On what grounds and on what authority did Paul persecute early church?
SnakChristianity
Bliv bruger af LibraryThing, hvis du vil skrive et indlæg
Dette emne er markeret som "i hvile"—det seneste indlæg er mere end 90 dage gammel. Du kan vække emnet til live ved at poste et indlæg.
1richardbsmith
Several references suggest that the early followers of Jesus continued to worship in the synagogues, even in Jerusalem.
This suggests that the early Jewish followers of Jesus were accepted by the Jewish authorities, perhaps as a sect of Judaism.
What was the basis for Paul's objection and authority?
This suggests that the early Jewish followers of Jesus were accepted by the Jewish authorities, perhaps as a sect of Judaism.
What was the basis for Paul's objection and authority?
2hf22
In terms of the grounds, I would follow Larry W. Hurtado, and point to Christology (https://larryhurtado.wordpress.com/2014/11/11/pauls-persecution-of-jewish-jesus-followers-nature-causes/).
In terms of authority, as a Pharisee, I suspect it was formally as a representative of his local synagogue (i.e. warning other synagogues to discipline or reject early Jewish Christians). However, given what his later career suggests about him, the authority of his own force of character might have been the source more practically speaking.
In terms of authority, as a Pharisee, I suspect it was formally as a representative of his local synagogue (i.e. warning other synagogues to discipline or reject early Jewish Christians). However, given what his later career suggests about him, the authority of his own force of character might have been the source more practically speaking.
3richardbsmith
I can see his great zeal, which apparently was as characteristic of his Judaism as it was of his Christianity, pushing him, independently to try persecute early Jesus followers.
I don't know that there was much of a church at that time.
Perhaps if Paul was an apocalyptic leaning Pharisee, and was expecting God's action in the world to be imminent. He might have emphatically denied Jesus as the messiah.
So that Paul's own expectations of messiah were greatly disappointed by the death of Jesus.
He might have attacked the early followers, mostly on his own authority, on the basis of their claim that Jesus was messiah. A claim which Paul at first would have rejected, largely based on the crucifixion.
If he were apocalyptic in thinking, and I suspect he was so before his conversion, then the messianic claim for Jesus might have seemed to need urgent challenge.
Another topic which I would like to consider, perhaps later, for another topic, is whether Paul read Hebrew. He seems to have used the Septuagint mostly. And some of his verse interpretations seem to require the Septuagint translation.
I don't know that there was much of a church at that time.
Perhaps if Paul was an apocalyptic leaning Pharisee, and was expecting God's action in the world to be imminent. He might have emphatically denied Jesus as the messiah.
So that Paul's own expectations of messiah were greatly disappointed by the death of Jesus.
He might have attacked the early followers, mostly on his own authority, on the basis of their claim that Jesus was messiah. A claim which Paul at first would have rejected, largely based on the crucifixion.
If he were apocalyptic in thinking, and I suspect he was so before his conversion, then the messianic claim for Jesus might have seemed to need urgent challenge.
Another topic which I would like to consider, perhaps later, for another topic, is whether Paul read Hebrew. He seems to have used the Septuagint mostly. And some of his verse interpretations seem to require the Septuagint translation.
4hf22
>3 richardbsmith:
Again, I suspect he would have need some facility in Hebrew / Aramaic, if nothing else to engage with his disputes and dialogue with the Jerusalem Church as outlined in his letters.
The language of his gentile Church seems to be Greek however (even in those locations in the Latin west), and his background (of Tarsus) would suggest it was his mother tongue.
Again, I suspect he would have need some facility in Hebrew / Aramaic, if nothing else to engage with his disputes and dialogue with the Jerusalem Church as outlined in his letters.
The language of his gentile Church seems to be Greek however (even in those locations in the Latin west), and his background (of Tarsus) would suggest it was his mother tongue.
5richardbsmith
I need to look more thoroughly. Surely his Hebrew was better than mine is. I don't know any of Aramaic.
Yet it does not seem that he argues from the Hebrew text. It seems more from the Septuagint.
Yet it does not seem that he argues from the Hebrew text. It seems more from the Septuagint.
6hf22
>5 richardbsmith:
Indeed. Clearly for St Paul, a great many Jews of and before his own time, and indeed the early Church which followed, the Scriptures were the Greek LXX. I don't think there is much scholarly doubt about that.
I find that fact a strong support for the respect the Eastern Churches have for the LXX. As indeed are the findings from the Dead Sea scrolls, which indicate the LXX is a witness to Hebrew variants not captured by the Masoretic Text, rather than a defective translation as was previously suspected by some.
Indeed. Clearly for St Paul, a great many Jews of and before his own time, and indeed the early Church which followed, the Scriptures were the Greek LXX. I don't think there is much scholarly doubt about that.
I find that fact a strong support for the respect the Eastern Churches have for the LXX. As indeed are the findings from the Dead Sea scrolls, which indicate the LXX is a witness to Hebrew variants not captured by the Masoretic Text, rather than a defective translation as was previously suspected by some.
7richardbsmith
I do not have a text critical Hebrew Bible. It would be good to have such a resource.
8hf22
>7 richardbsmith:
The Logos software, if you use it, has servicable critical apparatus for both the Greek and Hebrew texts.
The Logos software, if you use it, has servicable critical apparatus for both the Greek and Hebrew texts.
9cl1914p
My opinion is this: Paul's grounds and authority was simply misunderstanding. He must have misunderstood the teaching of the prophets. And owing to the simplicity of Jesus' entrance into the world, Paul and others like himself, they see Jesus and His teachings contrary to the Law of Moses. As a result, they considered that it would be best have them all killed. Paul was in great darkness of the truth; yet after all that, the truth got him converted. God Is Good!
