Proving Paul is Pro-Torah

[BelieveTheWord]

It was an option. I think the wavering can be attributed to:

1. Speaking to different people (different congregations)
2. His developing theology which is greatly influenced by his Pharisaical upbringing which causes him to constantly try to reconcile that with what happened in Jerusalem.
3. His own struggle with the spirit and the flesh.

And Example

Romans 2:13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

Yet to the Galatians he wrote:

2:15 We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles; 16 nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.…


So how do you reconcile these? Is it who he is writing to? Is it in response to something they were doing or someone else's teaching.

According to Bible Scholars he wrote to the Galatians before he wrote to the Romans. He knew the people of Galatia that he was writing to but he had not yet met those in Rome that he wrote to.

Great points!

 

[Truthfrees]

This is really not the place to debate this so don't be surprised if you post disappears. But let me just ask you about the part I highlighted. I've heard this argument so many times it's pathetic. Why do you think that these people can understand the rest of the bible but not Paul's writings?

And why would anyone suppose that the L-RD would give Yeshua teaching to give to Paul that his people couldn't understand? What benefit would that bring?

The Message of Messiah should be compatible with the Torah given and any that are followers of Messiah should also match up.

Even Peter said Paul was hard to understand. Peter said untaught and unstable people twist Paul's meaning.

"Some things Paul teaches are hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures." - 2 Peter 3:15-16

Who's untaught? Those who have NO Torah teaching and Torah keeping lifestyle can't possibly understand teaching about "the law". They can only imagine what Paul is talking about.

What makes someone unstable? Double mindedness. "He is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways." - James 1:8

Doesn't Paul sound double-minded the way he's been translated? IT's because the translators have no Torah teaching or experience.

With proper Torah teaching people will stop twisting Paul's words.

The excellent Torah teaching here has untwisted my understanding of Paul's teaching on the law.

 

[Truthfrees]

Without getting involved in this endless debate with those who are anti-Paul conspiracy folk and have done good and left the Romish denominational daughters, but have in blind zeal presumptuously attributed much error to Paul because of those who purposely distort his words. The problem is also that they still are practicing the horrible habits of their former denominational indoctrination by still exalting Paul's testimony over Messiahs Testimony, including that in TANAK ...but now instead in a contrite, or disparaging manner.

So to them it does seem (within that context) that Paul is opposing both Messiah and TANAK.

My advice is to understand the confines of Paul's statements, and authority, if it seems like there is a contradiction with Paul ...it usually is because there is, but not in contrast to TANAK or Messiah, but in contrast to YOUR OWN UNDERSTANDING.

The trick to figuring out many of Paul's teachings is to first understand the context, and then more importantly after that, to find out where or how within scripture the proposed contradiction is reconciled without rendering contradiction ...he does this as a way of opening your understanding on the issue.

..,but remember to keep in mind Who has more authority in their statements.

Anyways I just simply request you all give it a try and not immediately treat my advice with contempt ...I'm just simply attempting to help you, thanks.

Great advice.

This perfectly describes my anti-law confusion before I started learning Torah observance.

One point though. I didn't purposely distort Paul's words to be anti-Torah. I IGNORANTLY distorted Paul's words due to Torah ignorance.

"Some things Paul teaches are hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures." - 2 Peter 3:15-16

 

[Truthfrees]

It was an option. I think the wavering can be attributed to:

1. Speaking to different people (different congregations)
2. His developing theology which is greatly influenced by his Pharisaical upbringing which causes him to constantly try to reconcile that with what happened in Jerusalem.
3. His own struggle with the spirit and the flesh.

And Example

Romans 2:13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

Yet to the Galatians he wrote:

2:15 We are Jews by nature and not sinners from among the Gentiles; 16 nevertheless knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the Law but through faith in Christ Jesus, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, so that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the Law; since by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified.…


So how do you reconcile these? Is it who he is writing to? Is it in response to something they were doing or someone else's teaching.

According to Bible Scholars he wrote to the Galatians before he wrote to the Romans. He knew the people of Galatia that he was writing to but he had not yet met those in Rome that he wrote to.

Great points that should be incorporated into a proper study.

 

[Truthfrees]

If Paul is anti Torah it would make him anti Christ since Yeshua says Moses and the prophets witness of Him. Yet Paul is not anti Torah he is however anti the flesh of Adam ever keeping Torah He is pro the life of YHWH living in and through disciples that Torah becomes a living word. Torah is not a list of what we should and should not do but who we are when we lose the self life from Adam in Messiahs death and become one with YHWHs life in his resurection. If Torah is a thing we must make the life inherate from Adam to change to it is a law that shows us the sin and death we received from Him. If Torah is a promise and witness of YHWHs life He has made us to inherate through being one with Him and Messiah it is a immutable law of life as Moses witnessed it to be.
Despite scholars opinion Romans is Paul's Deuteronomy. Here is where He gives law of sin and death and law of life in Messiah Yeshua...same law ...different power source to keep it. It is also why He speaks of gentiles doing the things contained in the law by nature...this is the of YHWH in them not a nature inherent from Adam as the scripture concludes no Adam to be righteous.
Sorry so long and hello all been a few months since I have been here

Absolutely correct. Paul IS teaching Gentiles to be Torah observant. It's a beginners' course for Torah newbies.

If you cut and paste all Paul's instructions together you'll end up with an abridged version of Torah, perfect for newbies.

 

[Truthfrees]

And that is why we have such trouble; and why I have had to conclude Paul was not Pro Torah, nor was he Anti-Torah, in reality he was both. And I think it comes down to mainly being anti for the Gentiles, but we do have that accusation by many Jewish believers that he was teaching it to Jews as well.

It is a conundrum to say the least.

I think you have to approach Paul already knowing what you believe, if G-ds commandments are good and Yeshua said to keep them, or that they are for the Jews (and Jesus taught that because he was Jewish not a Gentile) and not for the Gentiles to follow.


I believe that they are not for the nations, the heathen but for Israel. That is the separation of the Holy and the profane. The word Gentile (Goyim) used to relate to to all other peoples but the Jews or Israel. The differences were their gods. Israel had the one and only true G-d, the rest of the nations worshiped other false gods.

Paul changed that meaning and thus introduced much confusion. Part of the conversion was to deny or repudiate there was any other G-d but the G-d of Abraham Isaac and Jacob. We can see an early version of this with Ruth.

• Don't urge me to leave you or to turn back from you. (Allow me to stay with you)
• Where you go I will go, and (I will follow you anywhere)
• where you stay I will stay. ( I will live wherever you live)
• Your people will be my people and ( I will be joined to your people Israel)
• your God my God. (Your G-d will be my G-d (and no other) )

Excellent points. This is an intrinsic part of this topic. I'll need to read this again. Thanks.

 

[Truthfrees]

Yep, "Anabatehode!", (third heaven and Paradise) even as Paul learned it from the Revelation of Yeshua, (11). For when the nations not having the Law do by nature the things of the Law; those not having the Law are unto themselves a law, who show forth the work of the law written in their hearts: the inner law jointly witnessing-testifying together with their conscience unto them, and between one another the resulting thoughts Accusing or even making a defense in the Day when Elohim shall judge the secrets of men according to the good message I have received through Revelation of Messiah Yeshua. No one outsmarts the Great Psychologist who made us all.

For sure.

 

[Lulav]

Even Peter said Paul was hard to understand. Peter said untaught and unstable people twist Paul's meaning.

"Some things Paul teaches are hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures." - 2 Peter 3:15-16

Who's untaught? Those who have NO Torah teaching and Torah keeping lifestyle can't possibly understand teaching about "the law". They can only imagine what Paul is talking about.

What makes someone unstable? Double mindedness. "He is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways." - James 1:8

Doesn't Paul sound double-minded the way he's been translated? IT's because the translators have no Torah teaching or experience.

With proper Torah teaching people will stop twisting Paul's words.

The excellent Torah teaching here has untwisted my understanding of Paul's teaching on the law.

I know you haven't been around here that long, but I'd hoped you'd come across a posting that speaks about that part in Peter2.

That is a common knee-jerk reaction to anyone saying anything about Paul's inconsistency. It has to the fault of the reader. Many scholars don't believe that the letter was written by one of the twelve called Peter. Also some feel that that part is a redaction to make it look like Peter and Paul were in complete sympatico.

This is a result of the redactionist going too far by saying this part

as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.

At this time the only thing that was called Scripture is what is called the Old Testament today. Those are the Scriptures Yeshua refers to, as well as Paul.

You quoted James, there are some interesting things brought out about why James wrote that writing and in particular that part who he is speaking about.

I don't think the double-mindedness comes from the translation though.

 

[Lulav]

Excellent points. This is an intrinsic part of this topic. I'll need to read this again. Thanks.

Please do when you have time, it really is the crux of the matter I think.

 

[mercy1061]

Excellent information. When we get to the misunderstood phrases, this would be an excellent aid to clarifying Paul's real meaning.

Right now, the canonized order of Pro-Torah writings is easier for Christians to follow.

I don't have it all figured out. Sorry if I gave that impression. I've been praying and studying Paul's writings since I came to this forum a year ago. I've reached the point where I can share what YHWH has revealed to me so far. It's only the beginning. I learn a lot from the others who post their insight. I'm hoping we can do this project together. The only pre-requisite is that a person KNOWS Paul is Pro-Torah. If someone thinks he's anti-Torah, we're projecting in 2 different directions.



Awesome points.


Thank you for this.

Let us consider that all of Paul the Pharisee letters are Pro Torah. Let us also consider that if we consider any of his letters to be anti Torah, we may have a misunderstanding. So let's honor Paul the Pharisee by presuming he honors Torah. Paul the Pharisee is a Torah lawyer or Torah scholar, if you ever heard a criminal case, you know a lawyer's intent or thinking is not always quickly, properly observed or understood. A Torah lawyer always have purpose or cause for what he says to the jury, the 12 jurors, the 12 apostles, the 12 tribes of Israel decide the verdict of the case. Often times the general public may not agree with the 12 jurors decision.

 

[Truthfrees]

Let us consider that all of Paul the Pharisee letters are Pro Torah. Let us also consider that if we consider any of his letters to be anti Torah, we may have a misunderstanding. So let's honor Paul the Pharisee by presuming he honors Torah. Paul the Pharisee is a Torah lawyer or Torah scholar, if you ever heard a criminal case, you know a lawyer's intent or thinking is not always quickly, properly observed or understood. A Torah lawyer always have purpose or cause for what he says to the jury, the 12 jurors, the 12 apostles, the 12 tribes of Israel decide the verdict of the case. Often times the general public may not agree with the 12 jurors decision.

Excellent points.

The assumptions you're promoting for sure make it easier to to understand what Paul is really saying.

The good news is for any who have a hard time with our above mentioned assumptions there's a way to prove it from scripture, which is the purpose of this thread.

If we post all the Pro-Torah statements Paul made, it's an impressive list of scriptures that can't be swept under the rug.

I recently found an excellent book where Jewish scholars examine Paul's anti-Torah statements among other things.

Interestingly their conclusions are the same as ours: Paul talks about more laws than Torah. They say the law of sin and death is NOT Torah, and they show from Paul's own words the various types of laws he's talking about.

It's like a physicist mentioning the law of gravity, the law of thermodynamics, the law of conservation of energy, the law of reflection, etc.

So too does Paul speak of more spiritual laws than just Torah.

The book is called: THE JEWISH ANNOTATED NEW TESTAMENT NRSV. Edited by Amy-Jill Levine and Marc Zvi Brettler. Copyright 2011 Oxford University Press.

I highly recommend this book. These 30 some Jewish scholars see the same things we do.

They each contribute Bible commentary and essays for this NT to counter anti-Semitism bred by a misunderstanding of the Jewish idioms and history contained in the NT.

 

[Truthfrees]

Here's some more material on the topic of this thread:

Let me recommend these books:

The Mystery of Romans: The Jewish Context of Paul's Letter - Mark D. Nanos - Google Books

The Irony of Galatians: Paul's Letter in First-century Context - Mark D. Nanos - Google Books

I'm reading an essay by Mark D. Nanos in the "Jewish Annotated New Testament" on "Paul and Judaism".

He says the dispute over circumcision of Gentiles is 1. becoming a Torah observant proselyte of Judaism vs 2. becoming a Torah observant Gentile.

He says there's Torah provision for Gentiles to become Torah observant without becoming Jewish.

Can anyone explain?

Also read an essay by David M. Freidenreich on "Food and Table Fellowship".

He says Paul rebuked Peter over commensality with Torah observant Gentiles who weren't circumcised. He says in the Messianic age, when all the nations come to worship YHWH, they won't be circumcised, but they will be Torah observant, and commensality with Gentiles will be allowed.

He says Paul was disputing this point now with Peter, who was observing commensality with Gentiles, but then drew back when men from James insisted commensality wasn't allowed with non-Jews.

 

[Truthfrees]

I know you haven't been around here that long, but I'd hoped you'd come across a posting that speaks about that part in Peter2.

That is a common knee-jerk reaction to anyone saying anything about Paul's inconsistency. It has to the fault of the reader. Many scholars don't believe that the letter was written by one of the twelve called Peter. Also some feel that that part is a redaction to make it look like Peter and Paul were in complete sympatico.

This is a result of the redactionist going too far by saying this part

At this time the only thing that was called Scripture is what is called the Old Testament today. Those are the Scriptures Yeshua refers to, as well as Paul.

You quoted James, there are some interesting things brought out about why James wrote that writing and in particular that part who he is speaking about.

I don't think the double-mindedness comes from the translation though.

Yes. What you're saying is the other side of this argument. I'm taking it into consideration as I study scripture prayerfully. I'm interested in the truth.

I come from a deeply rooted anti-Torah grace background otherwise known as the LAW VS GRACE paradigm.

I preached and taught anti-Torah grace from scripture so convincingly that my friends and family are now convincingly teaching anti-Torah grace to others. Imagine their surprise now that I'm teaching them Pro-Torah grace.

YHWH forgive me for teaching my Torah ignorant paradigm to others.

One thing I've recently discovered is the translators are very detailed regarding Messiah Yeshua but very sloppy regarding the law.

EG.

The translators will go to great lengths to make sure they differentiate "god" from "God", "he" from "He", "anointed" from "Christ".

They want to make sure we know exactly who's divine and who's not, so we don't misunderstand scriptures, YET when it comes to "law" they lump it all in together.

Here's a list of what the Torah-less scholars have translated as law. They make NO ATTEMPT to clarify the various types of laws, especially when words like "law of sin and death" vs "law of the Spirit of life" are used. IOW, the "untaught" translators make Paul look anti-Torah, and Torah look like the ministry of death.

LAW
1. DATH
2. CHOQ
3. CHAQAQ
4. MITZVAH
5. MISHPAT
6. TIMAHONE
7. TORAH
8. AGORAIOS
9. ANOMIA
10. ANOMOS
11. ENNOMOS
12. KRIMA
13. KRINO
14. NOMIKOS
15. NOMOS
16. NOMOTHESIA
17. NOMOTHETEO
18. PARANOMEO

 

[rick357]

If anyone is interested I am currently posting a consideration of Galatians on my blog at rickrosamond2.blogspot.com. If you give it a look post your opinion here or there and we can discuss it

 

[Truthfrees]

If anyone is interested I am currently posting a consideration of Galatians on my blog at rickrosamond2.blogspot.com. If you give it a look post your opinion here or there and we can discuss it

Thanks for the link.

I finished the post on Galatians 1. Great post. Excellent points made on what Paul is really discussing.

Thanks for introducing these Torah insights with Christians on your blog.

1. I didn't understand the gematria of the last 2 paragraphs.

2. Point #3 - An additional point is the yearly sacrifice for sin redeemed Israel from the curse of the law for 1 year. (Leviticus 23:19, Hebrews 10:1-4)

3. Point #6 - An additional point is this is all done through the re-New-ed Covenant made by YHWH through Yeshua with Israel, and we've been grafted in to Israel and partake of their covenants. (Romans 11:17-24, Romans 9:4, Ephesians 2:12)

It'll take me some time to go through all your blog posts on Galatians, but excellent job. Thanks for sharing it.

 

[rick357]

Thank you for your kindness and also pointing out other points to bring out .

 

[Hoshiyya]

Yes. What you're saying is the other side of this argument. I'm taking it into consideration as I study scripture prayerfully. I'm interested in the truth.

I come from a deeply rooted anti-Torah grace background otherwise known as the LAW VS GRACE paradigm.

I preached and taught anti-Torah grace from scripture so convincingly that my friends and family are now convincingly teaching anti-Torah grace to others. Imagine their surprise now that I'm teaching them Pro-Torah grace.

YHWH forgive me for teaching my Torah ignorant paradigm to others.

One thing I've recently discovered is the translators are very detailed regarding Messiah Yeshua but very sloppy regarding the law.

EG.

The translators will go to great lengths to make sure they differentiate "god" from "God", "he" from "He", "anointed" from "Christ".

They want to make sure we know exactly who's divine and who's not, so we don't misunderstand scriptures, YET when it comes to "law" they lump it all in together.

Here's a list of what the Torah-less scholars have translated as law. They make NO ATTEMPT to clarify the various types of laws, especially when words like "law of sin and death" vs "law of the Spirit of life" are used. IOW, the "untaught" translators make Paul look anti-Torah, and Torah look like the ministry of death.

LAW
1. DATH
2. CHOQ
3. CHAQAQ
4. MITZVAH
5. MISHPAT
6. TIMAHONE
7. TORAH
8. AGORAIOS
9. ANOMIA
10. ANOMOS
11. ENNOMOS
12. KRIMA
13. KRINO
14. NOMIKOS
15. NOMOS
16. NOMOTHESIA
17. NOMOTHETEO
18. PARANOMEO

God points, clever ideas.

Reminds me of the definition of Rabbi Mizrachi on the categories of sin:

Chet - to miss the mark, an unintentional sin.

A Jewish court was traditionally required to try to judge the crimes presented before them as uninentional if at all possible, hence a court was considered a cruel or strict court if one person was executed in 70 years.

In Texas, a court that executed only or less than one person every 70 years would be considered a lenient court, or no court at all !

But if you ask Texans, they would probably assume that ancient Israel was constantly killing people.

Avera - a real sin, an intentional sin, much rarer.

In the historical Christian form of piety, one may like to impute sin onto oneself, and get a kick out of confession, especially public confession of sin, which is comparatively rare in other cultures. Traditionally, a person might confess to sin, but would have more of a tendency to label their sin as unintentional rather than intentional, because the idea of intentional sin is taken MUCH more seriously in the Biblical culture. Hence even David's deeds against Bath-Sheba and Uriah are reframed as not being entirely Avera in the Jewish culture.

This ultimately points to God's mercy, since Chet is more easily forgiven than Avera. So to label as many sins as possible as Chet (rather than Avera) means that there will be more forgiveness, more mercy, in the world.

Pesha - an intentional sin committed specifically to provoke or to "prove" something to God. However you really have to be a Keruv or a Sage in order to commit this sin. Very few humans in this generation are capable of this one. It more or less equates to high treason against God, committed by his own servants.

It may perhaps be compared to the "blasphemy of the holy spirit" in terms of being "the biggest sin" and in terms of requiring you to be a servant of God first in order to commit this treason.

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

It seems you have got it all figured out. I don't understand though why you start in the middle. If we are doing a thesis on Paul's theology don't you think it best to start in chronological order? And where was he writing from? Also to consider is the background of who he is speaking to, and since we only have one side, what other writings can we find to understand him better?

Most agree on this Chronology.

Thessalonians 1 Circa 50 CE From Corinth
Thessalonians 2 Circa 51 CE From Corinth

Galatians Circa 53CE (late Spring) From Antioch,Syria

Corinthians 1 Circa 56CE (late winter) From Ephesus
Corinthians 2 Circa 57CE (late summer) From Ephesus

Romans Circa 57 (Winter) From Macedonia

Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Philemon Circa 61-63 CE while a prisoner in Rome

1Timothy, Titus Circa 63CE From Nicopolis, right after being released from prison

2Timothy Circa 67CE After being incarcerated in Rome again

I think that Romans, at least in my experience is one of the most used books by those trying to prove that Paul is against Torah. In going through it myself though, slowly, searching it in it's context, I think it's quite pro Torah. I was unaware of the Chronology you've given, thank you. I will start on those books next and work in order.

 

[BelieveTheWord]

"If we don't have to keep the law
that means that heaven and earth have passed away.
So what planet are we on?"

Very nice!

 

[Hoshiyya]

"If we don't have to keep the law
that means that heaven and earth have passed away.
So what planet are we on?"

Very nice!

Planet Post-Torah, aka earth.

Points like this are meaningful to us, but don't exactly impress Christians who have God whispering in their ear that God's law is bad.