Corpus-Paul

["Hyam Maccoby" <h.z.maccoby AT leeds.ac.uk>]

Robert Benchley wrote:

When would you say a consensus on something like the Noahide commandments
emerged?

The existence of the concept of Noahide laws and of Gentile 'God-fearers' is
well attested for this period especially in funeral inscriptions (see the
work of Louis Feldman).  This was a concept accepted by all Jews, since it
is based on the Bible itself, which constantly calls on Gentiles to obey
moral laws without requiring them to accept the Jewish Torah (see for
example the book of Jonah, in which a Jewish prophet is sent to call a
Gentile nation to repent from its 'violence',  without any mission of
conversion to Judaism).  Similarly, the Flood is sent to punish the nations
for 'violence' before the Jewish Torah came into existence.  The expulsion
of the Canaanites is construed as a punishment for their infringements of
basic moral law, not for infringements of the Torah.  So there is never any
equation in the Bible between the Jewish Torah and morality in general.  The
Jewish Torah is the law of a nation of priests, who have a special code of
holiness, in addition to the principles applicable to all mankind.

You write: 'There's no clear reference to the Messianic age'.  By claiming
to be the Messiah and by prophesying the near approach of the kingdom of
God, Jesus was announcing the beginning of the Messianic age.  According to
the Talmud, conversion of Gentiles to full Judaism would not be allowed in
the Messianic age, since it would be motivated by obvious benefits;  but
conversion to full Judaism by Gentiles at times when Jews were suffering
oppression was to be encouraged.  James' envoys were saying to people
attracted by the Jesus movement:  'You can join either as Noahides or as
Jews.  We will accept you as Noahides, as decided in the Jerusalem Council,
but we still encourage you to join as full Jews as this will be to your
benefit in the coming Messianic age and this is your last chance.'

Best wishes,

Hyam Maccoby









____________________________________________________________________________
_________


Dr.Hyam Maccoby
Research Professor
Centre for Jewish Studies
University of Leeds
Leeds.LS2
Direct lines: tel. +44 (0)113 268 1972
                   fax +44 (0)113 268 0041
e-mail: h.z.maccoby AT leeds.ac.uk




----- Original Message -----
From: <RSBrenchley AT aol.com>
To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.metalab.unc.edu>
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 9:46 AM
Subject: [corpus-paul] Re: Jerusalem conference


> In a message dated 23/08/02 04:58:46 GMT Daylight Time,
> corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu writes:
>
> > In order to understand the Jerusalem Council, one must take into account
the
> >  existence of the Noahide Laws, which formed a kind of Torah for
Gentiles,
> by
> >  which they could be counted as belonging to God.  These laws do not
include
> >  any requirement for circumcision, which was required only for Gentiles
who
> >  wished to become converted to full Jews.  Various versions of the
Noahide
> >  Laws exist in the sources but none of them includes circumcision.
> >      The question before the Jerusalem Council was whether Gentiles
could
> >  belong to the Jesus movement without becoming full Jews, but merely by
> >  becoming 'God-fearers', i.e. Noahides (benei Noach).  This was a
difficult
> >  question, since the Messiah was regarded as the King of the Jews, and
it
> was
> >  doubtful whether non-Jews could come under his jurisdiction.  In other
> >  words, could Noahides belong to a Messianic movement, thus becoming
> subjects
> >  to a Jewish king,  or must they retain their own nationality under
their
> own
> >  rulers?
>
>     When would you say a consensus on something like the Noahide
commandments
> emerged? I can well imagine that a movement like that of Jesus, which soon
> opened itself to Gentiles, would have been willing to embrace some such
idea,
> even if the regulations of the time might not have been exactly what was
> subsequently laid down in the Mishnah. What is there to prevent the
> circumcisers of Gal 2:12 from being members of another, more powerful and
> stricter local group, pressurising Peter et al to abandon their concession
to
> Gentiles, and insist on strict membership of Israel for every member of
the
> community? I'm not sure I'm expressing myself very well, but there's no
clear
> reference to the Messianic age, and while you may well be right, I'm not
> clear in my own mind which of several available options to take.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robert Brenchley
> RSBrenchley AT aol.com
> Birmingham UK
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to corpus-paul as: h.z.maccoby AT leeds.ac.uk
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
$subst('Email.Unsub')
>