Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Paul as apostate (was:Paul Not a Pharisee?)

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Antonio Jerez <antonio.jerez AT privat.utfors.se>
  • To: Corpus-paul <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Paul as apostate (was:Paul Not a Pharisee?)
  • Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2000 18:40:49 +0100


Sakari Häkkinen wrote:

> >If Paul was a Pharisee, he was quite a special one because
> >of his more liberal attitude to the commands of the Lord in
> >written Torah and Halakhah than other Pharisees had.

Mark D. Nanos replied:

> Again, what Pharisees are you comparing Paul with, and upon what data
> from these Pharisees about Paul do you base your analysis? If it is
> data you find in Paul's letters, what data is it?

I'm sure Sakari can answer for himself but since this topic has
always been of special interest to me I think I'll step in with a
few comments of my own. In one way I believe Sakkari is
creating unnecessary problems for himself by just focusing
on the differences between Paul and the Pharisees visavi
the Law. My impression is that Paul's views on Torah and
Halakhah would had put him at loggerheads with just about
any firstcentury Jewish sect we know about, including the
Pharisees - be they of Hillelite or Shamaite colours. Which
Jewish sect does Mark Nanos think would agree with Paul's
words in passages like Gal. 3:22-26 or Gal. 6:21-30, which
I interpret as Paul claiming that neither Jew nor Gentile is really
in need of the Mosaic Law in the messianic age. Or what about Paul's
words in 1 Kor. 9:21-21? Which Jewish sect would have agreed
with him about that posture and not claimed that those are the
words of an apostate?

Best wishes

Antonio Jerez
Goteborg University, Sweden






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page