Thanks for sharing as you did.
Concerning the many who often try to make it out as if Paul was dismissive of the Torah/its principles and the lessons from the OT that he often quoted from, I'm reminded of what occurred with what the Ebionites went through. For the Evyonim (Ebionites) at one point adopted the same interpretation of Paul as many modern Christians....but they realized that such an interpretation was contradictory to the Torah, and chose to reject his writings, rather than seek a perspective that would allow them reconcile his writings with the Torah.
To be clear, I think it should be noted that there were, of course, many variations of the Ebionites....though one of the more well-known variations claimed that Christ was merely a man (as the Ebionites say)---and that all Gentiles had to be circumcised/Keep the Sabbath in order to qualify for salvation. That, of course, went counter to the attitude that Christ had for the Gentiles when it came to them in their salvation. Luke 4 and his praising the Widow in Sidon as well as Naaman the Syrian are some of the greatest examples....and the same for Matthew 15 with his praising the Gentile lady who had a demon-possessed daughter and whom He noted as having great faith. Luke 7:1-10 and Matthew 8:5-13 also comes to mind with the Roman centurion who followed Christ.....a GOD-Fearer who loved the Jewish people but was not a full convert to Judaism...and one whom Christ said had more faith than any in all of Israel.
Though there were others who chose to try and find ways in which they could harmonize/renconcile his teaching with the Torah, there were indeed many who rejected it outright without any logical basis.
For more on the Ebionites, some sources that've been a blessing can be found under the following titles:
"Ebionites and Nazirites « Messianic Jewish Musings "
"JewishEncyclopedia.com - EBIONITES"
Nazarenes/Ebionites - A Christian Thinktank
"Heresy or Reasonable Theology? The Ebionites: Part 2"
Ebionites: diversity of the early Christianity - a knol by Zia Shah
One could argue that the Ebionites Sect advocating keeping all aspects of the Law was essentially a logical development from the Judaizers of Paul’s day in some of their mentalities, as seen in how they felt it was mandatory for ALL to keep the entire Mosaic law with special attention to circumcision and the Sabbath, and revered Jerusalem as if it were the abode of God. Their failure was to realize that all this pointed to something better, for Christ Himself spoke about the true worship in saying that neither on Mount Gerazim nor in Jerusalem is God to be worshipped, as in a locality, for God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship Him in Spirit and in truth (John 4:20-24). And the apostles noted frequently how the Judaizers themselves did not truly know what Christ was talking on
It is always amazing when considering how the Ebionites choose to use only the Gospel of Matthew (despite how it went counter to their very claims/credibility), and choose to reject Paul as an apostate from the Law (Eusebius iii.27)....
Nevertheless, they were amazing people on a host of other levels....especially as it concerns their asectism, intentional choosing of living in poverty and their high regard for the Law. In some ways, they'd be similar to what occurred with the Essenes....
As much as the Ebionites tried to say that Paul was simply making up another religion without support when it came to his views on the Law, I think that they often misunderstood many things. For often, Paul made commentary that lined up EXACTLY with Christ's....and for many Jews, this was always an issue...except for the Apostles
2 Peter 3:15
Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
What the Ebionites did often is similar to what others do whenever they try to make it out as if Pauline letters can be trusted less than what Jesus said---seeing how much the man went OUT of his way to quote Jesus directly in whatever it was He stated.....and the same thing goes for the other epistles not written by Paul. There was often no inconsistency between what Paul wrote and what Christ wrote...and one of the reasons why is because Christ made clear to Paul that the Lord had chosen him to reach out to the Gentiles.
This is made clear in Galatians 1:17-21 and Galatians 2:1-2, as it concerns the chronology of Saul's life as reported by Luke in the book of Acts...
To be clear, what's said further from here is in line with what David Stern said in his Jewish Bible Commentary. Procedding...
Paul made clear that His message was directly from Christ in Galatians 1:12, seeing that he was an observant Jew (Galatians 1:13-14) and had a special conversion experience....being confirmed in His ministry by the other apostles who had been with Jesus and knew intimately what the Lord talked about. Paul previously had been one of the most religious Jews of His day, scrupulously keeping the Law and relentlessly persecuting Christians (see Acts 9:1-2). Before His conversion he had been even more zealous for the Law than the Judaizers were whom He came against in the book of Galatians.. He was sincere in his zeal---but he was wrong....and when he met Jesus, His entire life was changed and he dedicated all of his energies toward building the Christian church.
As it concerns the rest of his life, on his way to Damascus (Acts 9:3-19), he came to faith and ended up staying there with the Messianic Jewish believers briefly, evangelisng in the synagouges (Acts 9:20-22). He immediately went off to Arabia ....and he was gone for a limit of about three years. Afterward, he returned to Damascus where he continued evangelising Jewish people until some of them hacthed murder plot, so that he had to escape by being lowered over the city wall in a basket (Acts 9:23-25, II Corinthians 11:30-35). Only then did Paul go up to Jerusalem (Acts 9:26-30) but just for two weeks. Paul wrote how he went to make Peter's acquaintance...but did not see any of the other emissaries/disciples except James, the brother of Christ. Of course, Barnabas was noted from leading Paul to the other emissaries in Acts 9:27 and techincally it was that Paul was introduced to all or most of the emissaries but spent no extended amount of time with them recieving instruction or discussing his version of the Good News......which was key for the Gentiles in their acceptance, as Christ intended.
Next he went to Syria and Cilicia, specifically to Tarsus (Acts 9:30) where he remained for a number of years until Barnabass brought him to be his assistant in Antioch (Acts 11:25-26). After some time, they both went to Jerusalem with the Anthoch congregation's contribution for the relief of the Judean Brothers (Acts 11:29-30, Acts 12:25) so that Paul's second visit here was only after foutteen years (Galatians 2:1)....and during this visit, He and Barnabas (Galatians 2:1) reached an agreement with the Jerusalem leaders on principles on Gentile Evangelism, as described in Galatians 2:2-10, After this, he and Barnabas evangelized the Gentiles (Acts 13:2 and Acts 14:1-23) and Paul wrote them thie letter from Antioch either during the "some time" of Acts 14:29 or after the events of Acts 15:1-2. At the time that the letter of Galatians was written, the Jerusalem Conference (Acts 15:3-29) had not yet happened..so that its more specific directives concerning how the Gospel was to be presented to Gentiles were announced to the Galatians by Paul only at a later time.
What Jesus did through the ministry of Paul was to show how Christianity is truly transcultural Judaism. For during the time Paul spent in Arabia, away from the company of others and guided by the Holy Spirit, Paul put together the outline of how the Gospel, hitherto confined within an ethnically Jewish framework, could be made independent of Jewish culture and thus fully available not only to Jews....but also to Gentiles without their having to convert to Judaism (Galatians 2:2, Galatians 2:6-9, Galatians 5:2-4, etc). Paul must had seen at once that the Pharisaic Judaism that he had learned fom Rabbi Gamliel (Acts 22:3) had been shaken by the coming of Yeshua (Jesus) the Messiah. But it must have taken him considerable time to think about the various specific issues------the nature of atonement and forgiveness, the authority of the written and Oral Torah, the meaning of the Messianic Prophecies, the role and future of the Jewish people, the preeminent requirement of trust for salvation, the role of ethics, and other essential theological matters---and to formulate and refine his views to what they were when he wrote the letters. As soon as he experienced God's call to be an emissary to the Gentiles, he must have realized that His need was not to be instructed in the Gospel as it had been presented to the Jews.....but to think and meditate privately on its implications for Gentiles. No one could guide him in this, for he would be pionerring...but his training as a Jewish scholar by Gamliliel uniquely equiped him to investigate these matters in a fundamental way.
The development of Paul's faith would have been a simpler process had the acceptance of Jesus been for him, as it was for some of his fellow Jews, merely adding to traditional Judaism the belief that Jesus is indeed the long-awaited Messiah. And it would have been simpler if the acceptance of Jesus had been for him what it doubtless was to many Gentiles he led to trust, namely, the acceptance of a new religion that displaced former pagan values and practices. To Paul, the revelation of Jesus as the Son of God emant neither of these, but a radical reexamination of all his former beliefs, which issuwed in a conception of religion that differed from the other emissaries. Messianic Judaism perhaps even more than theirs differed from then-current Non-Messianic Judaism. Only prolonged thought could enable him to see just how much of the old was to be abandoned, how much revised, how much retained unchanged. So although he wasted no time before plunging enthusiastcally into evangelizing (Acts 9:20, Acts 9:22-28), his real work was developing the implications of the Messiah's coming in the light of his deep knowledge of Judaism and in the light of God's call on him to communicate this Jewish truth to the non-Jewish world.
Thus, Paul's example was the perfect example of what Jesus was talking about when he said the following in Matthew 13:52:
Matthew 13:50-5251 “Have you understood all these things?” Jesus asked.
“Yes,” they replied.
52 He said to them, “Therefore every teacher of the law who has become a disciple in the kingdom of heaven is like the owner of a house who brings out of his storeroom new treasures as well as old.”
From his vast treasure of Jewish knowledge, his many years in the Gentile world, and his personal experience with the Messiah Paul developed the foundations of the transcultural Judaism which came to be known as Christianity.....
Some of what Paul noted is actually very much in harmony with what Christ taught--and much of that can be better understood if understanding the times which Jesus lived in. For many scholars have often noted how Jesus was most likely a Pharisee---an issue that wouldn't have been a problem in light of the variations of Pharisees that existed in the days of Christ. For they were divided into at least three schools: the disciples of Shammai, Hillel, and Gamaliel. These schools were especially concerned about the proper administration of the temple. The school of Shammai, who represented the more conservative wing of the group, were dominant before the destruction of the temple in A.D 70 (Mishnah, Shabbat 1.4). But Hillel, representing a more liberal interpretation of the Jewish scriptures, had moved from Babylon to Jerusalem about a generation before Jesus, and gained influences as well. Jesus historically quoted often from this school---with many of his teachings going counter to those of the school of Shammai, the school which often composed the group of Pharisees he came against....especially as it concerns how to treat Gentiles.....and it is because of this that Jesus often came to blows with the type of Pharisees he did. For he was not with the camp saying the Gentiles had to adopt all Jewish customs. His parable of the Good Samaritan is evidence of that since the main hero is one whom Jews would've hated at the time.