Paul & The Oral Torah-Law Before & After The Road To Damascus

Paul was no stranger to the oral torah-law, because he of course was a Pharisee. The Pharisees believed in the Oral Torah-Law, but the Sadducees didn't.

Philippians 3:5 circumcision on the eighth day! of the race of Israel! of the tribe of Benjamin! a Hebrew of Hebrews! according to law (NOT "the law") a Pharisee! - Young's Literal Translation

In chapter 1 of Galatians and verse 14: Paul writes:

Galatians 1:14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the TRADITIONS OF MY FATHERS.

As he defends himself to his peers Paul explains:

Acts 22:3 "I am indeed a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, taught according to the strictness of our fathers' law, and was zealous toward God as you all are today. NKJV

So Paul was taught the oral Pharisaic traditions of the fathers at the feet of Gamaliel.

Paul And The Oral Torah Law - After the Road to Damascus

But notice what Paul says about what he believes AFTER his conversion from Pharisaic Judaism on the road to Damascus.

In Acts 24:14 Paul sums up his beliefs in front of an array of accusers AFTER he has been converted.

Acts 24:14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are WRITTEN IN THE LAW AND IN THE PROPHETS:

Notice anything?

Hang on a minute Paul, with your Pharisaic background, what about the Oral Torah law?

Interestingly Paul is saying here: "I believe in all the written scriptures in the Old Testament", BUT for a former Pharisee about the Oral Torah law he says what?

He mentions NOTHING about the Oral Torah law, which was later codified in the Mishnah.

He COULD have said: "believing all things which are written in the law and the prophets AND THE TRADITIONS OF THE FATHERS".

But he doesn't.

And that tells us volumes.

Contrast in Paul's Attitude to The Oral Torah Law Before and After His Conversion

Before his conversion Paul was a Pharisee, a trained specialist in the Oral Torah law and exceedingly zealous of the traditions of his fathers. Following his conversion though Paul is critical of "works of law" or legalism and Paul is equally critical of being "under law and subsequently in Acts 24:14 declares only that he believes in the written Torah law.

Whilst to the Jews over the generations since the exile in Babylon it had increasingly seemed to be, that the more they kept law's oral additions and traditions, the more righteous they were.

Paul knew that this was nonsense.

We've all sinned. And no amount of good deeds, even if the oral additions were more righteous (and they weren't), could take that sin away and make anyone righteous.

The only thing that takes away our sins (is not trying to be "extra good") it is the blood sacrifice of the Lamb of God. As Paul said in Ephesians 2:

Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast. NKJV

And when we read Romans 9:, Paul says of the Jewish nation:

Romans 9:30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing THE law of righteousness, has not attained to THE law of righteousness. 32 Why? Because they did not seek it by faith, but as it were, by THE works of THE law. NKJV

In verse 31 Young's translates "THE law" "a law" And of course in verse 32 there's also no definite article, so Paul seems to be saying:

Although the Jews have sought righteousness by developing and trying to keep more and more law, they've not attained it because they sought it by "works of law" (or legalism).

How Does Paul's View of the Oral Torah Law Compare With Jesus Christ's?

When we compare Paul's position with that of Christ's on the oral traditions of the Jews, we don't find them inconsistent. Christ criticized some aspects of the oral torah-law substantially (particularly the traditions and illegal additions to the written Torah).

Return to the start of Galatians, Paul, The Torah-Law and Legalism a Judianity website ?

Why do many christian theologians believe that Paul kept Nazirite vows & offered sacrifices at the temple after the crucifixion if the Old Testament law is "done away"? One small and predictable change to an "Old Testament" law about circumcising gentile proselytes in Acts caused massive turmoil in the predominantly Jewish first century church. If most of the other Old Testament laws were "done away" why then isn't any comparable fuss recorded in the New Testament ?

Let's take a closer look at the fact that Christ Criticised Some Aspects of the Oral Torah Law
© www.galatians-paul-the-torah-law-legalism.info Jan 2006.