Apostle to the Gentiles

As Christians already know, the apostle Paul is known as the apostle to the Gentiles (e.g. Eph 3:1, 8). Of course, that doesn't mean Paul didn't attempt to minister to the Jews (he did), but he's most known for ministering to the Gentiles.

At the same time, Paul writes:

I am a Jew, born in Tarsus in Cilicia, but brought up in this city, educated at the feet of Gamaliel according to the strict manner of the law of our fathers, being zealous for God as all of you are this day. (Acts 22:3)

and

If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless. (Phil 3:4-6)

and

I am speaking the truth in Christ - I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit - that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen. (Rom 9:1-5)

It's interesting that Paul was quite possibly the best person in his day to take the gospel to his fellow Jews. Moreover, he had the strong desire to do so. Nevertheless as things worked out God made him the apostle to the Gentiles instead. (Meanwhile God sent a fisherman like Peter to the Jews, among others such as James.)

Paul, Apostle of Christ—the movie

http://www.craigkeener.com/paul-apostle-of-christ-the-movie/

Gaius Julius Paulus?

Excerpted from Colin Hemer's paper "The Name of Paul" (1985):

It is generally recognised that Paul, as a Roman citizen, must have possessed a full Roman name, in fact the tria nomina (three names). 'Paulus' was his cognomen, but his praenomen and nomen are quite unknown to us. When a provincial was enfranchised, as when a slave was freed, he automatically assumed the praenomen and nomen of his patron and transmitted it to his descendants...

According to Acts 22:28 Paul was born a Roman citizen. If his family bore the names of a Roman benefactor, the origin must be sought in a previous generation, presumably in the person of a famous Roman who had favoured Tarsus, and bestowed citizenship on some of its leading citizens. If we cannot explain Paul's citizenship in this way, we can only confess our total ignorance of the circumstances.

The three eminent Romans associated with the East and with Tarsus in particular in the preceding period were Pompey, Caesar and Antony, the two latter especially being linked favourably with Tarsus. There is then the possibility - we can say no more - that Paul might have been Cn. Pompeiu Paulus, C. Julius Paulus or M. Antonius Paulus.

The purpose of this note is to draw attention to an inscription from Naples which illustrates the question of Paul's name and identity at three separate points...

'To the spirits of the dead. L. Antonius Leo, also called Neon, son of Zoilus, by nation a Cilician, a soldier of the praetorian fleet at Misenum, from the century the trireme "Asclepius", lived 27 years, served 9 years. C. Julius Paulus his heir undertook the work [of his burial]'...

Paul was both Hebrew and Roman by birth, and operated under either name (Saul or Paul) according to context. It is a neat example of the 'undesigned coincidences' of Acts and Epistles that Paul's Hebrew name is known only from Acts, and his tribe (Benjamin) only from an acknowledged epistle (Phil. 3:5): he was named after the most famous member of his tribe...

Leo's heir bears exactly the name which may possibly have been Paul's own. If he was Leo's near kinsman he may also have been a Cilician, and Tarsus was the capital and dominant city of Cilicia. The form of his name makes it probable that he or his ancestor was enfranchised by Caesar...

The name 'Paulus' itself was a common cognomen, occurring also in the variants Paullus, Polus and Pollus, and meaning 'small', whether in origin pejorative or affectionate. It may sometimes have been confused with an obsolete rare praenomen, usually spelt 'Paullus', which was occasionally revived as an archaizing fashion, as in the names of Paullus Aemilius Lepidus (consul suffectus in 34 B.C.) or Paullus Fabius Maximus (consul in 11 B.C., proconsul of Asia in 9 B.C.; IGRR 4.438, etc.). In Paul' case, as in that of enfranchised provincials generally, the cognomen will have been his ordinary personal name in the Gentile world, his formal designation by praenomen, nomen, father's praenomen, Roman tribe and cognomen being reserved for official documents and remaining unknown to us.

The Apostle Paul: His Life, Thought, and Letters

https://domainthirtythree.com/2016/09/08/book-announcement-porter-the-apostle-paul/

Paul and the Gift

http://themelios.thegospelcoalition.org/article/thomas-schreiner-paul-and-the-gift-a-review-article

When did Paul first see Jesus?

It's common for scholars to deny that Paul knew the historical Jesus. But is that correct?

Paul witnessed the martyrdom of Stephen:

12 And they stirred up the people and the elders and the scribes, and they came upon him and seized him and brought him before the council (Acts 6:12). 

58 Then they cast him out of the city and stoned him. And the witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man named Saul (7:58). 

8 And Saul approved of his execution. And there arose on that day a great persecution against the church in Jerusalem, and they were all scattered throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except the apostles. 2 Devout men buried Stephen and made great lamentation over him. 3 But Saul was ravaging the church, and entering house after house, he dragged off men and women and committed them to prison (Acts 8:1-3).

Stephen was martyred about a year after Christ was crucified. Cf. Eckhard Schnabel, Acts, 43. As another scholar notes:

The fact that witnesses laid their clothes at Saul's feet suggest that he was already the acknowledged leader in the opposition to the earthly church (cf. 8:1,3). David Peterson, The Acts of the Apostles, 268.  

In 4:35,37; 5:2, lying something at someone's feet implies a recognition of that person's authority. Ibid., 268n89.

So Paul was in Jerusalem a year after the Crucifixion. And he was a seminal figure in the persecution of the early church. 

What was Paul doing in Jerusalem at that time? He was a rabbinical student. 

I am a Jew, born in Tarsus in Cilicia, but brought up in this city, educated at the feet of Gamaliel according to the strict manner of the law of our fathers, being zealous for God as all of you are this day (Acts 22:3).

This statement indicates that although Tarsus was his hometown, he was already living in Jerusalem well before he began his rabbinical studies. As one scholar notes:

Paul mentions his place of origin only briefly and moves on to his early life in Jerusalem. There are three participles in the Greek, highlighting successive stages in Paul's experience: he was "born" in tarsus, "brought up" in Jerusalem, and "educated" at the feet of Gamaliel. So Paul's theological roots were essentially Palestinian rather than Diaspora Judaism…This phase of Paul's education probably began some time after he turned thirteen, when he was instructed by Gamaliel "according to the strictness of our ancestral law," ibid. 597.

One possibility is that Paul's father moved the family to Jerusalem to give his son proper socialization in traditional Judaism. This preceded his formal rabbinical education. Or perhaps there was an aunt and uncle in Jerusalem who hosted Paul. That's reinforced by another statement: 

16 Now the son of Paul's sister heard of their ambush, so he went and entered the barracks and told Paul (Acts 23:16).

As one scholar notes, 

Paul and his sister were apparently brought up in Jerusalem, and his sitter remained there to marry and have children. Ibid. 621. 

The upshot is that Paul was in town at the time Jesus made trips to Jerusalem during his public ministry. That's reinforced by the fact that Jesus went to Jerusalem during major festivals. 

This would also help to explain why Paul was on the groundfloor of opposition to the Christian movement. He was a protege of Gamaliel, who was, in turn, a member of the Sanhedrin. Gamaliel was directly involved in formulating a policy to counter the nascent Christian movement in Jerusalem. 

26 Then the captain with the officers went and brought them, but not by force, for they were afraid of being stoned by the people…34 But a Pharisee in the council named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law held in honor by all the people, stood up and gave orders to put the men outside for a little while (Acts 5:25,34).

This gave Paul access to official proceedings via his mentor. That explains his presence at the martyrdom of Stephen. By riding on the coattails of his mentor, Paul had entree to the high priestly entourage. But Paul took a harder line than Gamaliel. 

Considering all these connections, it seems quite likely that Paul saw Jesus preach. He certainly had occasion to see Jesus preach. And Jesus drew big crowds. Surely Paul would be curious.

That would explain why Paul took such an early and avid–albeit hostile–interest in the Christian movement. It didn't happen overnight, right after the apostles began preaching the Resurrection. 

That, of course, wouldn't make him a believer. For one thing, that doesn't mean he saw Jesus perform miracles.

And even if he did, the Jewish leaders had an apologetic to explain away the miracles of Jesus: they called him a sorcerer. We find that allegation in the Gospels and Talmud alike. Assuming he saw Jesus preach, he probably viewed Jesus as a false prophet or Messianic pretender. 

But the radiant postmortem appearance of Jesus to Paul on the Damascus road was too much for Paul to deny. Rumors about the Resurrection turned out to be true after all! 

J.B. Lightfoot's Commentary On Acts

It's available for preorder at Amazon. It's based on some previously unpublished manuscripts of Lightfoot's work on Acts recently discovered by Ben Witherington. If you want to know why the book is significant, read the description and endorsements at Amazon.

Are All Religions Basically The Same?

One way to increase your appreciation for the Bible is to read the Quran. Consider Antony Flew's experience, for example.

Flew was a prominent atheist philosopher who came to believe in the existence of God shortly before his death. He never became a Christian, but that makes his comments about the contrast between Christianity and Islam even more significant. Unlike many critics of Christianity who irrationally claim that there aren't any significant differences among the religions of the world, Flew acknowledged some important contrasts between Christianity and Islam:

"Between the New Testament and the Qur'an there is (as it is customary to say when making such comparisons) no comparison. Whereas markets can be found for books on reading the Bible as literature, to read the Qur'an is a penance rather than a pleasure....Whereas St. Paul, who was the chief contributor to the New Testament, knew all the three relevant languages and obviously possessed a first class philosophical mind, the Prophet [Muhammad], though gifted in the arts of persuasion and clearly a considerable military leader, was both doubtfully literate and certainly ill-informed about the contents of the Old Testament and about several matters of which God, if not even the least informed of the Prophet's contemporaries, must have been cognizant. This raises the possibility of what my philosophical contemporaries in the heyday of Gilbert Ryle would have described as a knock-down falsification of Islam: something which is most certainly not possible in the case of Christianity....The evidence for the resurrection [of Jesus] is better than for claimed miracles in any other religion….Well, one thing I'll say in this comparison is that, for goodness sake, Jesus is an enormously attractive charismatic figure, which the Prophet of Islam most emphatically is not." (208-9, 211 here)

Why Do Paul's Letters Not Say Much About Jesus' Life On Earth?

James McGrath has a post on the subject that makes some good points.

Alan Segal on Paul the Apostle

Alan Segal Dedication from A Polite Bribe on Vimeo.

HT: Larry Hurtado

About Alan Segal.

Alan Segal Wiki.