bacht

Okay... I don't know Greek, so don't ask me to parse these statements word by word, others here can do that for you.

I don't see Paul as a "normal" observant 2nd temple Jew, if that's the issue. But it seems that whoever redacted this letter wanted to present Paul as some kind of proper Jew who saw the coming of Christ as the end of the Law, or its supercession. This might have made sense to post-70 or post-135 gentiles, but not to typical Jews afaik.

DCHindley

Typical or not, I looked up this passage (Rom 16:25-27) and found out that the technical term for it is a "doxology." According to Literary forms in the New Testament: a handbook (or via: amazon.co.uk), by James L. Bailey & Lyle D. Vander Broek, the basic form of a doxology consists of 1) a reference to God in the dative case (in/to/by God, often using personal or relative pronouns to refer to God), 2) ascribe to God eternal glory (doxa in Greek, which can also mean honor, greatness or power), and 3) conclude with an "amen." This passage has all that for sure, in spades. In fact, this is the most embellished example of a doxology in the Pauline letters.

It also turns out it may not even be by Paul at all! Textually, this doxology is sometimes found after 16:24, or after 14:23, or in both places, or following 15:33 (as in p46), or not at all. This means it was added to the text of Romans at a later time, or in consequence of publication of Romans in several longer (16 chapter) and shorter (14 & 15 chapter) forms.

Mark Nanos, in The Mystery of Romans (or via: amazon.co.uk), who in my humble opinion presents the best case for a Paul who is both a faithful and proud Jew who believes in the resurrected Christ, reconstructed from the texts as they have been received, makes a very strong case that Paul was not anti law at all.

In my own oh-so-impossible-and-certainly-wrong POV, a redactor of an original Paul really did think the way you suggest about the relative value of his Christ figure versus Judaism, while the original Paul knew nothing of this Christ figure at all. In his view gentiles did not have to become circumcised to be cool with God. On the other hand, he did believe that the law was great for Jews, but because the law is required of all circumcised Jews, gentiles did not have to take on its burden.

DCH

aa5874

But, if "Jesus" is a Greek transliteration of "Joshua", then there was nothing special about the name Joshua once the writings of Josephus is taken into consideration.

There was Jesus [ Joshua] the mad-man, Jesus [Joshua] the robber and Jesus [Joshua] the murderer.

And further, there is no indication in Philo and Josephus that the Jewish Messiah was expected to be only called Joshua a very common name.

bacht

I think this only makes sense if Paul really was the apocalyptic the letters say he was, that is, that he expected the end very soon. I think the redactors of this material realized this and kept this theme to help explain Paul's unorthodox take on the Torah.

But I can't help thinking that an ordinary diaspora Jew of the 1st or 2nd C would assert something like "God is one, and His law is forever". No room for any goy Christ or new covenant. There were already established rules for proselytes in a world that wasn't facing incineration.

DCHindley

Uh oh, I can't tell which of the two POVs I mentioned you meant when you said "this."

What exactly do you think is apocalyptic about things said in the epistles? The only overtly apocalyptic/eschatological things I can find are in 1 & 2 Thessalonians, and these I have all assigned to a redactor:

1 TH 4:2 For you know what instructions we gave you through the Lord Jesus. 14b that Jesus died and rose again, even so 15b who are left until the coming of the Lord 16d with the archangel's call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God 17b shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air

1 TH 5:2 For you yourselves know well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night. 3b as travail comes upon a woman with child 4b for that day to surprise you like a thief 6 So then let us not sleep, as others do, but let us keep awake and be sober. 9b through our Lord Jesus Christ, 10 who died for us so that whether we wake or sleep we might live with him.

2 TH 1:4b in all your persecutions and in the afflictions which you are enduring 6 since indeed God deems it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to grant rest with us to you who are afflicted, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels in flaming fire, 8 “inflicting vengeance upon those who do not know God (Ps 79:6; Is 66:15; Jr 10:25) and upon those who do not obey the good news of our Lord Jesus. 9 They shall suffer the punishment of eternal destruction and exclusion “from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might,” (Is 2:10,19,21) 10a when He comes on that day to be glorified in his saints, and to be marveled at in all who have believed 12a so that the name of our Lord Jesus may be glorified in you, and you in him

2 TH 2:1b concerning the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ and our assembling to meet him 8b whom the Lord Jesus “will slay with the breath of his mouth” (Job 4:9; Is 11;4) and destroy him by his appearing and his coming 14b so that you may obtain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ

Now THAT is pretty harsh language. In the other books, though, the best that can be said is that the redactor thought Jesus Christ was resurrected, and this was important for his understanding of Jesus Christ's significance. However, I do see the redactor's Christ figure as developing from apocalyptic expectations that have been radically redefined, much like the way that Sethian (Jewish) Gnosticism developed from dashed apocalyptic expectations.

In the parts I think are original to Paul, he speaks of a day of judgement:

Romans 2:3 Do you suppose, O man, that when you judge those who do such things and yet do them yourself, you will escape the judgment of God?

2:5 But by your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God's righteous judgment will be revealed.

2:15 They [i.e., faithful gentiles] show that what the law requires is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness and their conflicting thoughts accuse or perhaps excuse them 16a on that day when, according to my good news, God judges the secrets of men 16b [...].

1 Corinthians 3:12 Now if any one builds on the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw-- 13 each man's work will become manifest; for the day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done.

4:5a Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, 5b [...]. 5c Then every man will receive his commendation from God. (Compare 2 Baruch 83:3 & 1 Enoch 9:5)

2 Corinthians 5:10a For we must all appear before the judgment seat 10b [...], 10c so that each one may receive good or evil, according to what he has done in the body.

Ephesians 4:30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.

2 Thesalonians 2:1c we beg you, brethren, 2a not to be quickly shaken in mind or excited, either by spirit or by word, or by letter purporting to be from us, to the effect that the day 2b [...] 2c has come.

2 Timothy 1:12 And therefore I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am sure that he is able to guard until that day what has been entrusted to me.

4:8a Henceforth there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which
8b [...] 8c the righteous judge will award to me on that Day 8d [...].

This is MUCH more tame than the above. Since I think his message was all about faithful gentiles being able to lay claim, on equal terms with circumcised Jews, to the inheritance God had promised to Abraham's seed, the question has to be raised about just when the promised land would be handed over to his "seed." He saw this as a kind of final judgement, probably some time in the distant future. None of those passages, though, speak of it as emminent or that we all live on the edge of the eschaton (I shore doo like them big words). Paul had a concept of a resurrection, but it is an immortal body one resurrects to. So, his promised land is the whole world and the resurrected saints are immortal. Cool. But until then, we have the world we live in everyday.

Rom 4:13 The promise to Abraham and his descendants, that they should inherit the world, did not come through the law but through the righteousness of faith.

6:5 For if we have been united through the likeness of death (by means of baptism), so also shall we be (united) from the resurrection.

1 Corinthians 15:12b How can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?

15:42 So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable, what is raised is imperishable.

2 Timothy 2:17 and their talk will eat its way like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, 18 who have swerved from the truth by holding that the resurrection is past already. They are upsetting the faith of some.

DCH

bacht

Well the apocalyptic theme runs right through the NT. There are hints of "realized eschatology" but the classic version of Daniel et al seems to be the main focus.

If Paul wasn't an apocalypticist then his message about Christ becomes even more radical doesn't it? Was he saying that God had changed all the rules simply because it was the right time? This is of course possible but not what one would expect from an observant Jew. If Paul's theology came after the fall of the temple then it might be more logical as a reaction to God's judgment on Israel. But the canonical books all strive to date the birth of Christianity before 70.

All of this could simply be a smokescreen for the real agenda: a gnostic re-interpretation of the Tanakh, with the traditional Torah relegated to obsolescence. The apocalyptic angle would then just have been a convenient supporting argument.