• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.
  7. There has been an addition to the announcement regarding unacceptable nick names. The phrase "Let's go Brandon" actually stands for a profanity and will be seen as a violation of the profanity rule in the future.

New Perspective on Paul.

Discussion in 'Messianic Judaism' started by Messianic Jewboy, Mar 19, 2012.

  1. mishkan

    mishkan There's room for YOU in the Mishkan! Supporter

    +240
    Married
    US-Republican
    My man! I knew there was a reason I liked Wright. :cool:

    When I was in Bible college, I took a class called "Principles of Biblical Interpretation". We spent an entire semester reading and re-reading Ephesians. We outlined every chapter at least 3 or 4 times. We would discuss a verse to death, then come back two days later and discuss it some more!

    Maybe that's why the letter eventually sank so deep into my being. Now, I see it as the key to almost all theological questions. It talks about the integration of Jews and Gentiles into one body, the Gospel message, the spiritual gifts, family relationships... almost everything important is in that short letter.

    I couldn't agree more.
     
  2. Messianic Jewboy

    Messianic Jewboy Senior Veteran

    +112
    Messianic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    Nanos says the same thing but bases it on the Shema. Wright is much more 'elaborate'.

    You can read the interview. Wright is pretty radical in that he's as close to Jewish theology on justification that I've seen in modern times.

    http://saidatsouthern.com/nt-wright-interview-mp3/

    http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/trevinwax/2007/11/18/justification-present-and-future/

    He talks about justification also in a future sense meaning rewards.
     
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2012
  3. Lulav

    Lulav Older than ZIP Codes Supporter

    +6,741
    United States
    Messianic
    Married
    Sure he talks unendingly about mysteries revealed only to him. Yeshua had 40 days with the 12, why weren't any of these 'mysteries' revealed to them?

    I see this as Paul's drash on bits and pieces of the Tenakh, and it does make his own religion just as was stated in that quote I posted. It's not just that you can say Jews saw Paul this way because they didn't want to believe in Messiah, but there is also the other side of the coin that was interpreting his writings the same way.

    I have checked many of his references to the Tenakh to support his assertions. The thing is, most times he is speaking to Gentiles who would not know if what he said was true or not, and many times they are not quoted properly. The biggest of these is the one about Abraham which all else that he teaches about the Gentiles is based on.

    Either way, you can change the 'perspective' on him any way you want but it still doesn't undo the millions that have died because of his words.
     
  4. yonah_mishael

    yonah_mishael הֱיֵה קודם כל בן אדם

    +1,232
    Judaism
    Single
    US-Democrat
    Nice. :)

    Just be careful with your use of "here" (in this place) and "hear" (perceive with the ears). Twice you wrote "here" when you meant "hear." Not trying to judge, but it just helps readers with correct comprehension.
     
  5. yonah_mishael

    yonah_mishael הֱיֵה קודם כל בן אדם

    +1,232
    Judaism
    Single
    US-Democrat
    Have no idea what you're talking about. Your link doesn't work.
     
  6. mishkan

    mishkan There's room for YOU in the Mishkan! Supporter

    +240
    Married
    US-Republican
    Army.

    Ah, yes. I made a couple of trips out there.

    I drove by that hotel once. :)
     
  7. Messianic Jewboy

    Messianic Jewboy Senior Veteran

    +112
    Messianic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    Here is a paragraph that stuck out in this article;


    http://www.jcrelations.net/Paul_s_Contradictions___-_Can_They_Be_Resolved.2189.0.html

    "I am prepared to take the next step: Whenever any statement supposedly explicating Paul's thought begins with words like "How could a Jew like Paul say X, Y, Z about the Law," the statement must be regarded as misguided. In all likelihood, Paul is not speaking about the Law and Israel, but rather about the Law and gentile members of the Jesus movement.

    One of the major figures in the creation of what I call the "new Paul" is Lloyd Gaston, who puts it this way:

    Paul writes to Gentile Christians, dealing with Gentile-Christian problems, foremost among which was the right for Gentiles qua Gentiles, without adopting the Torah of Israel, to full citizenship in the people of God. It is remarkable that in the endless discussion of Paul's understanding of the law, few have asked what a first-century Jew would have thought of the law as it relates to Gentiles.12"

    Interesting.
     
  8. Steve Petersen

    Steve Petersen Senior Veteran

    +3,220
    Deist
    US-Libertarian
    Good thread so far.
     
  9. Phillip Hawley

    Phillip Hawley Y'shua HaMoshiach based Messianic Jew

    +347
    Messianic
    Married
  10. Messianic Jewboy

    Messianic Jewboy Senior Veteran

    +112
    Messianic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    There is different 'perspectives'. The core is tyr Wikipedia that you posted. However the likes of Nanos emphasize Paul being a Torah observant believer and being an Apostle to the Gentiles applying the Torah to the specific audience.

    The article I just last posted tries to put Paul in his proper context. Especially trying to bring together Paul being supposively contradictory in being Pro Israel/Pro Torah versus Anti Israel/ Anti Torah.

    Here's an interesting interview with Wright, you can either listen it it or read it;

    http://saidatsouthern.com/nt-wright-interview-mp3/
     
    Last edited: Mar 24, 2012
  11. mishkan

    mishkan There's room for YOU in the Mishkan! Supporter

    +240
    Married
    US-Republican
    If Paul were merely a marketer, selling his product through any means of compromise necessary, I might be tempted to agree with this perspective. However, the author of this statement fails to take into account that what Paul taught was a fixed message, outside of himself. A message that was given to him by the Israeli prophets of old, speaking to Israeli audiences, on behalf of the Israeli God, who had chosen Israel uniquely from among the nations.

    Micah says it most clearly,

    This must be our core message--the ancient call of the prophets tells us that our mission is to restore the planet to the worship of the One True God, where all nations learn the ways of the God of Israel, and pledge allegiance to the Israeli King... the Messiah. A message that divorces Mashiach from his throne in Zion is only half a message.

    It is compromise to promote a message of a universal, "cosmic Christ", that brings one message to the Goyim, and a different message to the people of Israel. By creating this dichotomy, we promote the very rift Yeshua intended to heal. We encourage the very divisiveness that lies at the heart of human selfishness and ego. Either there is one king, fulfilling one mission for all the people of the earth... or there is no king at all.
     
  12. Messianic Jewboy

    Messianic Jewboy Senior Veteran

    +112
    Messianic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    Right what I posted is an element of the NPP in which alot of Nanos addresses. The likes of Wright don't address Paul a as being a Torah observant believing Jew being Apostle to the Gentiles and the specifics.This aspect of the NPP does a good job in my opinion that Paul was a Torah observant Jew promoting how a Torah observant Apostle to the Gentiles applied scripture to his specific audience in 'their standing' in the Good News with specifics somewhat. At least this element is moving towards the middle compared to the 'old' which says Paul was 'to the I became a Jew....' concept.
     
  13. mishkan

    mishkan There's room for YOU in the Mishkan! Supporter

    +240
    Married
    US-Republican
    "To the..."?

    I assume you meant to say that the traditional message is that "Paul left Judaism in order to be a Christian, but to the Jews he acted like a Jew--changed his spots to win leopards."

    Yes?
     
  14. Messianic Jewboy

    Messianic Jewboy Senior Veteran

    +112
    Messianic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    Yes that's what I'm saying. This aspect of the NPP does a good job as disproving "Paul left Judaism in order to be a Christian, but to the Jews he acted like a Jew--changed his spots to win leopards."
     
  15. Gxg (G²)

    Gxg (G²) Pilgrim/Monastic on the Road to God (Psalm 84:1-7) CF Ambassadors Supporter

    +1,185
    Oriental Orthodox
    Private
    US-Others
    :thumbsup:
     
  16. Phillip Hawley

    Phillip Hawley Y'shua HaMoshiach based Messianic Jew

    +347
    Messianic
    Married
    While I am no authority on the Pauline letters, there are a number of elements in this article with which I thoroughly agree. The apocalyptic atmosphere of the soon coming Messianic Kingdom and the accompanying dark days of judgement, in which they were penned, the absence of a New Testament 'lens' through which to interpret these writings at the time of their writing, the impression of Paul as a Torah observant Jew, etc., were all views that I brought to the first reading of this article.

    However, my conclusions are another matter entirely. The main doctrinal conflict that Paul had to deal with in his day, was the false assertion that a gentile believer needed to be circumcised and subjugated to the governmental body that held sway over Judea, even though they did not live in the land nor had any claim thereto. Paul's assertions were that the inheritance of the gentile believer, just like the Jewish believer, was both of a physical and spiritual nature in the present and a physical and spiritual inheritance in the future, though different. In my opinion, there was a need for a separation of the Gentiles from the parts of the covenant that directly tied them to the land, because of the curses that had befallen the Jews for the lands sake, the land being a full partner in the covenant. Note the length and cause of the Babylonian diaspora for instance.

    I realize that this is a unique perspective. However, I have yet to hear an opposing viewpoint that has swayed me to surrender this one.

    I am also in full agreement with Mishkan's perspective that the Torah must be obeyed, each part in full, as it applies to the individual. For me that means He has brought me out of Egypt. One day He will bring me into the land. Until that day I will keep covenant as well as I am able and repent, turn back, when I lose my way. I will join myself to Him and to His children. And one day, there will be only one Elohim, one King, one land and one people - His.

    Blessings,
     
  17. Jerushabelle

    Jerushabelle Well-Known Member

    +486
    Messianic
    Married
    Good day one and all!

    While many would call these perspectives new, I tend to believe that the practice of attempting to view Paul in a light other than Scriptural is very old.

    The sum total of all we know of Paul is found in Scripture and, as a Christian and Messianic, that is where I feel most comfortable going for my facts regarding Paul as they relate to the faith. From Scripture we know that Paul was an Apostle of Yeshua confirmed by 4 witnesses, one of whom was Yeshua Himself. The other three witnesses were Ananias, Peter and Barnabas. All 4 witnesses were Jewish. Three of the 4 witnesses were Christian believers.

    In regard to the "Summary of the New Perspective of Paul", IMO this statement, "These are hardly the convictions of someone who intends to rest entirely on the merits of an alien righteousness imputed to his or her account." paints Paul out to not only be non-Christian but also non-Jewish. Any written work that portrays the relationship of God to His people as alien is alien to the faith as a whole.
     
  18. Phillip Hawley

    Phillip Hawley Y'shua HaMoshiach based Messianic Jew

    +347
    Messianic
    Married
    Shalom Sis,

    I think that you may have mistaken the intent of the author. Rather than view Paul from an unscriptural perspective, the intent is to view Paul from the basis of his writings, which if I'm not mistaken, you already regard as scripture.

    It is well established the approximate time of most of his letters. Likewise is the dating of the gospels pretty sound. So to assume that Paul's only scriptural resource to be Tanakh is widely accepted in Christian, Jewish and scholastic circles. There are other criteria that is likewise both scriptural and widely agreed upon. The assumptions and conclusions of Christian commentators are what are being discussed here.

    Take your shoes off Sis. Sit a spell. That's what I'm doing. It's good practice to look at things from different perspective and engage in a little critical thought. I was just going over this and another article while trying to formulate the 'good question'. We don't have to agree to critically analyze! :D
     
  19. Messianic Jewboy

    Messianic Jewboy Senior Veteran

    +112
    Messianic
    Married
    US-Democrat
    Actually an aspect about the NPP that interests me is how salvation is not necessarily individualistic, individualistic for this time UNTO salvation as Nanos puts it in regards to restoration, the final redemption which Paul has in mind. Saving souls for the sake of final restoration. In Jewish thought in other words there's really no such thing as individualistic salvation but emphasis on the World to Come. Make sense?
     
  20. Phillip Hawley

    Phillip Hawley Y'shua HaMoshiach based Messianic Jew

    +347
    Messianic
    Married
    Sister Jerushabelle,

    I have combed the following for anything that would cast Paul in the light of being neither Christian nor Jew and have come up empty. Could you help me understand you perspective a little more clearly?

    Krister Stendahl: Paul’s “Robust Conscience”

    The more we consider Paul’s writing in this context the less we see the acute psychological dilemma characteristic of the Augustinian-Lutheran interpretation as a whole. Krister Stendahl masterfully explores this in his ground-breaking essay “The Apostle Paul and the Introspective Conscience of the West.” Paul was certainly aware of his own shortcomings, but, Stendahl asks, “does he ever intimate that he is aware of any sins of his own which would trouble his conscience? It is actually easier to find statements to the contrary. The tone in Acts 23:1, ‘Brethren, I have lived before God in all good conscience up to this day’ (cf. 24:16), prevails also throughout his letters.”8Far from being “simultaneously a sinner and a saint” (simul iustus et peccator), Paul testifies of his clear conscience: “Indeed, this is our boast, the testimony of our conscience: we have behaved in the world with frankness and godly sincerity” (2 Cor. 1:12a). He was aware that he had not yet “arrived” (Phil. 3:12-14), that he still struggled with the flesh, yet he was confident of the value of his performance (1 Cor. 9:27). He looked forward to a day when “all of us must appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each may receive recompense for what has been done in the body, whether good or evil” (2 Cor. 5:10), and he anticipated a favorable verdict (v. 11). He acknowledged that his clear conscience did not necessarily ensure this verdict (1 Cor. 4:4), but he was confident nevertheless. These are hardly the convictions of someone who intends to rest entirely on the merits of an alien righteousness imputed to his or her account.
     
Loading...