FAQ
Paul

Paul

http://www.google.ro/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CDEQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.marknanos.com%2FBoston-Torah-Obs-5-9-05.pdf&ei=1x3eUrWRKpCA7QaOzoGoBg&usg=AFQjCNGJz_3_e0azWA26wzllYHfcfZa6UA&sig2=HmuvflTtmo69fptTGqeOcw&bvm=bv.59568121,d.ZGU

And it has not kept in focus the rhetorical nature of Paul’s language and the intra-Jewish context of the audiences it implies. I propose that we read Paul as a Torah- observant Jew of his time who was not proclaiming allegiance to a new religion, but the restoration of Israel and the inclusion of the nations, in expression of a Jewish hope that was a central tenet of Judaism—and one that still is.

Paul as Torah-Observant (or not) in Some Exemplary Texts

Paul’s declarations that, e.g., Torah is “spiritual” (Rom 7:14) that as a gift of God to Israel the Mosaic covenant is “irrevocable” (11:29), that Christ-believing Jews are to remain “in that state,” i.e., remain Jews and thus Torah-observant (1 Cor 7:17-24) and that it is “keeping the commandments of God” that matters in the end of the day (v. 19)

Gal 1:13-16: You have heard, no doubt, of my earlier life in Judaism. I was violently persecuting the church of God and was trying to destroy it. I advanced in Judaism beyond many among my people of the same age, for I was far more zealous for the traditions of my ancestors. But when God, who had set me apart before I was born and called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, so that I might proclaim him among the Gentiles, I did not confer with any human being.... This text has been understood to mean that Paul formerly lived in Judaism, but that he no longer is identified with Judaism, and does not practice it. He is instead identified with something else and practices it, namely, Christianity, even if not yet so called. The Greek phrase th\n e ̇mh\n aÓnastrofh/n pote e ̇n twˆ◊ ∆Ioudaiœsmwˆ◊ can be translated to read, “my former way of living (lifestyle) in Judaism,” that is, moving the implication not to a change of religion from Judaism to something else, but a relative change of some aspect of lifestyle within or among Jewish religious groups, or even to a new way of living within a Jewish group. He now lives in Judaism (Jewishly) in a new way.

That this is a responsible translation and understanding of the language is witnessed by the fact that Paul refers within this statement to a particular Jewish group 11 See the helpful formulation of this matter in Gager, Reinventing Paul. Mark Nanos Page 16 5/9/05 in which he formerly operated, namely, the Pharisaic groups, which were defined by allegiance to their interpretation “of the traditions of the fathers.”12 Moreover, Paul had formerly lived within that group in a particular Judaism that he claims his fellow members failed to match in their way of living within that Judaism, for he was more zealous for upholding that Jewish group’s traditions than his peers. Indeed, he had lived like one who, unlike the rest, sought to destroy the rival Jewish groups that he felt transgressed the traditions upheld by that Judaism in some (unexplained) way by how they lived based on their claim to faith in Jesus Christ. Two specific ways arise to understand his dissociating rhetoric (from his former way of living in that Judaism, before a Christ-believer himself) that do not suggest any move away from Judaism itself per se: either he moved away from Pharisaism (from Pharisaic Judaism) in his current way of living (i.e., as a member within a different Judaism), or he moved away from a certain element of his way of expressing his zeal for the traditions of the fathers (i.e., from a certain element of Pharisaic Judaism that formerly drove him to such opposition to Christ-believers with Judaism). It seems to me that the latter option is implied. However, whether Paul left Pharisaism or not, he states that he no longer seeks approval from his (former) Pharisaic compatriots (the former contemporary Judean peers [sunhlikiw¿taß e ̇n twˆ◊ ge÷nei mou] among whom he had sought approval previously) when he says his approval and status is established by God, not human agency or agents (cf. 1:1, 10-16).

Pavel a scris niște scrisori prin care a adresat problemele sau situațiile din anumite adunări sau din viață unor persoane. Nici prin cap nu i-a trecut lui Pavel că peste 2000 de ani vom dezbate noi scrisorile lui. Deci când citim aceste scrisori să nu uităm acesta. Eu unul sunt sigur că cei care erau destinatari au înțeles ce a vrut Pavel să le spună atunci și acolo. Cred eu era ce aveau nevoie ei să audă în situațiile respective. Dar aceasta nu înseamnă că rămân la ce a scris fiecăruia în parte pentru că așa cum spui tu Sergio par a se contrazice. Păi dacă vorbesc cu doi oameni și unul moare de sete, iar altul a băut prea mult atunci îi voi spune primului să bea și la al doilea să nu mai bea. Dacă cunoști situațiile nu e nici o problemă cum să pui împreună răspunsurile care scoase din context se contrazic.

Rico Cortes: The Hebrew Context of Galatians: Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toiV5g9FBdA