Did Sha’ul (a.k.a.) Paul the Apostle Really Exist?
It is virtually impossible to insert non-historical people (fictitious characters if-you-will) who set such a weighty influence on the annals of history without it causing fundamental problems. It’s just as hard to write an influential person out of history as it is to insert one. Ask the guys that wrote the Back to the Future movies!...just kidding.
The Nazarenes and its scripturally documented leaders certainly existed. One can see this by looking at the negative space within the ebb and flow of Judaism at the time of the emergence of the Nazarene and the sect’s subsequent growth. The addition of the twelfth blessing in the Amidah, the prayer against heretics is but one example. This blessing was added at the Council of Yavneh after the destruction of the second Temple and was aimed at Essenes and Nazarenes. I might add that in its latter generalized format the prayer itself is sound as real heretics are a genuine phenomenon.
Calling into question the existence of Sha’ul is problematic to say the least. Presently there exists some Messianics who disbelieve his ministry atbest and at worst question his existence altogether. This view begins tobankrupt a believer as other books such as Acts attributed to Rabbi Silus(a.k.a. Luke), Sha’ul’s cousin, begin to unravel in addition to all other worksin the Netzarim Ketuvim(a.k.a. The New Testament) that are attributed to Sha’ulhimself. This is because Sha’ul occupies such a prominent presence in otherbooks that he did not write.
Rabbi Sha’ul was seen as a dissident turn-coat Jew by many in hislifetime and beyond. "We have found this man to be a troublemaker, stirringup riots among the Jews all over the world. He is a ringleader of the Nazarenesect.” (Acts 24:5) Even amongNetzarim who he initially hunted he was for a very long time regarded withsuspicion. “On reaching Jerusalem, hetried to join the talmidim; but they were all afraid of him – they didn’t believehe was a talmid.” (Acts 9:26)
Asfor evidence of him in rabbinic literature, the Jewish Encyclopaedia clearly dealswith him as a very real individual, citing him as a Hellenist with epilepsy based on his thorn in the flesh admittance. This isthe classic mode of attack that general Orthodox Judaism adopts when refutingour movement by citing our own text when criticising us and dismissing it wherewe might cite it as support material.
Wealso have to bear in mind that acknowledging a supposed heretic normally gives unnecessarylife to their cause. This is why it is of little benefit to enter into officialdebate with any religion outside the one a person is committed. By enteringinto dialogue one may find himself in danger of entering into dialogue with theserpent. Therefore historically, Judaism says very little about Nazarenes,knowing that if a sect arises within its body that is of human origin, it willfall without excessive criticism of it on their part. Consider the words of Gamalielthe great elder who lived in Messiah Yahshua’s day. “Then he addressed the Sanhedrin: ‘Men of Israel, consider carefullywhat you intend to do to these men. Some time ago Theudas appeared,claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He waskilled, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. Afterhim, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band ofpeople in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered.Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let themgo! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail.”(Acts 5:25-38)
In actuality, rabbinic history acknowledges quite a few of the more orthodox Nazarene leaders in a positive light, not so much as their status as Nazarenes, but their orthodoxy and piety is focused upon. Nearly all of those who are mentioned are done so with no related information pertaining to their position or activities within the sect of the Nazarenes. Yochanan Ben Zakkai (a.k.a.) Johnthe Baptists (though his connection to the Immerser is concealed) is mentioned,James the Just (a.k.a. Ya’akov HaTzadik is mentioned in several places within rabbinic literature and Rabbi Akiva is even mentioned as having some neutral contactwith James’ disciples.
The issues many have with Sha’ul and a great many other things in the NetzarimKetuvim are all compounded by the mess of Christianity that supplanted the original faith through the initial efforts of the Simon the Sorcerer mentioned in Acts, Ignatius,early church father Marcion and or course old favourite Emperor Constantine.
I’mall for keeping Christian theology out of Rabbinic Judaism and I even side withthe Jews on a great many areas of its teachings and halacha, but this mess is going to be cleaned up a whole lot faster if Orthodox Jews stick to attacking the false Greco-Roman identities of our movements leaders rather than attack them as if that is who they really were. For example, an attack of the Christian J-sus is different to an attack on the Jewish Yahshua ben Yosef. Fortunately,there are some Jewish Rabbis that are beginning to do this and I give praise to HaShem those minds that are in accordance with their lips.
--
This came from a Torah Observant friend in Australasia. It's real good.
More Later...
