I am interested in what we can know about Paul’s view of the continued importance of Jewish law for Jews, and particularly for himself, as a Jew. I understand that he is emphatic in his letters that the law is not a path to salvation. Rather, for him, belief in the resurrection of Christ is the path to salvation. Yet, the letters are (largely?, exclusively?) addressed to Gentiles, and it is never clear to me what he is saying about the law with respect to Jews.
I understand that traditionally Paul was interpreted as standing against Judaism, which would lead to a view that Paul rejected the law entirely, even for Jews. I also understand that modern scholars have tended to try to understand Paul in his Jewish context, which would lead to viewing his negative statements about the law as relating only to Gentiles. Yet, I tend to be persuaded by James Tabor (Paul and Jesus) that Paul really did materially break from his Judaism.
Possibly, Paul did think Jews need to observe the law, and possibly he did so personally, but not because he thought this was the path to salvation for Jews. Possibly he thought the law had some other function, but still needed to be observed – by Jews. Or, was he really saying that the law has been superseded?
Did he likely keep observing the law himself? Did he consider himself (and other Jews) to be obligated to do so, whether or not this was really the path to salvation?
Very interested to hear what you think about this.
Eric
Paul’s attitude towards marriage is emblematic of his attitude in this area. Better that nobody marry, nobody has sex, nobody has children. But he still endorses Christians marrying, rather than burning with illicit lust (as if married people never burn with illicit lust.)
He’s the key transitional figure because he feels both ways about it–yes, Jesus should return, the Kingdom should come, and then nobody will marry, nobody will be born, nobody will be circumcised, there will be no impure foods to eat, there will be no sinners to convert. (This is how he sees it, I’m far from certain Jesus saw it precisely the same way).
But he also likes the life he’s found. He enjoys the challenge of the mission he’s taken on, it completes him in a way that the Judaism he was raised with never did. He likes converting people, he likes seeing their children brought up with religious ideas he’s helped create, he does on some level want them to marry and raise their children Christian, because this is how his ideas will spread. This is his true progeny. This is his true immortality. And many before and since have felt the same way. Truthfully, it is the closest thing to true immortality any mortal can aspire to–to be remembered. And he will be. Bloodlines die out, the afterlife (however you see it) is never confirmed. But certain people just go on in the collective memory. And he’s one of them.
He is not of one mind about any of this. Is anyone? To understand a human being is to understand his or her inner conflicts, the ability to want many opposing things at the same time. Paul wants to see Jesus in the (immortal) flesh. But if he ever does, his work is done. He wants it to go on. There is no reconciling those two desires.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
2 Guest(s)