What is the Jewish view of St. Paul?

[jas84173]

I often wonder this. Pre conversion he was a respected Pharisee who was taught by Galmiel, a highly respected teacher of the Jewish faith. Do Jews view him as heretic? Or do they just think he was someone who messed up? I mean his conversion in Acts is sudden and his thinking changed 180 degrees about truth in a matter of days. It must have really been interesting to have seen how Jewish leaders would have reacted to his conversion to what they believe was a blasphemous movement.

 

[Assyrian412]

This would be an interesting plot for a movie

 

[7_Sorrows]

I was thinking I had read an article from a Jewish periodical about St Paul a few years
ago that was negative. Weren’t the followers of Jesus still worshipping in the synagogues until St. Paul said they don’t need to be circumcized or follow the dietary
laws. Maybe I am confusing him with another apostle.

 

[Kaninchen]

I often wonder this. Pre conversion he was a respected Pharisee who was taught by Galmiel, a highly respected teacher of the Jewish faith. Do Jews view him as heretic? Or do they just think he was someone who messed up? I mean his conversion in Acts is sudden and his thinking changed 180 degrees about truth in a matter of days. It must have really been interesting to have seen how Jewish leaders would have reacted to his conversion to what they believe was a blasphemous movement.

You have to remember that, since we don’t accept the NT as any kind of scripture or reportage, Paul is a character in somebody else’s story and talking about him is more a kind of literary criticism than anything else.

That doesn’t mean that the character depicted in the story hasn’t had great historical and religious significance as a consequence of the rise and dominance of Christianity, obviously.

 

[Contarini]

I often wonder this. Pre conversion he was a respected Pharisee who was taught by Galmiel, a highly respected teacher of the Jewish faith. Do Jews view him as heretic? Or do they just think he was someone who messed up? I mean his conversion in Acts is sudden and his thinking changed 180 degrees about truth in a matter of days. It must have really been interesting to have seen how Jewish leaders would have reacted to his conversion to what they believe was a blasphemous movement.

To piggyback on what Kaninchen just said–you’re assuming that Jews accept Paul’s claims about himself. I had a conversation with a Jewish person on this forum, I think, some years back, in which he suggested that Paul may have been lying about his Jewish credentials. Jews have often had trouble understanding how Paul could have misunderstood Judaism (as they see it) so radically if he was really educated in Judaism.

I think that the New Perspective on Paul is changing that situation, though of course many people still haven’t taken it on board. According to this relatively recent scholarly view, Paul isn’t primarily making an argument about how you get to heaven but about what the defining marker of God’s people is: Torah or Jesus.

One very positive Jewish perspective on Paul is that of Michael Wyschogrod, who argued that in Galatians Paul was really just being a good rabbi, telling Gentiles that they didn’t have to become Jews. I’m not sure how that analysis would apply to Romans, though.

Edwin

 

[StGerardMajella]

Jews have often had trouble understanding how Paul could have misunderstood Judaism (as they see it) so radically if he was really educated in Judaism.

Yeah, well, a personal encounter with Jesus will make anyone do an about face.

You have to remember that, since we don’t accept the NT as any kind of scripture or reportage, Paul is a character in somebody else’s story and talking about him is more a kind of literary criticism than anything else.

Wow.

 

[jas84173]

You have to remember that, since we don’t accept the NT as any kind of scripture or reportage, Paul is a character in somebody else’s story and talking about him is more a kind of literary criticism than anything else.

That doesn’t mean that the character depicted in the story hasn’t had great historical and religious significance as a consequence of the rise and dominance of Christianity, obviously.

Well; I do understand that but in order to be able to defend your beliefs you need to be educated. I realize in Judaism, Jesus is just one of a long line of Messiah Claimnants. However, Jesus being in the Jewish eyes would also be the most " followed " of them. ( I know throughout Jewish history others have been revered as the Messiah by some groups … I know Simon bar Kokhba was given even a Messianic blessing at one point.) The issue I have with your response is it is saying being ignorant to other beliefs is a way to preserve your own. I am not a Muslim yet have read the Quran. Muhammad is another false prophet in Jewish view, and Christian for that matter. We can’t learn from each other if we just ignore the others beliefs. St. Paul is huge in Christianity and was also claimed to be a highly regarded Jewish Pharisee; so there should be a stance on the view they have of him.

 

[ChineseCatholic]

Well; I do understand that but in order to be able to defend your beliefs you need to be educated. I realize in Judaism, Jesus is just one of a long line of Messiah Claimnants. **However, Jesus being in the Jewish eyes would also be the most " followed " of them. ** ( I know throughout Jewish history others have been revered as the Messiah by some groups … I know Simon bar Kokhba was given even a Messianic blessing at one point.)

In history? Are you sure about that? I always thought the most followed “Messiah” of the Jews was Sabbatai Zevi…

The issue I have with your response is it is saying being ignorant to other beliefs is a way to preserve your own. I am not a Muslim yet have read the Quran. Muhammad is another false prophet in Jewish view, and Christian for that matter. We can’t learn from each other if we just ignore the others beliefs. St. Paul is huge in Christianity and was also claimed to be a highly regarded Jewish Pharisee; so there should be a stance on the view they have of him.

Do you have a stance on Padmasambhava’s debate against Mo-he-yan about the nature of Gradual vs. Sudden Enlightenment?

How about the Kuaki vs. Saicho on priority of the Lotus Sutra vs. the Mahavairocana Sutra?

Is Ibn Tamiyyah’s criticism of Ibn Arabi and Sufism as being “Monism” correct?

Was Rabbi Nahmanides right in intervening on the debate as to whether Rabbi Moses Maimonides writings should be burnt?

Are the Salafists correct about the poverty of Classical Islamic scholarship? Or do those who adhere to Madhab are defenders of the truth of their faith?

I can literally go on and on and on and on with every single fracture/juncture/debate of great importance in Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Daoism, Buddhism, Jainism, Hinduism(s) [The Thing we call Hinduism is like a catch-all term for a variety of different faiths], Zoroastrianism, etc from now and till doomsday.

I’m a lot less concerned about them, and more concerned that people who wish to be Catholics are properly cathechized.

While i’m sure there are some people of the Jewish faith who, because they deal with inter-religious affairs, would come to know the details of our faith - the vast majority won’t.

At best, all i can hope from them is merely an open heart.

 

[jas84173]

In history? Are you sure about that? I always thought the most followed “Messiah” of the Jews was Sabbatai Zevi…



Do you have a stance on Padmasambhava’s debate against Mo-he-yan about the nature of Gradual vs. Sudden Enlightenment?

How about the Kuaki vs. Saicho on priority of the Lotus Sutra vs. the Mahavairocana Sutra?

Is Ibn Tamiyyah’s criticism of Ibn Arabi and Sufism as being “Monism” correct?

Was Rabbi Nahmanides right in intervening on the debate as to whether Rabbi Moses Maimonides writings should be burnt?

Are the Salafists correct about the poverty of Classical Islamic scholarship? Or do those who adhere to Madhab are defenders of the truth of their faith?

I can literally go on and on and on and on with every single fracture/juncture/debate of great importance in Judaism, Islam, Christianity, Daoism, Buddhism, Jainism, Hinduism(s) [The Thing we call Hinduism is like a catch-all term for a variety of different faiths], Zoroastrianism, etc from now and till doomsday.

I’m a lot less concerned about them, and more concerned that people who wish to be Catholics are properly cathechized.

While i’m sure there are some people of the Jewish faith who, because they deal with inter-religious affairs, would come to know the details of our faith - the vast majority won’t.

At best, all i can hope from them is merely an open heart.

Sabbatai Zevi, isn’t he the one who a lot did believe he was the Messiah but ironically he converted to Islam?
Jesus Christ is obviously the largest following. The reason it isn’t viewed that way is because Christianity and Judaism split completely by the end of the first century. However many Jews in the beginning of Christianity remained Jewish. This group, known as Jewish Christians which was led by James , believed Jesus was the messiah and remained Jewish. It wasn’t until the destruction of Jerusalem around year 70 this group seemed to disappear. But many Jews accepted Jesus. It’s really a myth when people ask " Why do Jews reject Jesus?" , because it was Jews who originally accepted Jesus. Not all of course, and those are the side Jewish people are today. The Christianity we have today is called Pauline Christianity, which proclaimed observing Jewish laws was not necessary at all, that Jesus was the new covenant etc. However Jesus is a Jewish Messiah Claimnant. Just because the followers ended up completely splitting from Judaism doesn’t mean he wasn’t a Jew. In fact a lot of argument goes on to this day on whether Jesus himself would have wanted his followers to completely break off from Judaism. This is for another post though because this could be a whole conversation on that subject.

 

[Kaninchen]

Well; I do understand that but in order to be able to defend your beliefs you need to be educated.

Why on earth would I even need to ‘defend’ my beliefs?

And thereby hangs a tail/tale. If you look at the details to the top right of my post, you’ll see that I’ve been here for over a decade and have over 9000 posts. In fact I’ve been discussing religion with Christians for over two decades now so I’m not entirely ignorant about Christianity and the nature of inter-faith conversations. The reason I’m saying this is that, from experience, it’s the people doing the ‘selling’ who need to be educated most, it would save them a lot of frustration.

Perhaps the key understanding that Christians need in talking to Jews is:

Christianity is not Judaism plus Jesus and Judaism isn’t Christianity minus Jesus. The two religions are paradigmatically different, they work differently, they have different foci, different ways of seeing the world.

‘Learning from each other’ isn’t just a matter of Christians setting the agenda and telling us to defend our views about the documentation they bring to the meeting.

 

[jas84173]

Christianity is not Judaism plus Jesus and Judaism isn’t Christianity minus Jesus. The two religions are paradigmatically different, they work differently, they have different foci, different ways of the world

Yah you are right I’m sorry if I came off as rude.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Why on earth would I even need to ‘defend’ my beliefs?

And thereby hangs a tail/tale. If you look at the details to the top right of my post, you’ll see that I’ve been here for over a decade and have over 9000 posts. In fact I’ve been discussing religion with Christians for over two decades now so I’m not entirely ignorant about Christianity and the nature of inter-faith conversations. The reason I’m saying this is that, from experience, it’s the people doing the ‘selling’ who need to be educated most, it would save them a lot of frustration.

Perhaps the key understanding that Christians need in talking to Jews is:

Christianity is not Judaism plus Jesus and Judaism isn’t Christianity minus Jesus. The two religions are paradigmatically different, they work differently, they have different foci, different ways of seeing the world.

‘Learning from each other’ isn’t just a matter of Christians setting the agenda and telling us to defend our views about the documentation they bring to the meeting.

+1

 

[StGerardMajella]

‘Learning from each other’ isn’t just a matter of Christians setting the agenda and telling us to defend our views about the documentation they bring to the meeting.

Kaninchen stated earlier:

Paul is a character in somebody else’s story and talking about him is more a kind of literary criticism than anything else.

To Christians, St. Paul is not a myth.

I think that perhaps what you were trying to convey is that traditional Judaism does not include the New Testament as part of its religious canon. That might be a more diplomatic approach.

The statement above could be deemed offensive to some Christians if taken in the wrong context.

 

[Kaninchen]

The statement above could be deemed offensive to some Christians if taken in the wrong context.

I apologise for any offence, the words ‘to us’ should have been inserted, thus:

since we don’t accept the NT as any kind of scripture or reportage, to us, Paul is a character in somebody else’s story and to us talking about him is more a kind of literary criticism than anything else.

Innocently (I assure you), I had assumed that readers would have understood that to have been what I was saying.

I think that perhaps what you were trying to convey is that traditional Judaism does not include the New Testament as part of its religious canon.

Apart from wondering about the several (?) Judaisms that supposedly accept the New Testament as part of their religious canon (and not being prepared to have a conversation about the, so-called, Messianic Jews) I do think I’d been quite clear about the non-acceptance (in diplomatic language).

 

[Kaninchen]

Yah you are right I’m sorry if I came off as rude.

Inter-faith conversations very easily become minefields (as you can see from the above).

 

[thephilosopher6]

Perhaps the key understanding that Christians need in talking to Jews is:

Christianity is not Judaism plus Jesus and Judaism isn’t Christianity minus Jesus. The two religions are paradigmatically different, they work differently, they have different foci, different ways of seeing the world.

‘Learning from each other’ isn’t just a matter of Christians setting the agenda and telling us to defend our views about the documentation they bring to the meeting.

Well, you also need to understand this: Christianity and Judaism, though separate religions, still share the same faith in the same God YHWH. Whether you like it or not, Christianity and Judaism are inherently connected. Jesus was Jewish. His original followers were Jewish. Jesus and his original followers all followed in the practices and traditions of Judaism. Paul was a Jew. Christianity itself started out as a Jewish sect and didn’t become its own unique religion until 50-100 years after Jesus walked on planet earth. We are both Abrahamic religions. We both have the same God. As Christians, we have 100% of your scripture as our scripture plus an added addition of the New Testament (and the deuterocanonical books in our Old Testament that do come from pre-Christian Jews, although not all Christians regard these as scripture and that is a different discussion for a different time). Likewise, we also believe in 100% of your prophets plus an added addition of Christian prophets, many of whom were actually Jewish. In fact, most of our original prophets were pious Jews. Now, don’t misinterpret what I am saying. I am not saying Christianity (at least now) is Judaism plus Jesus and that Judaism is Christianity minus Jesus. Yes, our outlooks on what God wants for us are different. Yes, our goals are different. But the truth is, we come from the same Abrahamic YHWHist tradition. Judaism gave birth to Christianity. Christianity could not exist without Judaism. Because of all this, as religious cousins, dialogue between us is important.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Well, you also need to understand this: Christianity and Judaism, though separate religions, still share the same faith in the same God YHWH. Whether you like it or not, Christianity and Judaism are inherently connected. Jesus was Jewish. His original followers were Jewish. Jesus and his original followers all followed in the practices and traditions of Judaism. Paul was a Jew. Christianity itself started out as a Jewish sect and didn’t become its own unique religion until 50-100 years after Jesus walked on planet earth. We are both Abrahamic religions. We both have the same God. As Christians, we have 100% of your scripture as our scripture plus an added addition of the New Testament (and the deuterocanonical books in our Old Testament that do come from pre-Christian Jews, although not all Christians regard these as scripture and that is a different discussion for a different time). Likewise, we also believe in 100% of your prophets plus an added addition of Christian prophets, many of whom were actually Jewish. In fact, most of our original prophets were pious Jews. Now, don’t misinterpret what I am saying. I am not saying Christianity (at least now) is Judaism plus Jesus and that Judaism is Christianity minus Jesus. Yes, our outlooks on what God wants for us are different. Yes, our goals are different. But the truth is, we come from the same Abrahamic YHWHist tradition. Judaism gave birth to Christianity. Christianity could not exist without Judaism. Because of all this, as religious cousins, dialogue between us is important.

well stated.

 

[Potter]

Kaninchen stated earlier:

To Christians, St. Paul is not a myth.

.

I think it was just an expression – Paul is a figure in the Christian narrative, as Washington is a figure in the American narrative. Just because it’s a narrative doesn’t imply that it’s fictional.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Paul was never thought about among most Jews; when I mentioned the books of the Maccabees to a Conservative rabbi in my hometown while we were discussing the conflict between the Greeks and later the Romans, he thought I was referring to the New Testament. That astonished me, because I assumed that he’d know the Maccabees books if only as history.

 

[jas84173]

I think it was just an expression – Paul is a figure in the Christian narrative, as Washington is a figure in the American narrative. Just because it’s a narrative doesn’t imply that it’s fictional.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Paul was never thought about among most Jews; when I mentioned the books of the Maccabees to a Conservative rabbi in my hometown while we were discussing the conflict between the Greeks and later the Romans, he thought I was referring to the New Testament. That astonished me, because I assumed that he’d know the Maccabees books if only as history.

Okay that makes no sense. Hannakah is a holiday celebrated because of the events portrayed in the Maccabees books 1 and 2. Also known as the rededication of the temple. The Talmud includes the story about the oil lasting 8 nights; and is not in the Maccabees books. However he’s a pretty uneducated Rabbi if he isn’t aware of Judas Macabeus and the Maccabean revolt.

 

[Contarini]

Okay that makes no sense. Hannakah is a holiday celebrated because of the events portrayed in the Maccabees books 1 and 2. Also known as the rededication of the temple. The Talmud includes the story about the oil lasting 8 nights; and is not in the Maccabees books. However he’s a pretty uneducated Rabbi if he isn’t aware of Judas Macabeus and the Maccabean revolt.

I’m sure he is aware of them, but the books of the Maccabees are not in the Jewish canon. There is another account of the revolt, in Hebrew, that Jews have historically used, though of course it’s not regarded as Scripture.

Edwin