Paul's Paradigm

As readers of literature, it's important that we seek to understand a writer in terms of his own worldview, narrative, stories, questions, problems and solutions - rather than in terms of our own.

I think Paul has often been read through the eyes of 17th century theological and ecclesiological issues and questions - when really Paul's thought should be located within first-century thought, within first-century questions and issues, especially within first-century Jewish story and worldview.

First-century Jews believed they were part of a national story that was going somewhere. Israel had been created out from slavery in Egypt; and their nation had subsequently been exiled, and restored - but they felt their restoration was still incomplete, morally and politically. Then by early in the first-century AD, expectation that the Anointed should come and set everything right, reached fever-pitch, and was soon to reach breaking-point. The Anointed was to come and complete Israel's story - the righteous-dead would be resurrected to participate in that new age.

Israel saw their national story as fitting within a larger story: the story of Abraham and his promised seed. And they saw Abraham's story as fitting within the still-larger story: of Adam and Eve, and of all mankind. Creation itself had begun in paradise, and should be restored to Paradise again. The earth - mankind - were somewhere along the timeline of that unfolding story, and Israel were privileged to be the main actors in it.

The Jews felt their nation was called by God with a special vocation - privileged to be the custodians of that promised-restoration - and agents in bringing it about. They were marked-out for that privilege, they believed, by the 'Torah', their special law - circumcision, and other things - given to them by God, through Moses, through angels.

The Sadducees (and maybe some others too) didn't believe in angels or resurrection - but apart from that detail, pretty-much all first-century Jews lived within the same overall worldview, the same national-story.

But in the fist century, there was a new problem in the 'hood. Rome had recently occupied the land of Judea, and were administering it with an increasingly heavy hand. The Roman rulers were pagans. Idolaters. Uncircumcised. Without Torah. Being under their rule didn't fit Israel's story, looking forward.

Meanwhile they had the Scribes telling them that based on the Scriptures, it was time for the Anointed to arrive.

So what should the Jews do at this juncture? Should they do something to bring-about this 'kingdom'?

"The problem is, the current priesthood just isn't up-to-scratch," said the Pharisees, "We need to start observing the Torah properly."

"Lets be activists in that cause," said the Shammaite school of Pharisees, "there's too much pagan-influence."

"We'll even coerce our fellow-Jews, using violence if necessary," said some of the more zealous ones.

"No, let's not resort to aggression - let's just use more stringent rhetoric," said the Hillel school of Pharisees.

"Yeah, God will bring-about His plans all by Himself, without our help," said the Sadducees, as loath as they were to ever agree with a Pharisee on points of the Torah.

"No, the Temple-priesthood is too far gone," said the Qumran community, "a pure Zadok-priesthood must be restored".

The Temple-building included baptismal pools, but the Qumran community started performing baptisms of their own.

"We'll be like a true Israel within Israel," they said, "Messiah's kingdom will revolve around us, and the rest of 'Israel' will miss out!".

And the Essenes pretty-much agreed with them.

For every two Jews, as the saying goes, there were three opinions.

Enter: John the Baptist. He was from a priestly-family. But he came baptising, not in the Temple, but outdoors (a bit like the Qumran community maybe; the Temple also baptised) - but John's baptism was different: it was a baptism of repentance, promising the forgiveness of sins. Hoards of people turned-out to be baptised by him, but some sects didn't like his popularity.

John even publicly identified who the Anointed One was: a man named JESUS. Everyone knew what that implied: it meant their long-awaited 'kingdom' must be at hand; and with Roman soldiers keeping a watchful eye and always ready to be a bit too interventionist for Israel's liking, such an announcement about the kingdom couldn't have come too soon.

Move forward a few years. A zealous young Pharisee is on the highway. He's got authority from the main priests at Jerusalem to imprison any Jews who he thinks aren't quite doing Torah right. In Gentile cities like Damascus, perhaps the Jews were acting, he thought, a bit too pagan. And those ones who believed in this Jesus! With a name like Saul, Israel's first king, he may have seen himself as helping bring-about Israel's covenant-promised kingdom.

Then as you know, Saul encounters Jesus. "Who are you, Lord?" he asks. "I am Jesus whom you are persecuting".

This meant to Paul that Jesus had indeed risen from the dead. Saul knew the resurrection belongs immediately before the kingdom-age. The fact it had happened to Jesus, means the kingdom must have been inaugurated already in some sense at least, in some very real and powerful way.

It meant God evidently had approved of Jesus. His resurrection meant death had been defeated. Since death came by sin, it meant sin had been defeated.

It meant Jesus' death had been no ordinary death: His death had been substitutionary, and it meant His death had won the decisive victory: over sin, over death, and therefore over the rule of evil.

And the fact Jesus was now appearing to him in glory: meant Jesus was reigning already as Messiah and as Lord!

Paul knew that all this had been the goal of the Torah. It was where Israel's story was always meant to end-up. And now it all appears to have happened, in advance, in Jesus.

That meant JESUS was central to what Abraham's story was all about.

It's what the Old Testament Prophets were foreseeing.

It meant, the new and real way to be 'Israel', to fulfil 'Torah', to be Abraham's 'children', to experience what the Prophets foretold, is to belong to JESUS.

To worship Him.

To spread this good news - the glad announcement - to Jews of course, but also to the whole world, since the original idea was that through the Seed all nations would be blessed.

The light dawned. JESUS is the King! He has won the victory through His substitutionary death, and resurrection, in accordance with Old Testament shadow and prophecy, God has visited His people, acted in history. Jesus reigns victorious over sin, death, the devil, and all enemies political.

All who believe on Him, reign in new life with Him, through baptism.

They can receive the promise of the Spirit, right now.

This is it!

The blessing is for all nations - as Abraham was promised - Israel's vocation (to bless the world) has been fulfilled through God's faithful servant Israel - that is, God's own Son.

Since all this had been God's plan all along, it means that God justifies (declares to be 'in the right') the community of believers in Jesus - even Gentile ones - without them needing to become proselytes to the old Judaisms.

Many ethnic Jews were still unbelieving, like Paul (Saul) himself had been. But that didn't mean God's promises had failed, because many Jews had believed.

It was because of unbelief that the Jews handed their Messiah over to be crucified - but it was through His crucifixion that salvation came to the Gentiles, and also to the Jews themselves. How amazing is God!

That didn't mean God's mission to Jews was over: He was still seeking to save Jews, while ever Gentiles also were still getting saved.

In that scenario, promises concerning Israel were seeing their exact fulfilment.

And then Jesus will come the second time. And complete the salvation-story. God's mission to Jews was over: He was still seeking to save Jews, while ever Gentiles also were still getting saved.

In the meantime we must carry-on exhibiting His kingdom, even through suffering if need be, like He suffered. God is love. If we suffer with Him, we will also reign with Him.

Paul was a changed man. He still had the same big-picture, but now he understood that JESUS is at the centre of it, and some old ways dropped off the side.

His new message created some conflict with Caesar's empire; and not least with the Jews, and even with ex-Pharisee Christians who wanted Gentiles to become proselytes to Judaism, and there was also the possibility that Gentiles, particular in the city of Rome, might think too lowly of Jews.

Those were the kinds of issues and questions Paul addressed. So when he uses terms like predestination, election, justification, the law, "all Israel", kingdom, and salvation - it all fit within his larger worldview, his story, Israel's story.

It wasn't, for example, intended to answer the questions which Calvinists disputed with Arminians over, in the 17th century.

It mightn't even have been intended to make a point which trending 'Hebrew-Roots' people want to make about the 'law', or Dispensationalists want to make about Israel's future.

If we don't identify what questions Paul was answering, we won't understand properly what his answers are about.

Paul was explaining how the gospel fits in, and explains, the first-century Jewish worldview and narrative. How the gospel-scheme of things, as it was seen in the first century Church, exactly fulfilled Old Testament promise.

That's the good news! It's the message which still has power to save today.