-Devotion by Jeremy Martin (TN)
I really like Paul, he just strikes me as the kind of guy who has what they used to call “grit”; he’s feisty, and blunt to the point of offensive at times. When he’s writing the book of Romans (@ 56 AD, give or take a couple years) it seems like he’s writing to folks he hadn’t actually met yet (Rom 1:8-15) but considers fellow believers, is praying for them, and hopes to visit them soon (he’s arrested in Jerusalem before that can happen). This letter was most likely written from Corinth, around the time of his 3rd missionary voyage.
Paul was a “Jew’s Jew” (Phil 3:5, it actually reads “Hebrew’s Hebrew”), the guy was fiercely zealous for God and initially saw believers in Christ as a threat to Judaism (see activities just prior to his conversion: Acts 7:57-8:3, Phil 3:4-6, and Gal 1:13-14), but after he is converted he brings that same feisty zeal to the service of the Christ. He was a Pharisee (1 of the 4 Jewish “philosophies”, more on that later), a student of Gamaliel (a renowned rabbi), a Jew from the tribe of Benjamin, and a Roman citizen (he was born in Tarsus, a city in the province of Cilicia that held the status of a “free city” within the Roman Empire, which granted legal Roman citizenship).
I was very surprised (and amazed) that some modern day “apologists” on YouTube have recently begun to claim that Paul espoused doctrines that weren’t even existant until the 4th century. Here’s the thing: Paul was a Jew, not just that but a “Jew’s Jew”, and ALL of the Jewish people (since the time of the return from the Babylonian captivity) have been FIERCELY monotheistic. According to Sir Anthony Buzzard, to even begin to comprehend scripture properly it must be examined through the lens of a 1st century Jew. I agree. Saying anything different is just not doing your homework, and stating that a 1st century Jew such as Paul believed in a speculation that didn’t even exist in any form until the 4th century is clearly an anachronism (and a prime example of ‘confirmation bias’, and shoddy homework).
We can see Paul’s theology in the first chapter of Romans, it’s very clear, as it is in most of his letters. In Romans 1:1-4 he refers to the promises of God made in advance through His prophets about The Messiah (or Christ) as being a Jewish man descended from David genealogically, and designated as the son of God in power (Gen 3:15, Deut 18:18, 2 Sam 7 to name just a few of those prophecies). Romans 1:7 states “…Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the **Lord Jesus Christ.”, as he does similarly in most of his letters, showing a clear delineation in Paul’s thinking between the two. Paul did have a radical change in thinking, but it was from the Pharisee’s view of “the messiah is yet to come” to his post vision understanding that “The Messiah has come, this man Jesus who was a descendant of David.” (not any of the later speculations from the 4th century). **=Please note that the translation “Lord” here in “Lord Jesus Christ” is accurately “my lord“ (no caps) and not “THE LORD” (all caps), and every time you read “Christ” in scripture it is the title of a man whom God has anointed as King (and not somebody’s last name). “THE LORD” (all caps) is a later textual corruption done with good intentions (and bad results), mistranslating the name of God (which occurs about 7000 times in the old testament as “YHVH” or “YHWH”).
If Paul had somehow, against all logic and reason, ever changed his fiercely monotheistic Jewish understanding of God there would have been a VERY clear and direct dissertation on it to at least one of his many churches, more realistically a whole lot of dissertations to all of them; Paul wasn’t what I’d call a “subtle” guy, he was very direct. We would have entire books devoted to explain this new “doctrine”, and that just never happened. Quite the opposite. The only real doctrinal controversy Paul ever chimes in on is “should the gentiles be circumcised“ (he says not). Paul was probably, however, the single greatest (human) force in bringing the gospel that was delivered originally exclusively to Jews (by Jesus and then his apostles) over to the gentiles. In our reading today in Rom 15:16, we can see Paul (despite being a devout Jew himself) has now self-identified as a minister of the Messiah Jesus to the Gentiles (non-Jewish folks), a priest to them.
Even when he is ministering to the Gentiles, though, he constantly refers to the scriptures that the Jews were familiar with at the time: what we call the Old Testament. These were just the scriptures that a first century Jew had available, and the vast majority of the intended audience at this point were also first century Jews (keep in mind the New Testament wasn’t compiled in it’s entirety until later); numerically there were just fewer gentiles at this point in the development of Christianity than there were Jews, and they had a much clearer and simpler understanding of these scriptures. The later believers’ “complex” problems were of their own devising, and didn’t occur until after the (then numerically superior) gentiles brought their mythology and speculation in to the church around the 4th century. We see clearly in todays reading Paul’s reliance upon and belief in the ancient Jewish scriptures in the Old Testament.
In Romans 15, Paul quotes Jewish scripture (that’s the Old Testament to you gentiles) 4 times in this one chapter, with the intention of unifying “God’s people” (the Jews) and Gentiles (we who were “grafted on”). In v9 he (Paul) quotes 2 Samuel 22:50 (or Psalm 18:49), where David rejoices that God has mercy on the Gentiles. In v10 he quotes Deuteronomy 32:43, urging the Gentiles to rejoice with God’s people. In v11 he quotes Psalm 117:1, calling all nations to praise the Lord, and in v12 he quotes Isaiah 11:10, describing the root of Jesse who will rise to reign over the Gentiles, in whom they will hope. His whole point here in chapter 15 is to encourage the Jews and the Gentiles to “accept one another, just as Christ also accepted us to the glory of God” (Romans 15:7, LSB). I honestly don’t doctrinally agree with most of the mainstream Christian folks out there right now, but I do try to accept them as brothers (and sisters) in Christ, because after all who am I to judge the servant of another (Rom 14:4)?
I’ve heard a lot of folks take the stance that the Old Testament doesn’t matter, because that was for the Jews and we are “Christians”, and I disagree (in love). The New Testament didn’t in any way negate the Old Testament, it just clarifies it; all together it is just one long and unbroken story of the love that God has for His creation, and the overwhelmingly beautiful character of our God. Jesus, the servant of God (Acts 3:13), quoted extensively from the Old Testament. Paul, the servant of Jesus, who was the servant of God, quoted extensively from the Old Testament. We, who strive to be grafted on to the branch of God’s people (the Jew’s), by right of belief in the “root of Jesse who will rise to reign over the Gentiles” (the son of David: Yeshua, Jesus), should humbly acknowledge that the branches die without the root.
REFLECTION QUESTIONS
- Do you read the Old Testament or the New Testament more often, and why?
- Have you ever allowed doctrinal differences to cause you to view any of your brothers or sisters in Christ in a negative light? Why?
- Have you ever allowed doctrinal differences to cause you to view any of your fellow Children of the Book (Jews and Muslims) in a negative light? Why?
- Do you think that what you believe or how you behave is more important in terms of your entry into God’s kingdom, and why?
PRAYER
Father God, Creator and Sustainer of all life, thank you for my life. Please lead me, and allow me to humbly be a servant who pleases my master. Teach me wisdom, Father, and whisper in my ear. Help me to seek the old ways, and to know the truth about You. Please grant me Your spirit so that I can love my fellow creation and faithfully follow the instructions of my King, the one whom You sent for us. Father God, have mercy upon me. In Jesus’ name, Amen.
Seek Grow Love 