Source: “Reading Paul Within Judaism: The Collected Essays”, By Mark D. Nanos, 2017.
The Myth Of The Law Free Paul Standing Between Christians And Jews.wav
This podcast challenges the pervasive "myth of the Law-free Paul," arguing that the Apostle Paul did not abandon the Torah but rather remained a Torah-observant Jew throughout his life. The author contends that disagreements between early Christian and Jewish scholars stem from misinterpretations of Paul's teachings, particularly regarding how non-Jews (Gentiles) related to the Torah after believing in Christ. Instead of advocating for a universal "Torah-free" gospel, Paul maintained that while Gentile Christ-followers were not required to convert to Judaism and observe the Torah in the same way as Jews, they were still expected to adhere to Torah-defined norms for righteous living, such as avoiding idolatry and practicing neighborly love. This reinterpretation aims to foster a greater understanding between Christian and Jewish communities by revealing their underlying similarities in commitment to God's teachings, rather than emphasizing perceived differences based on a "Law-free" Paul.
Topic 1: The Misconception of a "Law-Free" Paul vs. a Torah-Positive Jesus A central issue in both Christian and Jewish scholarship, particularly since the advent of historical criticism, has been the portrayal of the apostle Paul. While there's a growing consensus that Jesus was Torah-positive—meaning he upheld the Torah and his disagreements were over interpretations, not the Torah's role itself—this understanding has often not been extended to Paul. Instead, many Christian and Jewish scholars have magnified the tendency to depict Paul as someone who abandoned or devalued the Torah, and subsequently, founded Christianity. This perspective effectively shifts the basis of distinction between Christianity and Judaism from Jesus' teachings to Paul's supposed "conversion from Torah to Christ." The traditional view asserts that Jesus practiced Judaism, even if his specific interpretations of halakhah (Jewish law) differed, while Paul did not. This leads to the ironic situation where the fundamental proposition that Christianity is "not-Judaism" and Judaism is "not-Christianity" often hinges on the prevailing image of a "Law-free" or "Torah-free" Paul and his "Torah-free gospel," rather than on Jesus and his teachings. This highlights a deep-seated polemic at the ideological level, where "freedom from law" in Christian interpretations and the characterization of Paul as an apostate in traditional Jewish views serve to delineate and often assert the superiority of each faith community.
Topic 2: Reinterpreting the Concepts of "Torah" and "Gospel" To address the polemical interpretations that have shaped the understanding of Paul, it is crucial to clarify the meanings of "Torah" and "gospel." The term "Torah" is often mistakenly translated as "Law," when its more accurate meaning is "Teaching." This teaching is not merely a collection of commandments or rituals, but rather a comprehensive way of life that prioritizes the interests of God and creation. The concept of "freedom," often celebrated by Christians as central to their faith, is also a core value within Judaism, exemplified by celebrations like Sabbath and Pesach, and commandments promoting humane treatment. The "love command," foundational to both Paul's and Jesus' teachings, originates from the heart of Torah itself, specifically Leviticus 19:17-18. Similarly, the term "gospel," meaning "good news," is also a central concept in Judaism, referring to the message of good for Israel that heralds would bring to other nations. By understanding these terms within their broader Jewish context, one can begin to dismantle interpretations that foster an unnecessary dichotomy between these faith traditions, recognizing shared fundamental values and concepts.
Topic 3: Paul's Affirmation and Observance of Torah Contrary to the widespread "Law-free Paul" myth, a closer reading of Paul's texts reveals that he did not teach the abrogation of Torah, especially for Jews like himself. The argument is made that Paul himself observed Torah as a matter of faith, considering it incumbent upon him as a faithful Jewish believer in Christ. He explicitly affirmed Torah, proclaiming that the good news in Christ actually "established" it (Romans 3:31) and even went so far as to declare the Torah "spiritual" (Romans 7:14). His letters to non-Jews were not about abandoning Torah universally, but rather about how non-Jews could become members of the politico-religious community of Judaism and its way of life without ethnically becoming Jews, meaning without becoming members of Israel. This implies that while Christ-believing non-Jews were not under the same obligations to observe Torah as Jews were (e.g., in terms of the full scope of dietary norms), Paul himself, and other Christ-believing Jews, continued to observe it. The prevailing interpretations often misread Paul's instructions to non-Jews as universal truths applicable to everyone, including Jews, leading to a profound misunderstanding of his actual stance.
Topic 4: Paul's Teaching on Gentile Christ-Followers' Relationship to Torah A key aspect of Paul's theology, often misunderstood, concerns the distinct relationship Christ-believing non-Jews (gentiles) had with the Torah. Paul insisted that these gentiles should remain non-Jews and therefore not come under Torah in the same way that Jews were. His opposition to their undertaking proselyte conversion (symbolized by circumcision for males, and metonymically by "works of law") stemmed from his conviction that such a conversion would compromise the "propositional truth of the gospel." This truth, according to Paul, proclaimed that the "end of the ages" had dawned with the resurrection of Christ and the arrival of the Spirit, ushering in an era where all nations would recognize Israel's God. In this new age, Christ-following non-Jews were obligated to bear witness to the righteousness expressed in Torah (the love of God and neighbor), but as representatives of their own nations, not as members of Israel or bound by the Mosaic covenant in the same manner as Jews. This approach created a new, somewhat amorphous religio-ethnic category for these believers: they were no longer idolaters but also not Israelites. They were understood as fellow members of a Jewish subgroup or coalition—Christ-faith Judaism—with equal standing before God through faith in Christ, but without the full obligations of Torah observance applicable to Jews. This distinction meant they were not without a relationship to Torah-defined norms, especially concerning dietary practices when among Jews, but their identity remained distinct from ethnic Jews.
Topic 5: Paul's Self-Proclaimed Torah-Observant Jewish Identity The claim that Paul was Torah-observant, including adherence to Jewish dietary norms, aligns with the logic of his own rhetoric. Paul consistently asserted his Jewish identity, even claiming to be "a Jew beyond reproach." His argument in 1 Corinthians 7:17-24, where he states that everyone should remain in the state they were in before responding to the gospel, logically implies that he, as a circumcised Jew, would continue to observe Torah. He also emphasized that "keeping the commandments of God" is what truly matters. His statement in Galatians 3:28—"there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor free, neither male and female" in Christ—is reinterpreted not as an elimination of religio-ethnic difference, but as an elaboration on the theme of eliminating discrimination among Christ-followers, while still acknowledging that differences, including religio-ethnic ones, persisted. Furthermore, Paul's argument in Galatians 5:3 against non-Jews becoming Jewish proselytes ("if one is circumcised, one is obliged to observe the whole Torah") would only make sense if his audience understood that he, a circumcised Jew, indeed observed the Torah fully himself.
Topic 6: Paul's Criticisms as Intra-Jewish Polemic Paul's criticisms, often interpreted as a rejection or devaluation of Torah, are instead presented as part of an intra-Jewish polemic—a debate within Judaism about how to interpret Torah. He was not disparaging Torah itself, but rather challenging the authority and teachings of his competitors. For example, his dissuasion of the Galatians from circumcision was not due to a distaste for Torah, but because their supposed "good news" (proselyte conversion) was, from Paul's perspective, a rival "good news" that compromised the gospel proposition. He believed that gentile Christ-followers should not become Jews or members of Israel ethnically, even though they were to be gathered alongside Israel in the dawning age. Paul's criticism of those who advocated proselyte conversion for gentiles was that they obscured the immense responsibility involved in full Torah observance, thus failing to uphold the Torah's central ideal of loving one's neighbor as oneself. This reframes Paul's disputes as theological disagreements within the diverse landscape of first-century Judaism, rather than a fundamental break from it. The tensions primarily arose from Paul's controversial claim that people from other nations could be full co-members of the people of God without being "under Torah" in the same way as Jews, because they were not members of Israel.
Topic 7: Reinterpretation of the Antioch Incident (Galatians 2:11-15) The "Antioch Incident," where Paul confronted Peter for withdrawing from eating with gentiles, is a crucial text in the traditional "Law-free Paul" narrative. However, a reinterpretation challenges the conventional view. The traditional understanding posits that Peter withdrew because the meals were not conducted according to Jewish dietary laws (halakhah) and that Paul denounced this by advocating "Torah-free" standards for joint meetings, implying that Christianity was separate from Judaism and free from "bondage" to Torah. This reinterpretation disagrees with this view, arguing that Peter's withdrawal was not due to non-kosher food but from fear of "the ones from circumcision" who advocated for gentile proselyte conversion (circumcision) for full communal integration and equality. Paul's accusation of "hypocrisy" against Peter suggests that Peter was inconsistent with a shared conviction that gentile Christ-followers should not become proselytes, not that he was eating non-kosher food. The meals were likely conducted according to Jewish dietary norms, and the issue was the equal seating and treatment of Jews and gentiles at these meals, celebrating the dawning messianic age where both were equally members of the people of God without the gentiles needing to become ethnically Jewish. Furthermore, Paul does not equate "the ones from James" (who arrived and prompted Peter's withdrawal) with "the ones from circumcision" whom Peter feared, and he does not imply that James reversed his agreement with Paul regarding gentile circumcision. This challenges the notion that Paul objected to Torah-observance or prevailing halakhic dietary standards in his assemblies.
Topic 8: Reinterpretation of Food Offered to Idols (1 Corinthians 8-10) Another pivotal text in the "Law-free Paul" narrative is 1 Corinthians 8-10, concerning food sacrificed to idols. The consensus view is that Paul permitted eating such food in principle, unless it bothered the "conscience" of the "weak" (understood as Christ-followers insecure in their Torah-free gospel understanding). This perspective often concludes that Paul viewed Torah as adiaphora (a matter of indifference) and adapted his behavior based on his audience (Torah-observant vs. Torah-free). However, the reinterpretation argues that Paul did not permit the eating of food known to be idolatrous, and he himself did not eat it. The "weak" or "impaired" in this passage are likely polytheists (pagans), not insecure Christ-followers. Paul argues from a Jewish, Torah-based perspective: while idols are merely statues, participating in or consuming food from idolatrous rites is to be avoided as it is associated with demonic powers. His rhetorical strategy, particularly in 1 Corinthians 9:19-22 ("I became like a Jew to win Jews... like a lawless one to win the lawless"), is reinterpreted as "rhetorical adaptability" rather than "lifestyle adaptability." Paul did not mimic the behavior of various groups (e.g., eating non-kosher food with the "lawless"); instead, he adapted his arguments by starting from their premises to lead them to his conclusions, while remaining Torah-observant. This interpretation suggests that Paul's audience knew him to be Torah-observant, and their queries stemmed from the social cost of adhering to Paul's teachings, which required them as gentiles to avoid idolatrous food without becoming Jews.
Topic 9: Reinterpretation of Instructions to the Strong about the Weak (Romans 14-15) In Romans 14:1-15:7, Paul instructs the "strong" to respect the "weak" concerning convictions about food, drink, and days, which often appear as Jewish norms (e.g., kosher food, avoiding libations, observing Jewish holy days). The traditional view identifies the "strong" as Torah-free Christ-followers (Jews or gentiles) and the "weak" as Christ-followers who still observe Torah (mostly Jews). This view assumes Paul himself is Torah-free and that his statement "nothing is impure in itself" (Romans 14:14) defines purity independently of Torah. This reinterpretation challenges this by arguing that the distinction between "strong" and "weak" does not revolve around Torah observance. Instead, it concerns their "ability" or "inability" to believe in the gospel proposition to the nations, meaning their potential to "stumble" over the message of Christ. Paul's appeal to the inherent goodness of all God's creation does not signify a rejection of halakhic behavior. Instead, it echoes rabbinic tradition that impurity is an imputed characteristic, not inherent, and applies specifically to Israel. Paul's argument is that regardless of whether the "strong" consider something pure, they are obligated to respect the sensibilities of those who deem it impure. This passage, therefore, does not provide conclusive evidence that Paul was not Torah-observant in matters of diet or that he taught against it; rather, it suggests he argued from the premises of a Torah-observant Jew.
Topic 10: Implications for Christian-Jewish Reconciliation and Understanding The reinterpretation of Paul as a Torah-observant figure has significant implications for contemporary Christian-Jewish relations. The prevailing portrait of a "Torah-free" Paul has historically fueled stereotypes and exacerbated differences between the two communities. By presenting Paul as different from other Jews, even Jesus, Christians may inadvertently perpetuate the idea of a fundamental break between the two faiths. Similarly, some Jewish traditions have characterized Paul as an apostate who misunderstood or rejected Judaism, rendering his teachings unworthy of serious engagement. Challenging the "Law-free Paul" myth can foster a heightened recognition of the similarities between first-century Judaism and Christian foundational texts and traditions. It suggests that a Torah-observant Paul, consistent with his self-witness and the portrayal in Acts, aligns more closely with the Torah-positive views of Jesus and James, where no dichotomy existed between Torah and Christ. This critical approach can encourage a new level of mutual respect by clarifying that the core differences between the communities may revolve more around the identity and meaning of Jesus, rather than a supposed disagreement over the "teaching" (Torah) of faithfulness in response to God's gracious calling. This re-evaluation aims not to disregard existing differences, but to understand them more accurately and constructively.