Was Paul a True "Convert"? [Part 2]

 
 

You can read Part 1 of this blog HERE.

Last week I posed the question, “was Paul a true “convert?’” Today I’ll briefly evaluate the three perspectives introduced in last week’s blog and explain why I favor the Paul within Judaism approach. It takes more than a two-part blog to adequately explore this topic, but perhaps this post can serve as a starting point for your own investigation.

The Lutheran Paul

On some points I agree with the Lutheran perspective,[1] such as its emphasis on justification by faith. As Paul observed, God counted Abraham’s faith as righteousness before the patriarch was circumcised – that is, pre-Torah.[2]  Hebrews 11 emphasizes the faith of diverse individuals including Abraham (prior to the Law), Moses (under the Law), and Rahab (outside of the Law); “all these…gained approval through their faith.”[3] Throughout the ups and downs of Scripture, faith has overarchingly marked the people of God as His own.

However, I disagree that Paul rejected Judaism[4] as a legalistic system. While some of his fellow Pharisees clearly operated under a works-based mentality[5] or were replacing God’s commands with human tradition,[6] this does not mean that Judaism as a whole had devolved into mere legalism. John the Baptist’s ministry[7] indicates that there was still a spiritual dimension to Jewish expressions of faith and an understanding of the need for repentance. And need we more proof of the Law’s importance[8] than Jesus’ observance of it?[9]

I also take issue with this view, as voiced by Lutheran blogger Garrick Beckett: “God’s promise is no longer to ethnic Israel, but inclusive Israel…. Paul considers himself a Jew not just in the ethnic sense, but also in the inclusive sense since it is by faith in Christ in which he officially and actually becomes a part of Israel.”[10]

Essentially, within the framework of salvation, Jewish ethnicity becomes meaningless because “Israel” morphs into a purely spiritual category for anyone who believes in Jesus, according to this perspective. This is classic Replacement Theology.[11]

The New Perspective on Paul

While I think the New Perspective moves in the right direction by recognizing God’s grace in choosing Israel and giving them the Law, I disagree with the idea that Jewish separatism was an ethnocentric sin. Israel was meant to be set apart as God’s people[12] – just as the church is.[13] While doubtless some carried this idea into the territory of ethnocentrism, Jewish customs that set Israel apart from the nations were very much in line with God’s commands. Furthermore, I find it unconvincing that Paul would object to Jewish separatism only to embrace the separateness of the early church.

My other big objection to the New Perspective is the same reason why I find the Paul within Judaism view most convincing: the New Perspective maintains that Paul abandoned his Jewish identity, while Paul within Judaism seeks to understand Paul from within the framework of his Jewishness.

Paul within Judaism

First, while it is true that the church would gradually move away from its Jewish roots,[14] in Paul’s time it was a decidedly Jewish movement. Rabbi Saul’s (later known as Paul) persecution of early believers illustrates this; had “the Way” been a movement outside of Judaism, Saul would not have felt the need to quash it. Saul searched for adherents of “the Way” in Jewish synagogues because he considered them Jewish blasphemers.[15]

Second, the council in Jerusalem[16] reinforces the Jewishness of the early church. The council’s purpose was to determine whether Gentile believers should observe Mosaic Law. Ultimately it was decided that they need only “abstain from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from acts of sexual immorality.”[17] . Sadly, the opposite question is asked today, instead of “What do we do with these Gentiles who want to follow Jesus the Jewish Messiah?” the question is now, “What do we do with these Jewish people who believe in Jesus?

Third, Paul avowed his Jewishness,[18] identified himself as a Pharisee,[19] and maintained that the gospel he preached came straight from the Torah and the Prophets.[20] He never lost his desire for his fellow Jews to accept Jesus as Messiah,[21] and he prioritized proclaiming the gospel in synagogues wherever he traveled.

Much more can and has been said, but let’s return to our original question: Was Paul a “true convert?” If by “convert” we mean he abandoned his Jewishness for something entirely new and unrelated, I think not. It is clear to me that Paul, and the Jewish members of the early church, maintained a strong Jewish identity. While I don’t wholeheartedly embrace the “Paul within Judaism” approach, I believe it is on to something by seeking to interpret Paul as a believer and a Jewish man.

Written by Miriam, Life in Messiah Communications Assistant


  1. Have you ever considered Paul as a Jewish man? How might that change your view and understanding of him and his writings?

  2. What do you think about Paul being an apostle to the Gentiles, yet going to the synagogue first in every town he visited?

  3. Is this your first time hearing about Replacement Theology? Check out this two-part blog: Ignorance and Arrogance.


Endnotes:

[1] At least as expressed by this blogger.

[2] Romans 4, especially verses 3 and 9-13 quoting from Genesis 15:6. The Torah was given to Israel at Mt. Sinai in Exodus 20 and following.

[3] Hebrews 11:39.

[4] The term “Judaism” is not found in the Tanakh (Old Testament). It is first found in Acts 13:43 and Paul uses it twice in Galatians (3:13-14) to refer to “the Jewish religion.” Similar to what we see in Christianity’s varied contemporary expressions, Judaism has morphed considerably over the centuries. We know of marked differences between Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes within Judaism even in Yeshua’s day, The epistle to the Galatians highlights some of the concerns Paul addressed in the first century. Today as followers of Messiah Jesus we need discernment as we seek to differentiate between biblical faith/observance and the accretions of doctrines, practices, and traditions not rooted in Scripture.

[5] John the Baptist’s rebuke of the Pharisees in Matthew 3:7-10 implies that they had missed the point of the Law.

[6] Mark 7:1-9, e.g.

[7] Matthew 3:1-11.

[8] In Psalm 19:7-14 we find King David’s poetic celebration of the Law.

[9] Galatians 4:4-5, Matthew 5:17, Luke 10:25-27 and other verses show that Jesus lived very much as a Torah-observant Jewish man.

[10] Quoted from “Beckett: The New Perspective from Paul.

[11] Unfortunately, a thorough discussion of Replacement Theology is beyond the scope of this blog. You might consider reading Michael Vlach’s book Has the Church Replaced Israel?

[12] Leviticus 20:26 is one among many verses that stresses Israel’s special status: “So you are to be holy to Me, for I the Lord am holy; and I have singled you out from the peoples to be Mine.”

[13] See 2 Corinthians 6:14-18.

[14] By the early fourth century, efforts to sever “the Jewish roots” of the church were well under way. Decisions by the Council of Nicaea (325 AD), such as determining the date for celebrating Yeshua’s resurrection by the vernal equinox rather than Passover, illustrate the increasingly “anti-Jewish” bias.

[15] Acts 9:2: “And [Saul] asked for letters from [the high priest] to the synagogues in Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them in shackles to Jerusalem.”

[16] Acts 15:1-35.

[17] Acts 15:29.

[18] “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city [Jerusalem], educated under Gamaliel, strictly according to the Law of our fathers, being zealous for God just as you all are today” (Acts 22:3). Also Acts 26:4: “So then, all Jews know my way of life since my youth, which from the beginning was spent among my own nation and in Jerusalem….” And Romans 11:1b: “…For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.”

[19] “Brothers, I am a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees; I am on trial for the hope and resurrection of the dead!” (Acts 23:6). Also Acts 26:5: “…Since they have known about me for a long time, if they are willing to testify, that I lived as a Pharisee according to the strictest sect of our religion.”

[20] Acts 26:6-7: “And now I am standing trial for the hope of the promise made by God to our fathers; the promise to which our twelve tribes hope to attain, as they earnestly serve God night and day….” Acts 26:22-23: “So, having obtained help from God, I stand to this day testifying both to small and great, stating nothing but what the Prophets and Moses said was going to take place, as to whether the [Messiah] was to suffer, and whether, as first from the resurrection of the dead, He would proclaim light both to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles.”

[21] Romans 9:2-3: “…I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from [Messiah] for the sake of my countrymen, my kinsmen according to the flesh, who are Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption as sons and daughters, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the Law, the temple service, and the promises, whose are the fathers, and from whom is the [Messiah] according to the flesh, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.”

Previous
Previous

In Your Light We See Light

Next
Next

Was Paul a True "Convert"? [Part 1]