@DRBAstro @lastenglishking @TheRaDR As I said, Paul rejects the fundamental tenets of his era's Rabbinic Judaism. He's a "source" in the same way that, say, George W. Bush was a "source" for what Democrats believed in the early 2000s: an unreliable and frequently hostile narrator.
@DRBAstro @lastenglishking @TheRaDR I mean, look, I'm not an expert on Christian scriptures, but here's just a few examples: (1) Romans 3, Paul articulates his view that the sole purpose of the Torah is to make us conscious of sin. That's 180° away from the Jewish view, which is that Torah brings us closer to God.
@DRBAstro @lastenglishking @TheRaDR (2) Galatians 5, Paul describes the mitzvot as a "yoke of slavery" that one should resist taking up.
@DRBAstro @lastenglishking @TheRaDR (3) Romans 8, Paul describes the Torah as a "law of sin and death". Paul's whole approach to mitzvot is that nobody can keep the Torah, its sole function is to make us aware of our sinful nature because of our inability to follow it.
@DRBAstro @lastenglishking @TheRaDR I mean believe what you want to believe, but I don't see how you can regard Paul as a reliable source for anything concerning Jewish (and particularly Pharisaic) beliefs. He's clearly hostile to the fundamental principles of Judaism.
@DRBAstro @lastenglishking @TheRaDR iJudaism teaches that the Torah is a tree of life. Judaism looks to Deut 30:11-15, which teaches that the commandments are "not too hard for you, neither [are they] far off... but the word is very near to you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it."
@DRBAstro @lastenglishking @TheRaDR Paul's ideology is the exact opposite of that: that the commandments ARE too hard, that no one can do it because of our sinful nature, that because of that we need a savior. Literally the complete inverse of the Jewish view of Torah and mitzvot.
@DRBAstro @lastenglishking @TheRaDR Conversely there's not a scrap of evidence in Paul's writings that he was familiar in any way with the oral tradition, which (as mentioned way at the top of my thread) was the essential doctrine of Pharisaism. He never alludes to it, even a little.
@DRBAstro @lastenglishking @TheRaDR Although he is reported to have been a student of Rabbi Gamliel, he never quotes any of his teachings, or those of Shimon the Just, or Hillel or Shammai or any other Pharisees of his time or before.
@DRBAstro @lastenglishking @TheRaDR So like I said, believe what you want to believe -- but I don't see any reason to take Paul's claim of having been a knowledgeable Pharisee, or his perspective on what that meant, in good faith. He's describing a religious perspective he disagrees with completely.
@DRBAstro @lastenglishking @TheRaDR And of course we DO KNOW what Pharisaic beliefs of the first century looked like, because the oral traditions of that era were eventually set down in writing. We have extensive collections of midrash, mishnah, and beraita from that time, none of which looks anything like...
