditions and the Law of Moses, and the further fact that the Law was taught to converts in Jerusalem (cf. Acts 15) makes it clear that Paul was in harmony with the early Jewish Messianic believers.
Why does this matter? It matters a great deal because the general consensus of the Jewish world today is that Paul was anything but orthodox. In fact, Paul is seen as the true foundation of the Church, a man who developed the teachings of “Jesus” into an antisemitic, supersessionism religion called “Christianity.” Other than the doctrine of the Trinity, Paul’s view of “law and grace,” as understood by Luther et. al. is perhaps the most theologically divisive idea that separates Christianity and Judaism. Boyarin’s comment on the rabbis’ opinion of Paul says it all:
“ . . . a person who refuses to keep the commandments for ideological reasons (such as Paul), whether called an apostate or a min, fits into the category of the worst deviants, who are subject to righteous murder.”[1]
Jonathan Sacks, the brilliant rabbi and scholar, had the same opinion, often mentioning Paul as the seminal thinker dividing Christianity and Judaism in the first century. I wonder how long it will be before Jewish scholars read what Paul said rather than interpret Paul through the lens of the Church? Probably as long as it will take the Church to admit that Paul was never a Christian but rather an orthodox, Torah observant Jew. Mark Nanos has gone a long way trying to demonstrate the fallacy of this “Christian Paul” view. Of course, Pamela Eisenbaum’s book, Paul Was Not a Christian already laid the groundwork. But for some reason, many scholars simply adopt what the Church has taught for centuries—incorrectly and with theological bias—as if the Christian view of Paul is historically accurate. The Church owes more to Augustine and Luther than it does to Paul, and until we make this perfectly clear, our Jewish brothers and sisters will misunderstand what happened in the first century and therefore misinterpret anything said about Yeshua. We can’t make headway about the Messiah if we’re going to be overshadowed by his representative. So, first things first. Let’s put Paul back in on the seat of Moses and off the preacher’s podium.
Topical Index: Paul, orthodox, Sacks, Boyarin, Nanos, Eisenbaum, Acts 24:14-16
[1] Daniel Boyarin, Border Lines: the Partition of Judeo-Christianity (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004), p. 199.
Human capacity to reflect God’s image is inherently obscured under rule of the darkness of sin and death, by which also human understanding of all things Divinely ordered is bereft of illumination. Any glimmer of hope comes only by the gracious radiant countenance of God himself toward the repentant and mercifully restored sinner by means of the expiation of atonement.
The Divine order was sustained by God for the sake of mankind through Noah; and then for Abraham and his descendants, expanding to include a select people of God demarcated both by a rule of order (Torah) and a particular geographical setting (the land of Israel) for a specific mission (proclaim the message and reflect the illuminating Spirit of God’s glory found under His rule of order for the good and benefit of all mankind). But, by the weakness of mankind found in and of itself apart from an actual relationship with God, Divine order continued to elude humanity’s grasp. God’s Divine order must be brought to mankind both corporately and corporally so as to be incorporated (embodied) by human beings.
That is the Divine order and rule that is now brought to mankind… the Divine order and rule which the apostle Paul (Saul) experienced… by which his understanding was illumined, and which he proclaimed the risen Yeshua of Nazareth— the crucified Christ and resurrected Son of God— is now enthroned as the new Divinely revealed order and rule of a new order of creation.
To borrow a phrase from Kohelet, “Of the writings Paul and how he should really be understood, there is no end”. Though I have not read Boyarin’s book, the citations given here and other places seem factually compelling. I really should read his book. As one may gather from my opening remark, when it comes to Paul, I am somewhat of an agnostic.
“Let’s put Paul back in on the seat of Moses and off the preacher’s podium.”
YES!!!