Loading...Now that I have provided an overview of the significance of Paul and his letters (my previous post) I can summarize what we can know about his life. I begin by trying to give a fifty-word version:
Paul, originally a zealous Greek-speaking Jew, vigorously opposed early Christians before having a vision of the resurrected Jesus that convinced him that the crucifixion was God’s plan of salvation for both Jew and gentile, leading him to spread his law-free gospel to gentiles in major urban areas of the Mediterranean.
Now I can provide a fuller summary of what we can know of Paul’s life.
Get access to Dr. Ehrman's library of 4,000+ articles plus five new articles per week about the New Testament and early Christianity. It costs as little as $2.99/mth and every cent goes to charity!
Unlock 4,000+ Articles Like This!
Something I find confusing: You argue that Paul remained a faithful Jew and that “Jews of course would continue keeping God’s law as his chosen people” even after Jesus’ resurrection. But Paul himself states that he did not consistently keep the law, which seems contradictory. I would have to argue that Paul no longer saw himself as fully Jewish.
I’d say Paul did keep the law. Except when he didn’t. 🙂 When he was with Jews he certainly did. But he was a misisoary to gentiles, and so could not really associate with them. I don’t think we can say that a Jew who doesn’t keep the law is not Jewish any more than we can say that a Christian who does not keep the Sermon on the Mount is not Christian.
That’s a good point that I, as a Jewish person who certainly doesn’t keep the whole law but sees myself as fully Jewish should have noted 🙂
Hi Dr Ehrman,
I grew up in the Independent Fundamental Baptist sect of Christendom here in the south before I left and now fall under the Agnostic, atheist banner. Long time admirer of your work and just recently joined the blog.
Is it safe to assume that the Christian religion is more a religion of Paul than Jesus now days? I always felt growing up that whenever there was a question about faith and religion growing up the answers from leaders invariably relied on what Paul wrote and not what was considered teachings from the Gospel version of Jesus.
I’d say it has been since the first century. But I don’t think Paul it the one who came up with the “religion about Jesus” (even though he most popularized it) He was persecuting Jesus’ followers for having that religion before he bacme one of them.disabledupes{f7b6f2dab5d28960dd9e2bfa122aa4e7}disabledupes
I got the impression the Paul considered the sacrifice of Jesus to conclude the Covenant with Moses, (obedience equals blessings, disobedience equals punishment)
in order to return to the Abraham’s Covenant ”by faith in God.”
I don’t think Paul saw the two covenants as at odds with each other. His view appears to be that most Jews misunderstood the law of Moses, thihkning it could establish righteousness, when in fact only faith could The law itself wsa good and holy, but because people were enslaved to sin, it created a barrier with God, overcome only by faith in God’s salvation. (Hope that makes sense: it’s a bit hard to lay out in a few sentences!)
When Paul claims to have been a Pharisee in Philippians 3:5, is he simply saying that he shared a belief system with the Pharisees, or shared certain practices with them? Or was it more involved than that; were there other things required to be a member of the Pharisee “club”?
Also, what kind of first-century man would be both an excellent reader/writer of Greek AND a leather-worker? Shouldn’t he have had a profession that utilized his writing skills – rare as they were?
Being a Pharisee involved both beliefs and practices. I don’t think he had to go through any initiation rites, though.
I’ve often wondered about Paul’s “status inconsistency”: highly educated as only elites for the most part were (or their slaves) yet a day laborer (as elites were not). Recently I’ve begun to wonder if he started out as a slave, and got his educatoin that way, but also had to have another handy craft. Really don’t know!
“Recently I’ve begun to wonder if he started out as a slave…”
That’s an interesting thought.
1. Would Paul have been a Jewish slave working for a Jew?
2. How would he likely got his freedom?
1. Don’t know. 2. Don’t know. Manumission happened a lot.
Albert Schweitzer wrote a scholarly book examining whether or not Jesus was mentally ill contending that Jesus was not mentally ill. Has anyone written a similar scholarly book about whether or not Paul, with his “vision,” and his grandiosity, was mentally ill?
I know a lot of people have talked to me about it! Off hand I don’t know of a scholarly analysis devoted to it. But maybe someone else on the blog does and can tell us!
Dr. Ehrman,
For such a profound historical figure as Paul, this post might be the best Cliff’s notes version on him ever. Especially the bulleted points. I’m fully sympatico with you on Paul.
However, in that same vein, I struggle to reconcile Peter’s assertion in Acts 15, “…God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe.”
Can you help a lay person out with understanding the timing and scope of Peter’s message to gentiles compared to Paul?
Acts is trying to show that hte gentile mission was given by God FIRST to Peter, almost certainly as part of his (Luke’s) agenda of showing that Peter and Paul and all teh apostles were completely on the same page, fully unified — given the rumors and realities that htey had split opnions on some matters, including whether gentiles were *equal* with Jews in Christ….
Would you prefer to have:
1. A comprehensive understanding of Paul’s life, including his childhood, theological development, and missionary journeys, providing insight into his thoughts and actions?
Or
2. A deeper understanding of the Gospel writers, including their identities, historical contexts, sources, and writing conditions, shedding light on the origins and development of the Gospel narratives?
Not sure what you’re asking. Do you mean some kind of authoritative account handed down from on high so that there were no longer any doubts about the matter?? Everyone has their preferences, but I myself tend to be more a Gospels person than a Paul person.
Wouldn’t it have been uncommon for someone to be literate in Greek and also work in the trades?
Yup. It’s hard to figure out!
Off topic question. What is your understanding of the phrase “Lord of Hosts”? As you know, it occurs in the Hebrew bible in numerous places. Some online stuff suggests it may refer to other gods in pre-monotheistic Israeli religion or it may mean Lord of the armies. Thanks in advance for any useful information.
It appears to mean that YHWH is the ultimate leader of all the heavenly beings.
So Paul goes from persecuting Christians to leading them overnight, and no one’s suspicious? That’s like a steakhouse CEO suddenly running PETA—surely someone had a few questions!
From his own letters it’s pretty clear that lots of followers of Jesus were mighty suspicious indeed!
“ Paul remained a faithful Jew. ”
It seems that people who were actually Faithful Jews would not agree that Paul was a faithful Jew, right?
Depends. There were Jews and there were Jews, just as there are Jews and there are Jews. But certainly lots of Jews were offended by him. He claims he was flogged (by Jews) on five occaoisns!
“Paul remained a faithful Jew.”
Who rejects circumcision – Romans 2:25-29
Who rejects the Law (and immediately claims that it is holy) – Romans 7:7-12
Who explicitly states that God bypassed the Jews and gave away his promise to “the nations”, or non-Jews – Romans 9:30-33
It is a Christian fable that Paul is Jewish, gratefully embraced to uphold the myth of Judeo-Christian origins.
Obviously, Paul claims that he is Jewish – yet evidently, his actions speak loudly against him, just as the actions of Jesus speak against him being Jewish.
Long story short, Christianity is rejected by any and all Jews, and evidently doesn’t equate to Judaism
You would do well to learn the difference between Jesus and Christ, by the way, and distinguish that Paul’s main 4 letters spend only 7% on Jesus, and the vast majority on Christ.
Read the Patristics, especially Dialogue with Trypho chapter 48. All of them speak almost exclusively of Christ alone.
XS is the sole focus of Christianity and the Epistles (and LXX where we find XS as “translation” of mashiach); IS is the sole focus of the Christian Gospels. Entirely different sets of text
Paul a Jew: have you read what you wrote under “The views Paul developed”?
“but that in the end transformed the Christian religion, opening it it up not only to Jews but also gentiles””
But what about the letter to the Romans?
This was a letter addressed to a church that he did not found, yet it was predominantly composed of Gentiles (Rom 11:13). Someone before him (at least in Rome) was already proclaiming the gospel to the Gentiles.
I believe that the title “Apostle to the Gentiles” was something Paul himself fabricated and is not historically accurate.
A topic that to me now seems true, at this time of my life and understanding of the ancient world, is Jews and many Pagans were vehement. A case could be argued the right terms are passionate, devoted, committed, faithful, etc. But, based on cases of stoning, whipping, destroying disagreeable texts, etc. I would use vehement. Does this zeitgeist fit within understanding Paul’s message and missionary activities?
I’d say it’s hard to summarize an entire people or peoples with certain adjectives. You could say that “Americans are arrogant” for example (and many people around the world do!), but it’s always a broad generalizatoin based on a few examples.
Everything seems to follow from Paul’s belief that Jesus was “raised from the dead”. But we appear to have no idea how he came to believe this, only that it probably had something to do with his visionary experience or experiences, and it does seem clear that Paul’s idea of being “raised from the dead” seems to be something other than reanimation of a corpse– more like a transformation that didn’t involve the material body. And how he came to that must also have had something to do with his visionary experiences. It’s a shame that he never really elucidated those visionary experiences. He seems to have thought that it would a bad thing to talk about them in any detail. Frustrating.
“Roman citizen from Tarsus trained in Jerusalem under rabbi Gamaliel are only from Acts & so cannot be trusted; he himself says nothing about them.)”
Perfect supports my point that Paul doesn’t talk about living in Jerusalem during Jesus’ time & experiences with the disciples & Gamaliel.