Amaleq13

Please avoid creating strawman arguments. I did not claim anyone was objective or unbiased. You asserted that no serious scholar questioned Paul's background as a trained rabbi and Maccoby stands as a disproving, contrary example. You later retreated from this position to the more reasonable stance that "most" scholars accepted this as Paul's background.

Can I assume you recognize your error in claiming that Paul described himself as a student of Gamaliel?

Metacrock

Neither was Paul. It was after AD 70 (Paul was dead) before you could say that it was another relgion. Paul tried to keep within the lines of communication for Judaism and the chruch: they were on the speaking terms with the Johannine community in Asia Minor, and paul tried to keep peach with James. if he had thought of his work as anthe religion he would have jsut said "screw James."









That's a silly argument and it's not why they did it. Look at the world Sanders in canonical criticism to see what waws going on with Jamnia.





That was a working out of the Apostoic mission. That was their safeguard on the Teachings of Jesus, which wouldn't have been necessary if not for the Gostics and othe heratics trying to prevent the message.

Metacrock

\

'Mcobby is not a shcolar! He's a rabbi. He's not an academic schlar. i doubt that he reads Greeks and he doesn't have a valid view of Paul. His whole program is to destroy a posative view of Christanity so more Jews wont convert. The more Jews convert the more fearful the Jewish fundies become and the more Tovia Singers and Moccobbys go out and put people with their phony so called shcolarship.

johntheapostate

If Jesus belief was not in conflict with first century Judaism why did Paul persecute the early Jerusalem church. They after all were still obedient to the Law and there would be nothing else that would have singled them out for persecution by the dominant Jewish faction which Paul is said to have represented. I am taking into consideration that simple Messiah belief would have been considered legitimate by first century Jews.

Metacrock

Paul was a Pharisee. He says he was,he studied with Gamaliel.


Jesus was probably of a family that was associated with the heterodox factions, maybe not Qumran itself, but something like it. Martinez shows the theology of Messiah at Qumran in such similar light to that of early Chrsitianity, and Ezienmann and Wise showed the similarity between the James chruch and early "way" movement very stricking. Thus I assume Jesus was some sort of heterodox, maybe an Essene.

The pharisees hated these guys. They wanted to get rid of them at all costs, and hated Jesus most of all because if he was messiah they were totally wrong, and they couldn't be totally wrong, its want in their vocabulary.

So they used anything they could use to get rid of the Christians.


they didn't represent their views fairly, they trumped things up.

johntheapostate

You seem unduly harsh on these "heretics" who in my opinion were taking no more liberties with the concept of Christianity than Christianity had with Judaism

johntheapostate

I alway found it odd that the Jewish Jesus cult was still represented in Jerusalem in the Epistles of Paul and that he was able to travel there unmolested by his former allies. It seems to me that the "horrible" persecution by the Pharisees was really not very effective and may have been fiction for the most part.

Toto

Thread on Maccoby's obituary

Maccoby was British and it is hard to find some of his books on this side of the pond. I am pretty sure that he knew Greek, but can't find a source on the web.

Maccoby as I recall worked as a librarian, and did most of his academic work after he retired, but is widely respected for his scholarship.

Once again, Metacrock: Paul did not claim to have studied with Gamaliel. He does claim to have been a Pharisee.

And are you actually quoting Robert Eisenman?

Metacrock

I believe Paul did calim it, but I'll check it out.

you want to talk about that Maccoby guy, why not Edersheim? Edersheim was trianed as a Rabbi, he was a linguistic genius, he was a professor at Oxford and cambridge and he shows how all the Messianich expectations in the NT are found in the Talmud.

I'm sure he would defend Paul if he had know someone was going to attack him so vociferously.

Metacrock

WEll do you think they had wanted posters? They had no way of distributing his likeness. It was probably a lot easier to get away form people back then.