Historical Background of the New Testament (Part 5): Jewish Subgroups

It would be incorrect to speak of “normative Judaism” in the New Testament era, as though it had a singular, homogeneous expression. The diverse and complex nature of 1st-century Judaism is evidenced by its various subgroupings.

The Pharisees. The name “Pharisees” comes from a Semitic root meaning “the separated ones, separatists …. It was the purpose of the Pharisees to take the pattern of the pious Israelite as established by the scribes, and to put it into practice as nearly as possible” (BAGD 853). The Pharisees arose during the Intertestamental Period presumably as the Hasidim, the orthodox Jews who emphasized religious purity in opposition to the Hellenizers and later the Hasmoneans.¹ They were a prominent sect who exercised significant influence among the people of Israel during the time of Christ and his apostles. They are probably best remembered for their antagonism against Jesus, although not all Pharisees or pharisaic tendencies were bad. Since they correctly acknowledged God’s power to raise the dead (Acts 23:6-8; 26:5-7), they were prime candidates for the gospel. Many of them did become Christians (Acts 2:41; 15:5), the most notable of whom was Paul of Tarsus (Acts 23:6; 26:5).

The Sadducees. The designation “Sadducee” may be derived from the name Zadok, who served as high priest when the first temple was built and whose descendants maintained this office until just before the Maccabean revolt.² During the Post-Exilic Period the center of Jewish society was the Jerusalem temple, controlled by the priests with the high priest recognized as the primary authority figure. From the 2nd century BC until the temple was destroyed in AD 70, the priestly sect of the Sadducees was among the upper echelons of Jewish society and often viewed as corrupt (cf. John 19:15). Their rejection of oral tradition and the doctrines of resurrection, angels, and spirits (Acts 23:8; cf. Josephus, Ant. 18.1.4) distinguished them from the Pharisees. Yet in the early years of the Christian movement, “the word of God increased and the number of disciples in Jerusalem greatly multiplied, and a considerable number of the priests were becoming obedient to the faith” (Acts 6:7, author’s own translation). After the temple was destroyed, the Sadducees dwindled to the point of insignificance (not even mentioned in John’s Gospel). 

The Essenes. This group is not mentioned in the New Testament, having no direct involvement with Jesus or the early church, whereas Josephus writes more about them than any other Jewish sect (Ant. 13.5.9; 18.1.4-5; War 2.8.2-13). The Essenes were a relatively small isolationist community of ascetics, apparently disillusioned by the corruption and disunity they observed among their fellow Jews following the Maccabean revolution. Some scholars contend that the Qumran community who preserved the Dead Sea Scrolls was a branch of this sect. 

The Hellenists. The designation “Hellenist” (Greek hellēnistēs) is similar to the words hellēnos (Greek person) and hellēnikos (Greek language), generally referring to a Jew who settled in another country and adopted the Greek language and culture (cf. Acts 9:29; 11:20); sometimes rendered “Grecian” (KJV). Even though tensions between the more traditional Jews and the more Hellenized Jews seem to have persisted in the 1st century AD (cf. Acts 6:1), the two were inextricably blended together and not as compartmentalized as we might assume (cf. Acts 6:9, 12; 9:28-29). Hellenism “was more a matter of degree than something providing a difference in substance between ‘Hellenistic’ and ‘Palestinian’ Judaism” (E. Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity [3rd ed.] 428).

The Scribes. The Greek term grammateús generally refers to a man of learning and stems from the noun grámma in reference to something written. In secular usage a scribe was a secretary or recorder (Esth. 3:12; 8:9; Acts 19:35), but among the Jews he was someone devoted to the Mosaic Law and recognized as an expert, a scholar, an esteemed interpreter and teacher. The key function of the earliest Hebrew scribes was writing (Jer. 36:32; 52:25), but later interpreting and teaching (1 Chron. 27:32; Ezra 7:6, 11). In the New Testament many Jewish scribes were Pharisees or at least closely linked with them,³ but also associated with the chief priests and/or elders.⁴ Despite being highly esteemed among the Jewish people, they were no match for the insight and teaching ability of Jesus and were often rebuked by him.⁵ Nevertheless, there were scribes who were useful in the Lord’s service (Matt. 13:51-52; 23:34). 

The Rabbis. The word “rabbi” is of Hebrew origin, essentially meaning “master” and used as an honorary title for “teacher” (see Education of Jesus the Rabbi). The rabbinic tradition developed along with the Pharisee movement, as learned men collaborated to standardize the written and oral laws of the Jewish people. The first usage of the term in the Mishnah (oral traditions put into writing) is in reference to Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai (d. AD 90), a staunch opponent of the Sadducees in the early-to-mid-1st century AD. It has been alleged that the title “rabbi” was not commonly used prior to AD 70 (cf. A. A. Bell, Jr., Exploring the NT World 33). However, C. Hezer argues that the editors of the Mishnah avoided using the term to give the impression that the highly respected R. Yohanan ben Zakkai initiated the rabbinic movement (Social Structure of the Rabbinic Movement 64). The New Testament record indicates that the expression was not uncommon in the first half of the 1st century AD (see Matt. 23:7, 8; 26:25, 49; Mark 9:5; 10:51; 11:21; 14:45; John 1:38-39, 49; 3:2, 26; 4:31; 6:25; 9:2; 11:8; 14:45). After the temple’s destruction in AD 70, rabbinic scholars saw the need to codify their opinions and teachings, eventually producing the Talmud.⁶

The Chief Priests. In the Old Testament there was only one chief priest, viz. the high priest (Lev. 21:10; 2 Chron. 19:11; 24:6, 11; 31:10; Ezra 7:5). But in the New Testament we read of multiple “chief priests” [archiereîs] (Matt. 2:4; 16:21; 20:18; 21:15) distinct from the high priest (Matt. 26:3, 57-59). Obviously recognized as authority figures among the Jewish people in Jerusalem, they may have been leaders of the priestly classes responsible for temple services (cf. Luke 1:9; 22:4, 52; Acts 4:1; 5:24), or more likely prominent representatives of priestly households, including former high priests and members of the high priest’s family (Acts 4:5-6; cf. Josephus, Vita 38).

The Zealots (see Ancient Terrorists). Corresponding to the Hebrew kanai and the Aramaic kananitēs, the Greek term zēlōtēs refers to one who is eagerly desirous or devoted or zealous. When Judea was established as a Roman province in AD 6 and forced to pay taxes to the Romans, the Jewish people begrudgingly transitioned from an autonomous nation to the occupation and control of a foreign power. It was in this context that the Zealot movement was born, similar to the Maccabean revolt of the 2nd century BC. Evidently the celebrated victories of Judas Maccabeus were still fresh on their minds, with the annual observances of Hanukkah and the Day of Nicanor (cf. John 10:22; 1 Macc. 4:36-59; 7:39-50; 2 Macc. 1:18-36; 10:1-8; Josephus, Ant. 12.5–13.7; War 1.3-6). Some historians classify the Zealots as a separate Jewish sect, whereas others consider them to have been an extreme wing of the Pharisees.⁷ They were zealous for Jewish sovereignty, promoted insurrection and violence against the pagan occupiers, and engaged in assassinations and armed conflict. It was in this environment that Jesus said, “but from the days of John the baptizer until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence, and the violent forcefully seize it” (Matt. 11:12). Barabbas, who was pardoned from execution instead of Jesus, appears to have been one of these political extremists; he and his fellow rebels “had committed murder in the insurrection” (Mark 15:7; cf. Luke 23:19, 25). Luke explicitly labels one of the Lord’s personal disciples as “the zealot” (Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13). Others involved in this movement were Theudas, Judas of Galilee, and an unnamed Egyptian (Acts 5:36-37; 21:38). Saul of Tarsus maliciously targeted Jewish Christians whom he considered apostates from the Jewish faith (Acts 8:1; 9:1, 21; 22:4-5, 19-20; 26:10; etc.). In the Greek text of Acts 22:3, as Paul recounts his violent past, the noun form is used to identify him as “a zealot” of God. Also, in Gal. 1:14 Paul again employs the noun form to describe his former activity in Judaism as “a zealot.” The Zealots were responsible for instigating the Jewish revolt of AD 66, provoking the brutal response of the Romans that resulted in the demolition of the Jewish temple and city of Jerusalem in AD 70. 

The Herods. Since the Babylonian conquest of Judah in the 6th century BC, the southern territory had been inhabited by the Idumeans (a.k.a. Edomites), descendants of Jacob’s brother Esau (Gen. 36:9). Idumea was conquered by Judas Maccabeus in 163 BC and reclaimed by his nephew John Hyrcanus in 125 BC, who then forced the Idumeans to convert to Judaism. When Rome started making inroads into the region, the Idumeans readily accepted Roman sovereignty. Antipater, a Judaized Idumean loyal to Rome, was named governor of Judea, and his son Herod the Great was appointed by the Roman Senate as Judea’s king in 37 BC, reigning as a friend of Rome until his death in 4 BC. He married Mariamne of the Hasmonean family to bolster favorability among the Jewish elite, and he was the recognized “king of the Jews” when Jesus was born (Matt. 2:1). After Herod’s death his kingdom was divided among three of his sons: (1) Archelaus became ethnarch of Judea, Samaria, and Idumea (Matt. 2:22) but was replaced by a Roman prefect in AD 6; (2) Herod Antipas (Mark 6:14) was tetrarch of Galilee and Perea throughout Jesus’ childhood and adulthood, reigning until AD 39; (3) Philip II was tetrarch of the northern Hellenistic territories, including Caesarea Philippi (Matt. 16:13) and Bethsaida (John 1:44), until his death in AD 34. Herod the Great’s grandson Agrippa I (son of Aristobulus IV) was given control of the tetrarchies of his uncles Philip and Antipas, then Judea and Samaria, and ruled as king until his death in AD 44 (Acts 12:1-23). His domain was then administered by Roman procurators until his son Agrippa II, brother of Drusilla (Acts 24:24) and Bernice (Acts 25:13, 23), was old enough to be appointed over the northern regions, including parts of Galilee and Perea (Acts 25:13–26:32). He reigned until AD 93.

The Herodians. As the Zealots were resisting Roman occupation, the Herodians found it more advantageous to collaborate with the Romans. They appear to have been political supporters of Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee and Perea. Jesus and his followers raised their suspicions as a possible threat to the political stability of the region. The Herodians plotted with the Pharisees against Jesus (Mark 3:6), and on one occasion attempted to entrap him by asking whether it was lawful to pay taxes to Caesar (Matt. 22:15-22; Mark 12:13-17; cf. Luke 20:20-26). The anticipated response had the potential of inciting the wrath of the hostile Zealots, on one hand, or the fury of the Romans, on the other. The wife of Chuza, a household manager of Herod Antipas, financially supported Christ’s ministry (Luke 8:1-3). 

The Samaritans. In 722 BC the Assyrians conquered and exiled the northern kingdom of Israel, and the land was repopulated with pagans from various Gentile nations (2 Kgs. 17:5-24). An Israelite priest was repatriated to teach them how to worship the God of Israel (vv. 27-28), and the intermingling of these new settlers with a remnant of the former populace resulted in what came to be known as the Samaritan race (vv. 29-41; cf. Ezra 4:2). 
When the Jewish people returned from Babylonian exile, there was instant hostility with the local Samaritans that continued for centuries (Ezra 4:1-6; John 4:29; 8:48). During Hasmonean rule Samaria was devastated by Jewish armies (Josephus, Ant. 13.10.2). Jesus very much disrupted the status quo by traveling through Samaria and interacting with the locals (Luke 9:52; John 4:4-43), providing healing (Luke 17:11-16), and making a Samaritan the hero of one of his parables (Luke 10:30-36). Once the Lord’s church was established in Judea, Samaria was the first mission field (Acts 1:8; 8:1-5; 9:31).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ The first time the name “Pharisee” occurs is when John Hyrcanus I persecuted them due to their resistance to Hasmonean rule (Josephus, Ant. 13.171-72). It has thus been proposed that the designation “Pharisees” (meaning “separatists”) is to be traced back to their official break from the Hasmoneans at this time (see F. F. Bruce, NT History 71).

     ² A reasonable proposal is that the name was coined by the Hasidim and eventually became “a party name applied to all the aristocratic circles connected with the high priests by marriage and other social relations …. The party name was retained long after the Zadokite high priests had made way for the Hasmonean house and the very origin of the name had been forgotten” (K. Kohler, s.v. “Sadducees,” Jewish Encyclopedia); cf. Josephus, War 2.8.14; Ant. 13.10.6. The designation first appears during the time of John Hyrcanus and could be a transliteration of the Greek sundikoi (“council members”), as they were advisors to the Hasmonean rulers (T. W. Manson, “Sadducees and Pharisees” 144-159).

     ³ See esp. Mark 2:16[NA/UBS]; Luke 5:30; Acts 23:9; cp. Matt. 12:24/ Mark 3:22. See also Matt. 5:20; 12:38; 15:1; 23:2, 13-15, 23-29; Mark 7:1-5; Luke 5:21, 30; 6:7; 9:22; 11:53; 15:2; John 8:3; Acts 23:9.

     ⁴ Matt. 2:4; 16:21; 20:18; 21:15; 26:57; 27:41; Mark 8:31; 10:33; 11:18, 27; 14:1, 43, 53; 15:1, 31; Luke 19:47; 20:1, 19; 22:2, 66; 23:10; Acts 4:5; 6:12.

     ⁵ Matt. 7:29; 8:19; 9:3-4; 17:10; Mark 1:22; 2:6-8; 9:11, 14-15; 12:28, 32, 35; Luke 20:39. N.B. Matt. 23:13-29; Mark 12:38-40; Luke 20:46.

     ⁶ The Talmud (meaning “instruction” or “learning”) is a collection of writings in two versions (Talmudim–Jerusalem and Babylonian) consisting of the Mishnah (oral traditions written down) and the Gemara (commentary), containing the teachings of thousands of rabbis from before the time of Christ to the 5th century AD. “This literature must be read with discernment since it does not always reflect perspectives contemporary with NT times; nonetheless, it provides a wealth of material useful in interpreting various NT texts” (J. B. Green and L. M. McDonald, The NT World 4).

     ⁷ Another suggestion is that the idea of a separate, organized group of rebels was invented by Josephus in order to divert the hostile attention of the Romans away from the general Jewish populace (see M. Smith, “Zealots and Sicarii,” HTR 64.1 [1971]: 5). There is little evidence of the Zealots as an organized group prior to the revolt of AD 66. See Josephus, War 4.129-62.

Related Posts: Historical Background NT Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 6

Image credit: http://www.crystalinks.com/judaism.html

Historical Background of the New Testament (Part 4): Significant Developments

Absent from the Old Testament but prolific in the New Testament are various Jewish traditions, synagogues, sects, political leaders, and the Romans. Why was the New Testament originally written in Greek, and why did Jesus speak Aramaic? Was Herod a Jew or a Roman, how did he become so politically powerful, and why does his name appear in different historical periods? Why was there so much hostility in Jesus’ day? Why were scribes so prominent, and who were they? How is it that the Romans had so much control? Without a basic understanding of historical context, much of the New Testament is obscure if not virtually inexplicable.

Aramaic. The Aramaic language was the lingua franca of the East. While Hebrew was the traditional language of the Hebrew people, during and after the Babylonian exile Aramaic was adopted as their everyday vernacular. Jesus spoke Aramaic (cf. Mark 5:41; 7:34; 15:34). The Gospels of Matthew, Mark, and John employ Aramaic expressions (Matt. 5:22; 6:24; 16:17; 27:33, 46; Mark 3:17; 5:41; 7:34; 14:36; 15:22, 34; John 1:42; 20:16). The apostle Paul was fluent in Aramaic (Acts 21:40; 22:2; cf. 26:14), and in his extant writings Aramaic expressions are occasionally employed (Rom. 8:15; 1 Cor. 16:22; Gal. 4:6).¹

Hellenism. The Greek language and culture increased in significance from the conquests of Alexander the Great in the 4th century BC. Koinē Greek developed and spread throughout most of the Mediterranean world, recognized as the lingua franca of the Roman Empire. It was the language of post-classical Greek literature, the Septuagint version of the Old Testament,² the New Testament, and most early ecclesiastical writers. The world of Christ and the early church was markedly Hellenized.³

The Diaspora. Jewish dispersion began in 722 BC with the deportation of northern-kingdom Jews by the Assyrians, and further in 597 BC when the Jewish state was destroyed by the Babylonians. While multitudes of captives were taken to Babylon, many took refuge in Egypt (2 Kings 25:26; Jer. 41:17; 44:1). After the Babylonian exile, only a minority of Jews returned to Palestine. When Alexander the Great founded the city of Alexandria in Egypt, there was a sizeable population of Jews there (Josephus, Ant. 19.5; Ag. Ap. 2.4). Ptolemy I (322-285 BC) reportedly transferred 120,000 Jews from Judea to Egypt, with other Jewish immigrants later settling particularly around Alexandria (cf. Acts 6:9; 18:24). By the early 1st century AD, Jews were scattered throughout the Roman Empire, as far east as Parthia and as far west as Rome (cf. Acts 2:5, 9-11; 6:9).⁴ J. H. Kane observes: “The dispersion of the Jewish people was the greatest single factor in preparing the world for the coming of the Messiah and the preaching of the gospel” (A Concise History of the Christian World Mission 6). 

Synagogues. In exile the Jewish people were separated from their temple and its rituals and sacrifices, so their religion had to be maintained through prayer and the study of their sacred writings. The synagogues provided meeting places for praying, scripture reading, and worship (cf. Acts 15:21), also functioning as courts, community centers, and schools. In Nazareth, where Jesus was raised, it was customary [eíōtha] for him to attend the local synagogue (Luke 4:16). He made frequent use of these gatherings in his earthly ministry.⁵ Paul’s customary evangelistic approach was to first target the synagogues of the Jews.⁶

Oral Tradition. The Jews in exile desired to make practical application of the Torah (Law) in their less-than-ideal circumstances, so “a body of oral tradition—interpretation and application—began to develop around the written Law of Moses to explain how to implement its commandments in new times and places” (C. L. Blomberg, Jesus and the Gospels 10-11). While the written law was conveyed through copyists, according to some the oral law was transmitted by word of mouth all the way back to Moses (F. F. Bruce, NT History 73). During the Lord’s earthly ministry he clashed with certain ones elevating these traditions to the stature of divine precept (Matt. 15:2-6; Mark 7:3-13; cf. Gal. 1:14; Col. 2:8). 

The Sanhedrin. The Old Testament prescribed courts of judges to rule in the affairs of the people (Ex. 18:21-22; Deut. 1:15-18; 17:9-12). When Judea was a temple-state under Hellenistic rule, the high priest had an advisory council for making judgments. During the Hasmonean era, John Hyrcanus’ son Alexander Jannaeus, king of Judea from 103 to 76 BC, presided over the Hasmonean court called “Sanhedrin.” Although Herod the Great deprived this council of most of its authority, when Judea became a Roman province in AD 6 the Sanhedrin regained control of Jewish internal affairs. The Greek sunédrion (“council”) can refer to a judicial assembly of 23 leading Jews (Matt. 5:22; 10:17; Mark 13:9) but is mostly used in the New Testament with reference to the Jewish Supreme Court in Jerusalem comprised of 71 members, including the high priest, representatives of Sadducean priestly families, learned Pharisees (scribes), and elders (Acts 4:5-6, 15; 22:30–23:7).⁷ 

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ See Aramaic. When Hebraistí (the “Hebrew” language) is mentioned in the NT, it most likely refers to Aramaic as the spoken language of the Hebrew people at this time (John 5:2; 19:13, 17, 20; Acts 21:40; 22:2; 26:14; Rev. 9:11; 16:16). Sections of Ezra (4:8–6:18; 7:12-26) and Daniel (2:4b–7:28) were penned in Aramaic.

     ² Produced in Alexandria, Egypt in the 3rd–2nd centuries BC, this would have been the scriptures of most early Christians. E. Ferguson notes, “The Septuagint was the most important literary event, perhaps the most important single development of any kind in the Hellenistic period, for the background of early Christianity” (Backgrounds of Early Christianity [3rd ed.] 436). Technically, the LXX was the Greek Pentateuch, with other documents translated and added later, although the label “Septuagint” is typically applied to the entire Greek OT (see K. H. Jobes and M. Silva, Invitation to the Septuagint [Grand Rapids: Baker, 2000]).

     ³ See Did Jesus Speak Greek? 

     ⁴ Aquila was a Jew born in Pontus, who lived in Rome and then in Achaia (Acts 18:2); later he and his wife moved to Asia (Acts 18:18-19; 1 Cor. 16:19), then back to Rome (Rom. 16:3).

     ⁵ Matt. 4:23; 9:35; 12:9; 13:54; Mark 1:21, 39; 3:1; 6:2; Luke 4:15-44; 6:6; 13:10; John 6:59; 18:20.

     ⁶ Acts 9:20; 13:5, 14; 14:1; 17:1-2, 10, 17; 18:4, 19; 19:8.

     ⁷ Matt. 26:57-59; Mark 14:53-55; 15:1; Luke 22:66; John 11:47; Acts 4:5-6, 15; 5:21, 27-41; 6:12-15; 22:30–23:10; 23:14-15, 20, 28; 24:20.

Related Posts: Historical Background NT Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 5, Part 6

Image credit: https://southviewchurch.com/event/adult-christian-education-repeat/2017-09-17/

The Early Life of Paul the Apostle (Part 2)

Advancements in Judaism

     In making a case against judaizing opponents, Paul describes his Jewish heritage by listing seven personal advantages – the first four were inherited and the last three were chosen by conviction: “[as to] circumcision, on [the] eighth day, of [the] nation of Israel, of [the] tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; according to [the] law, a Pharisee; according to zeal, persecuting the church; according to righteousness under [the] law, blameless” (Phil. 3:5-6).¹

     This is reminiscent of his rhetorical response in 2 Cor. 11:22, where the first three questions asked and answered imply the Jewish heritage of his adversaries: “Are they Hebrews? I also. Are they Israelites? I also. Are they descendants of Abraham? I also.” While these three designations are interrelated, they may respectively be descriptive of the Hebrew culture (as opposed to Hellenistic),² Israelite nationalism (as opposed to diaspora),³ and Abrahamic bloodline (as opposed to a proselyte).⁴

     Similarly, the defense Paul makes to the Philippians includes being “of the people of Israel” and “a Hebrew of Hebrews.” H. A. Kent observes that the apostle “may have meant he had no mixed parentage but was of pure Jewish ancestry from both parents. The phrase may also refer to his linguistic and cultural upbringing, which involved the Hebrew and Aramaic languages (in distinction from that of the Hellenist Jews), even though he had been born in the Diaspora (Acts 6.1; 22.2, 3)” (Expositor’s Bible Commentary 11:139). The self-portrayal actually begins with the fact that he was circumcised on the eighth day, a prelude to and reinforcement of the adjoining descriptions. Circumcision on the eighth day after a Jewish male’s birth was the physical sign of God’s covenant with Abraham’s descendants (Gen. 17:10-13; Lev. 12:3). Paul is not a convert to Judaism who received the rite of circumcision later in life (Acts 2:10; 13:43; cf. 16:3); he has been a member since infancy.

     More specifically he is “of the tribe of Benjamin.” Benjamin was the youngest son of Jacob (with his favored wife Rachel), and the only one of his sons born in the Promised Land. The tribe of Benjamin provided many valiant warriors to Israel’s army (cf. Hos. 5:8), as well as Israel’s first king (1 Sam. 9:1-2) – from whom Paul’s Jewish name Saul was likely derived.⁵ Only the tribe of Benjamin stood with Judah when the kingdom divided (1 Kings 12:20-21; cf. Ezra 4:1), and Mordecai was also a Benjamite (Esther 2:5). J. S. Howson comments, “How little was it imagined that, as Benjamin was the youngest and most honoured of the Patriarchs, so this … child of Benjamin [Paul] should be associated with the twelve servants of the Messiah of God, the last and most illustrious of the Apostles!” (The Life and Epistles of St. Paul 36).

     In addition to what he had inherited, Paul adds, “as to the law, a Pharisee.” The name “Pharisee” [Φαρισαῖος] comes from a Semitic root meaning “the separated ones, separatists …. It was the purpose of the Pharisees to take the pattern of the pious Israelite as established by the scribes, and to put it into practice as nearly as possible” (BAGD 853).⁶ They were a prominent Jewish sect who exercised significant influence among the people of Israel during the time of Christ and his apostles. They are probably best remembered for their antagonism against Jesus, although not all Pharisees or pharisaic tendencies were bad. Since they correctly acknowledged God’s power to raise the dead (Acts 23:6-8; 26:5-7), they were prime candidates for the gospel. Many of them did become Christians (Acts 2:41; 15:5), the most notable of whom was Paul himself (Acts 23:6; 26:5).

     The recounting continues: “as to zeal, a persecutor of the church,” having done so with a clear conscious (Acts 23:1; 24:6), firmly believing he was doing God a favor (Acts 26:9). “To his mind, this new movement posed a more deadly threat to all that he had learned to hold dear …. Paul was characterized, on his own confession, by a superabundance of zeal – which, indeed, he never entirely lost” (F. F. Bruce, Apostle of the Heart 51). Even though the apostle was a firm believer in God’s grace and forgiveness (Eph. 1:7; 2:8; Col. 1:14), he never forgot about his sinful past (Acts 8:1-3; 9:1-2, 21; 22:4-5, 19-20; 26:10; 1 Cor. 15:9; 1 Tim. 1:13), using it as a motivator to serve the Lord with even greater diligence (1 Cor. 15:9-10).

     As a devout Pharisaic Jew, Paul’s “righteousness under the law” was “blameless.” The noun “righteousness” [δικαιοσύνη] means “uprightness, justice, to judge justly” (BAGD 196), and he had followed the Mosaic law so closely, he exceeded many of his contemporaries (Gal. 1:14; cf. Acts 22:3; 26:4-5). The fundamental distinction is “between external conformity to the law in areas where men can judge and inflict legal penalties, and the perfect spiritual conformity to it that God alone can truly assess, and by which no one will be justified [cf. Gal. 2:16; 3:11]” (H. A. Kent, Expositor’s Bible Commentary 11:140, emp. in the text).

Conversion to Christ

     Paul is first introduced in the biblical narrative as “a young man” [νεανίας] named Saul (Acts 7:58), probably in his mid- to late-30s. Being from Tarsus of Cilicia, he may have been connected with fellow Cilicians to the synagogue of the freedmen in Jerusalem, where the dispute with Stephen began (Acts 6:9; 7:58). He went on to lead a violent persecution against the Jewish church from Judea to Syria, targeting both men and women (Acts 8:3; 9:2; 22:4), involving threats, arrests, imprisonment, forced blasphemies, beatings, and death (Acts 8:1-3; 9:1-2, 13, 21; 22:4-5, 19; 26:9-11).

     Paul was then converted to Christ in Damascus of Syria (Acts 9:1-19; 22:6-16; 26:12-20). If the “fourteen years” of Gal. 2:1 are counted consecutively from Paul’s previous visit to Jerusalem (Gal. 1:18-19), which had been three years following his conversion (Gal. 1:15-16), the year of his baptism was approximately three years after the church was established, i.e., the year 33.⁷

     After his conversion, Paul spent the first three years of his Christian life in the Syrian city of Damascus and the adjoining country of Arabia (Acts 9:3-19; Gal. 1:15-18), although the biblical record does not indicate for how much of the three years he spent in either place. Arabia was the Roman name of the Nabatean kingdom, ruled for approximately forty-eight years (9 BC – AD 40) by King Aretas IV, mentioned by name in 2 Cor. 11:32.⁸ During the Middle Nabatean period (30 BC – AD 70) its boundaries fluctuated but would have included what is today known as the Sinai, the Negev, the east side of the Jordan Valley, much of Jordan, and part of Saudi Arabia (cf. Gal. 4:25). At times it incorporated the cities of the Decapolis and Damascus, and Paul probably did not venture far from Damascus during his time in Arabia. 

     He was in Damascus at least twice during this time: (a) when he was converted to Christianity (Acts 9:8-19), and (b) when he returned from Arabia (Gal. 1:15-17). His initial departure was prompted by a Jewish plot to kill him (Acts 9:23-25), and his second departure was instigated by the governor of Damascus desiring to arrest him (2 Cor. 11:32-33). On both occasions Paul escaped by being let down in a basket through the city wall. Whether he (as a young Christian) went to Arabia for a period of isolation and renewal or as a missionary, the biblical record does not say. Neither does it indicate for how much of the three years he was there. But in view of his preaching Christ almost immediately after his conversion (Acts 9:20-22) and subsequently arousing the disfavor of the Nabatean king (2 Cor. 11:32), missionary activity seems likely.

     Afterwards (ca. 36) Paul spent fifteen days with Peter in Jerusalem (Gal. 1:18) before moving back to Tarsus (Acts 9:30). The first gentiles became part of the Christian movement sometime between 36 and 42 (Acts 10:1–11:18), and around the year 42 Saul joined Barnabas in Syrian Antioch, where they labored for a year. Then they traveled to Jerusalem with relief aid around 43 in conjunction with the famine of 44 (Acts 11:25-30). Herod Agrippa I died in early March 44 (Acts 12:23; Josephus, Ant. 19.8.2).

     Commenting on 2 Cor. 11:23-33, P. E. Hughes notes, “the catalogue of Paul’s sufferings which commences at this point (vv. 23 to 33) contains the mention of many experiences which are not recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, and therefore serves to remind us of how little we really know of the biographical details of his apostolic ministry. The book of Acts, indeed, was not written for the purpose of recounting the lives and achievements of men, albeit apostles, but in order to draw attention to the sovereign activity of God the Holy Spirit in the founding and expansion of the Christian Church” (Second Corinthians 406).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² The first time the word “Hebrew” (Heb. עִבְרִי, Greek Ἑβραῖος) occurs in scripture, it is applied to Abram (Gen. 14:13). It is then employed as a designation for his descendants through Isaac and Jacob (Gen. 40:15) and also for their language (1 Kings 18:26). This term is most often used to distinguish the Israelite people from other nations (Ex. 1:19; 2:11; 1 Sam. 4:9; etc.), and also applies to the Aramaic-speaking Jews of Palestine in contrast to Hellenistic Jews (Acts 6:1; 9:29). The origin of the name is uncertain. It may have been derived from one of Abraham’s ancestors, Eber (Gen. 11:16). Those who came to be known as the Hebrews descended from Shem, who is called “the father of all the children of Eber” (Gen. 10:21). Another possibility is that the designation is linked to a similar noun meaning “the region or country beyond,” referring to Abraham’s former homeland beyond the Euphrates (Josh. 24:2-3). It has also been suggested that the word is derived from a verb meaning “passing through” and came to describe Abraham and his descendants as sojourners (cf. Heb. 11:13).

     ³ The name “Israel” (Heb. יִשְׂרָאֵל, Greek Ἰσραήλ) means “Prince of God” and was first given to Jacob (Gen. 32:28; 35:10), then later used to designate Jacob’s descendants (Josh. 3:17). When the nation divided, the northern kingdom was called Israel in contrast to the southern kingdom of Judah (1 Kings 15:9). After the Babylonian exile, the united kingdom again carried the name Israel (Ezra 6:16).

     ⁴ The only usage of the term Ἰουδαίοι (“Jews”) in 2 Corinthians is in reference to antagonists (11:24).

     ⁵ Acts is the only NT document where the Jewish name “Saul” is used for the apostle (see BAGD 742).

     ⁶ The Pharisee sect originated during the inter-testamental period, emphasizing religious purity in opposition to Hellenized Jews. They were distinguished from the Sadducees by their commitment to the entire Torah and belief in resurrection, angels, and spirits (cf. Acts 23:8). 

     ⁷ Jesus was born in the days of Herod the Great, about two years before Herod died in the spring of 4 BC (Matt. 2:1-6, 14-19). The dating of Christ’s birth six years “before Christ” is due to the miscalculations of the 6th-century Roman monk Dionysius Exiguus, upon which our current system of dating is based. The ministry of John the baptizer began in the 15th year of Tiberius Caesar’s reign (ca. 26/27), and Jesus began his ministry sometime after when he was “about” 30 years of age (Luke 3:1, 23). The word “about” suggests that he was not exactly 30 but probably older. The ministry of Jesus incorporated at least three and probably four Passovers (John 2:13; [5:1]; 6:4; 12:1), thus about three to three-and-a-half years. Pontius Pilate was prefect of Judea during the years 26-36 (Luke 3:1; 23:1). Jesus was crucified “the Preparation Day of the Passover” (John 19:31) and resurrected on the third day after his death; the Passover was on the 14th day of the first Jewish lunar month (Ex. 12:6), and the church was established fifty days later on Pentecost (Lev. 23:16; Acts 2:1-47).

     ⁸ Phasaelis, the daughter of King Aretas IV, was at one time married to Herod Antipas, the son of Herod the Great and tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from 4 BC to AD 39. But Antipas divorced her in order to marry Herodias, who had previously been married to his half-brother Philip I (see Josephus, Ant. 18.5.1, 4), and then he beheaded John the baptist when he opposed this unlawful union (Matt. 14:3-12; cf. Luke 3:19-20; 9:9).

Related Posts: Paul's Early Life Part 1, What did Paul do in Arabia?, Paul's Apostleship

Image credit: https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhRdfcx0ZXvz2UP9z88x54ChBNP2dreZaDgln6XhzZFAw0VZilV1hXkTdbUxhPSuj5pWYcIktitSk8Z986e8delAh2IDQYtUlsCWAIvjC3Mj9AgQFB5mDeHf0QWPGMEx3He5cHXutgpa5AL/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/The+Martyrdom+of+Saint+Stephen+-+Juan+de+Juanes.jpg

James and the Law of Moses

     Does James affirm the current relevance of the entire Mosaic law for New Testament Christians (2:8-13; 4:11)? It is important to keep the epistle of James in its proper setting. The letter appears to have been written early in the church’s history, while Christianity was still within the general circle of Judaism. It is addressed "to the twelve tribes in the dispersion (diaspora)" (1:1, author’s own translation), with no hint of any conflict between Jewish and non-Jewish believers (i.e. prior to the discord of the early 50s). Around the year 33, Jewish Christians were "scattered" (diaspeirō) from Jerusalem by persecution (Acts 8:1, 4) and traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Antioch, "speaking the word to no one except Jews only" (Acts 11:19).

     The readers’ place of meeting is described as a sunagōgē ("synagogue") (James 2:2), Abraham is referred to as "our father" (2:21), and there is extensive use of the Old Testament and Jewish metaphors. Since no other New Testament document had been written at this time, casual reference to "the law" is understandable, with much emphasis on the outward workings of faith (1:22-27; 2:14-16; 3:13; 4:11). Remember that the ministry of James appears to have been primarily among Jewish communities, in contrast to Paul who labored predominantly among the Gentiles (Galatians 2:7-9)
     When James writes, "For [the one] who keeps all the law, yet stumbles in one thing, he has become guilty of all" (James 2:10), he is addressing the issue of certain ones claiming to be faithful to the law yet inconsistently violating the law by discriminating against the poor. James is simply calling for consistency. However, to construe these words to broadly affirm that the law of Moses in its entirety is permanently binding on all Christians of all time is to remove the argument from its original context. The allusions to "the perfect law of liberty" and the "royal law" (1:25; 2:8, 12) show that even these early Jewish disciples were living by a new standard.
     What about the apparent disharmony between the teachings of James and Paul on justification, faith, and works (e.g. James 2:21-24 vs. Romans 4:1-5)? This question led the 16th-century reformer Martin Luther (a strong advocate of the concept of justification by faith "alone") to regard James as "an epistle of straw" (see C. M. Jacobs, trans., Works of Martin Luther 6:444). But the discrepancy that Luther perceived is more apparent than real. The "works" in Romans relate to the meritorious observance of the Mosaic law, while the "works" in James pertain to non-meritorious demonstrations of faith. With the right perspective, these teachings are not at variance and readily harmonize.
--Kevin L. Moore

Related Posts: Is the Law of Moses Still Binding?, Was Paul Anti-Law?