Lesson 1 - Romans Introduction

[Music] [Music] well today we embark on a study of the New Testament book of Romans now we're gonna have quite the dialogue about this exquisite work of the Apostle show Paul because it has more to do with shaping the Christian faith as we know it than any other book in the Bible easily therefore if it's not properly interpreted it has the potential to lead followers of Christ down some paths that were never intended now I think if a survey was taken among Christians not only would the book of Romans probably be the most widely read but we would find that there are more commentaries that have been written on Romans than any other Bible book so why if I'm greatly aware of that what I offer yet another commentary and teaching on Romans there are a number of worthy commentaries available on Romans written by excellent scholars and brilliant people frankly that reality was a personal dilemma and it's why it took much urging and encouragement from family and friends to convince me to go ahead and teach Romans even though I was so unsure as to what more I could possibly offer you that wasn't already on the bookshelves but what probably most influenced me to turn the page from my skepticism to a determination to teach this book had much to do with a few provocative words written in the introduction to James D G Dunn's highly academic treatise on the book of Romans in his introduction he says this the dialogue present in the book of Roman of course arises out of the fact that the apostle to the Gentiles is precisely Paul the Hebrew of Hebrews and zealous Pharisee now converted but still sharing many of his earlier concerns the suggestion that in his conversion Paul totally abandoned all that constituted his previous identity and he made a quantum leap into a wholly different pattern of religion is unnecessary and it's unjustified more serious still it cuts itself off from the possibility of reaching a proper exegesis of Romans and it condemns its interpretation of Paul to confusion and contradiction first will soon become apparent in the exegesis he's speaking of his commentary on Romans Paul is debating not with an alien system but within himself in his own past the weft of his faith in Christ in her weaves with the warp of his Jewishness professor Dunn is expressing a fairly recent turn in the mindset of New Testament scholarship that is often labeled the new perspective and the new perspective is entirely about Paul and his epistles the champion of this new perspective on Paul and his writings is EP Sanders a highly renowned Bible scholar someone I've spoken to you about in other lessons now while the new perspective is anything but universally accepted thanks to Sanders and others like done it has entered the world of mainstream Christian scholarship because Sanders and Dunn are at the headwaters of the 21st century evangelical Christian's stream of New Testament thought and study so what is this new perspective basically is asserting that Paul was a full-fledged Jew he remained a full-fledged Jew in every way after turning to Christ and so logically it follows that if we are to correctly interpret and understand Paul then we must do so within the boundaries of his Jewish religion mindset upbringing education and life context in short Paul was a Jew he only knew life experiences as a Jew he was not a Gentile who experienced a Gentile life nor at some point did he come to identify with Gentiles now to believers who are disposed to accept the Hebraic roots of Christianity world view the correct worldview of the Bible in my opinion this is not much of a leap but to the majority of New Testament scholars Bible expositors and those pastors and late Christians who rely on their works this new perspective comes dangerously close to heresy however it's one thing for a Bible scholar to make this well-founded observation about Paul's Jewishness even to admit that it fully aligns with what is literally stated in the New Testament New Testament about him and how Paul describes himself but it's quite another to then seriously explore what this could actually mean when it comes to the effect it might have on cherished and embedded Christian doctrines their concern over those effects long-standing Christian doctrine is quite real because almost all church doctrines are based on the sayings of Paul so if it turns out that for 19 centuries institutional Christianity has not correctly understood what Paul meant because his words have a different meaning within the Jewish societal context in which they were written verses the Gentile societal context in which those words have been studied and used to establish a systematic theology of the church well then it opens up a Christian Pandora's box of all sorts of challenges and possibly inconvenient if not embarrassing discoveries so this is the point at which even open minded commentary writers find themselves at the end of a promising road to new discoveries in the Bible because they're unwilling to pursue it they will journey no farther down this path of a new perspective on Paul because they're well aware that to do so risks careers livelihoods and valued academic and religious associations that they have worked lifetimes to gain now as one who has read the works of EP Sanders and James Dunne I'm sorry to say that they too are reluctant to go any further at least for now some of that concern no doubt comes from knowing that if their deepest suspicions of where this road leads were to be realized it could be most disruptive to the inner workings of the institutional church as we know it today in ways that aren't predictable now don't think for a moment that I'm over dramatizing this crucial matter of how one is to characterize Paul the author of Romans therefore how one must interpret Paul I mean have you ever considered what it would mean to Baptist or Methodist or Calvary Chapel or any number of evangelical Christian denominations if suddenly the leading and most trusted of their Bible academics admitted that the law of Moses was not abolished Wow or that mankind does not face a choice of salvation methods between law the old way for Jews or grace the new way for Gentiles or that God has not abandoned his original people the Jews and replaced them with his new people Gentile Christians how about if it turns out that sabbath-keeping is still an ongoing commandment of God as well as keeping his holy appointed times as ordained in the Bible I mean what we're dealing with are some of the most foundational issues that God's Word sets forth issues that our early church fathers all Gentiles of course decided upon they declared them as doctrines and these doctrines have generally been followed and accepted as unassailable by the Christian community ever since and that's whether you're Catholic Protestant or Orthodox now what I'm preparing you for then we'll see if you come back is an all-out re-examination of the meaning of the book of Romans or better an in-depth cross-examination of what so many acclaimed and lettered scholars have said about the book of Romans and it faced little opposition not much pushback until now what we're gonna do we're gonna blast right through those institutional barricades that Warren go no farther when we acknowledge Paul's Jewishness blockades that have been erected on a road that represents the troubling nuances that are presented by the so called new perspective on Paul ba blockades that have done nothing but what done you can't get more mainstream than done or not done readily admits it condemns the interpretation of Paul to confusion and to contradiction I mean clearly it is a denominations particular interpretation of Paul that gives each denomination its uniqueness but how can that be if we're all reading the same words from the same apostle from the same New Testament how can the doctrines of various denominations vary so greatly from one another if we have but a single source of reference that we all look to the answer is again is done stated when the Hebrew context and the Jewish reality of who Paul is is removed what remains is confusion and contradiction and for centuries Paul has been accused by insiders and outsiders of the Christian faith of confusion and contradiction in his several epistles thus each denomination has cherry-picked statements of Paul that suits their agenda and belief and it ignores others appalled statements that seem contradictory to those and it's that set of Paul statements that has formed the basis of their particular brand of Christianity so what does this all mean for us in our study of Romans means that we're going to do our best does all any of us can do to choose truth over tradition we're going to go where the Scriptures lead us even when it troubles us and we don't like it we're gonna venture where angels fear to tread and we're gonna open up a few cans of worms and some of them are gonna escape and we're gonna delve deep and to poo Paul actually was and the Jewish cultural terms in which he of course spoke and thought and wrote all along the way no matter how challenging or uncomfortable this may get rest assured that the one constant is going to be that Yeshua is the Messiah he is the son of God and He is God and other than by him and his sacrifice on the cross there is no way for anyone to be delivered from sin but it also means we're gonna have to learn about the one thing that is missing from every commentary written on the New Testament whether that commentary is on Paul's letters or on the Gospels and that missing thing is the context of Jewish society and the first century AD what is called the Second Temple period it was a Jewish society that was based from birth to death on Jewish law called Holika now if you study the book of Acts with me you're gonna be a lot more prepared for Romans than if you haven't however I will take the time to revisit some of the teaching that I presented in Acts especially about Jewish law what it means how it worked adding some new information to what I've already given to you this is not to teach you Judaism it's to teach you about a society that operated strictly within Judaism I think between the book of Acts and Romans you will have been given enough information that you'll have a foundation then to read the remainder of Paul's letters in a different and more enlightening and less confusing way so what we're gonna learn is not terribly hard but there's a lot of information when everyone hasn't there been huh a lot of it's gonna be new to you we will go through Romans carefully and verse by verse at the same time I wanted to be careful not to bog us down too much that we lose the flow and the purpose of this wonderful work the main value of Romans for a believer is as a source of inspiration of theological instruction and practical application that must not be lost or buried under mountains of detail yet without the essential background and the preparation we will know we will do no better than what any other of the many commentators on Romans is accomplished and that is to provide incomplete information based on a Gentile rather than a Biblical Hebrew world view that has sometimes led to erroneous conclusions I'm not speaking about theological nuances that would interest only college professors I'm talking about the basics of our faith now the first thing to know about Romans is that it is no different than any other book of the Bible in the respect that it is but one part of a much larger whole Romans is not a Bible unto itself it is not a self-contained systematic theology that Paul created Romans is only truly intelligible when we have the rest of the Bible to provide the foundation and the texture for what Paul has to say and and I can't say this strongly enough we must always evaluate what Paul is teaching in light of what Christ taught especially we must be careful that Paul's thoughts always uphold with the Tanakh the Old Testament taught those words of the prophets couldn't be more important if Paul in any way refutes Christ or the prophets then what we have is but a mere man Paul providing a little more than air-filled personal theology that only has value as interesting Jewish literature from that era and it would be anything but divinely inspired you know the reason I even say that is because it's not uncommon around here for me to quote Yeshua from the Gospels explain the application and the principles that exposes only later to have somebody approach me and say well yes but Paul said folks I want to say this as plainly as I can Paul in Christ are in no way on equal footing if Paul and Christ seemed to disagree the faults with Paul we can't have a gospel of Christ but then turn around and say Paul has the power to override it remake it with his own inspired thoughts then it's not a gospel Christ it's a gospel of Paul and although the average churchgoer doesn't realize it inside the hallowed halls of our Christian institutions long ago doctrinal decisions were made that pitted Paul against Christ and the winner was predetermined to be Paul and this is because there were ways to spin Paul statements that made him appear to agree with the Gentile church authorities now on the other hand if I truly thought that Paul disagreed on any theological point of consequence over and against Yeshua we wouldn't even be studying his most famous letter the book of Romans I'd be telling you to avoid it what we're going to see in Romans is Paul working out a very sticky cultural and theological problem the participation of Gentiles within the early community of Jewish believers that as of that time still operated strictly as a sect of Judaism in fact so much of showels dialogue is about or is aimed directly towards Gentile believers that some commentators think that the book of Romans was written strictly to and for Gentiles and this belief very popular in the early Gentile dominated church is what propelled the viewpoint that the book of Romans uh to be the primary source of doctrine for the new religion called Christianity a religion that's offered only to Gentiles to this day the bulk of Christian commentators again all Gentile course refer to the book of Romans as Hellenistic literature see Hellenism refers to the lifestyle and the culture practiced by the Gentile Greeks and Romans this was the dominant and the desired culture of the Roman Empire by thinking of the book of Romans as Hellenistic literature than we necessarily discard the Jewishness of its author the Jewishness of its context the Jewishness of its theology and the Jewishness of its meaning and message in truth the book of Romans is thoroughly Jewish literature that even employs rather standard debate and defense principles and terminology used by the sages and the rabbi's in the Talmud yeah the oldest extant manuscripts of this book Romans is written in Greek but this shouldn't be troubling Greek was the most universally spoken language in the Roman Empire Paul was a Dyess for a Jew his first language was Greek the Jews believing or not in Rome to whom this letter was written would have spoken Greek but nevertheless all the history theology that scripture passages the thought patterns that Paul was transmitting were purely Hebrew and original it's only that these Hebrew thoughts were necessarily being transmitted in the Greek language now let's remember who Paul was although a diaspora Jew born in Tarsus of Silesia he identified with mainstream Judaism let's call it rabbinic Judaism just to give it a clearer picture now I say that because you see the ordinary common Jews of the Holy Land and those of the diasporic can't really be called adherence to rabbinic Judaism that connection occurs mainly with those who fancied themselves as religious experts like the Pharisees the common folk would not have identified themselves with any specific Jewish party thus we don't find ordinary Jews saying that they're Pharisees in fact Paul was part of a specific strand of rabbinic judaism that was espoused by taught by the highly acclaimed teacher Gumley l the talmud makes it clear that gamla l only took students who had exceptional attitude and devotion and who showed promise such that one day they could become rabbis we don't have to conjecture in any way about Paul in this regard he calls himself a Pharisee his training at Gamliel school is a recorded fact when his training was complete he did not graduate as a novice or an intern but rather as one having mastered the philosophy and nuances of this particular strand of Judaism Paul was a rabbi through and through I'm gonna make it an awl an analogy now in order to make a point that I've touched on before I hope you'll give me all your focus for a few moments I think it'll be valuable to you now although in Paul's school studying the Bible the biblical Torah the prophets was certainly part of his training in reality what was taught were the theological viewpoints of Gamaliel about the Torah and the prophets further this particular strand of rabbinical Judaism that gamla L followed operated within a set of doctrines that we commonly call Jewish law and Hebrew this is called Holika now these Jewish laws were not the same thing as the Torah law the law of Moses Jewish law is not the law of Moses two different things the law of Moses and Hebrews called Mitzvahed rather these Jewish laws were essentially man-made rulings and doctrines Yeshua called them traditions of the elders purported to accurately reflect the true interpretation of the law of Moses and the prophets the rulings and doctrines established a system of behaviors and customs and Theological expectations that those who adhered to the gamla l rabbinic philosophy those like Paul believed in so they followed them scrupulously now for centuries although much more so in modern times training centers for the future leaders of Christianity have operated in the same way as these ancient rabbinical schools we usually call these Christian training centers seminaries however each strand of Christianity each denomination has its own peculiar set of doctrines so each has its own designated schools to teach their doctrines so what happens at a seminary now while the Bible is certainly taught the larger emphasis is placed in the doctrines and customs and Theological expectations of that particular denomination that operates the seminary because those doctrines are purportedly derived from the Bible and define what that denomination believes the Bible says about any number of subjects so when a student signs up to attend a certain seminary he or she has already made a conscious decision about which strand of Christianity they have faith in and intend to follow the rulings and doctrines that they're taught at seminary then establish that particular dominations denomination system of behaviors and customs and Theological expectations that those students are not only to follow but are as graduates expected to lead other people to follow now in both the cases of Judaism and Christianity while the Bible is highly venerated in its taught at their schools it's given second place to the doctrines and customs that are taught let me say it this way the Bible is viewed through the lens of that denominations doctrines not the other way around the Bible is viewed through the lens of that denominations doctrines not the other way around so although the student might not be fully conscious of it what they wind up gaining is the greatest knowledge of and devotion to the ways that a board of religious scholars and elders long ago decided are the right ways in Christianity these ways are called doctrines in Judaism they're called Halle code plural for halaqa Jewish law once again are these ways taught in the religious schools Judaism or Christianity the same is the Bible are they Scripture no but they are said to capture the correct essence and meaning of the Bible this is why I regularly say that the Christian Church is no more nor less Bible based than Judaism the church is doctrine based just as Judaism as Holika based Paul's theology revolved around the halaqa of the Pharisees in fact it was the Holika of a specific brand of Pharisees as championed by championed by gum allele and it did not always agree with a holic ah of the other brands of Pharisees which like with Christianity there were numerous brands thus when Paul thinks and speaks and writes and instructs he does so with the underlying foundation of the Holika he learned at the feet of Gamaliel but since meeting his Messiah on the road to Damascus Paul somewhere somehow began assimilating a new Holika the Holika taught by Yeshua of Nazareth now remember Holika is just a certain groups interpretation of the Bible so Paul was adopting Yeshua's interpretation interpretation of the Bible that would become intertwined with his established Holika taught by gamma leo and much of what Yeshua teaches as his Holika generally fits with the Holika of the Pharaohs spirit ease although obviously some does not but Paul's real dilemma you see was this yeshuaa told him he was to be the emissary of this new Holika christ Holika to the gentiles and the core of christ's Holika was what the gospel the problem is there was no school to teach this because you xuan was now in heaven and because messianic judaism was far too young and embattled to have form schools there was no precedent in Jewish history for offering salvation to Gentiles on faith in the covenants God had made with the Hebrews no precedent for this so Paul had to think it through to come to some conclusions to establish solutions to to make rulings to go by in other words from Paul's perspective and remember he is a rabbi he was establishing messianic Holika Holika that included the advent of Messiah Yeshua and everything it entailed and that thinking involved much debate processing of information and he didn't necessarily agree with James Jesus's brother who headed up the way in Jerusalem for one thing James wasn't a trained rabbi James was just a country boy who was just happened to be the brother of Jesus on the other hand Paul fought like a rabbi because he was a brilliant formally trained rabbi at one of the two most prestigious rabbinical schools in Jerusalem as James Dunn points out Paul didn't somehow give up all that he was all he had learned as a Jewish rabbi to start a new Gentile based religion rather he sought to assimilate these new revelations about Messiah Yeshua into all that he was into all that he knew thus when Paul makes a point in Romans as he does in his other letters he does so in the style the protocol and the thought processes of a rabbi now the Hebraic roots Bible commentators shulam and lay cornu have researched and cross-referenced some of the terminology that Paul likes to use in his letters with what is used by rabbis and their arguments and debates as they appear in the Talmud and they found some expected similarities now for those of you who might not know the Talmud is essentially a large volume of Jewish writings containing the religious rulings and traditions and customs of Judaism but it operated in a really unique way rabbis whose thoughts were included in the Talmud use certain standard phrases when commenting on certain matters of Holika Jewish law and those phrases indicated agreement or disagreement with the ruling of another but earlier rabbi and those who study the Talmud perfectly understand that the insertion of these key phrases helps the reader to know the salient matter under discussion and what point is being made by the rabbi that is the Talmud operates on certain literary conventions and rules unique to the Hebrews and especially to rabbis and Jewish students are taught their significance for inst one of Paul's favorite phrases is what what then shall we say or what shall we then say now that's not unique to Paul actually it's a standard rabbinic terminology used in the Talmud that introduces a new matter for debate later on in the discussion the conclusion in other words the religious ruling on that matter that an earlier rabbi had decided his quote was quoted then what this later rabbi does is he refutes it because he thinks that earlier ruling was wrong so after the words what shet what shall we then say comes a discussion of the particular matter that is under examination evidence is produced usually in the form of scripture verses sooner or later a conclusion that is a ruling that rabbi so-and-so made about this matter is given but then it's going to be discredited by the rabbi who's now commenting on it the phrase that is used to indicate that this later rabbi disagrees with the conclusion of the former rabbi is God forbid or heaven forbid or sometimes may it never be standard so the entire argument typically begins with what shall we then say and it ends with God forbid or its equivalent so not surprisingly in the book of Romans we find a passionate discussion on a matter of extreme importance to Paul beginning at verse 30 of chapter Romans chapter 9 because Paul is a rabbi and this discussion or argument then is a matter at arriving at a prop ruling establishing the correct Holika as concerns Gentile participation in the covenants given to Israel so then Paul naturally begins his debate as any trained rabbi would listen to this from Romans 9:30 to 10:00 - you don't have to turn there it begins so what then are we to say whoops that tells us something doesn't it pay attention now this that Gentiles even though they were not striving for righteousness have obtained righteousness but it is a righteousness grounded in trusting however is really even though they kept pursuing a Torah that offers righteousness did not reach what the Torah offers why because they did not pursue righteousness as being grounded trusting but as if it were grounded in doing legalistic works they stumbled over the stone that makes people stumble as the Tanakh puts it look I am laying up in Zion a stone that will make people stumble a rock that will trip them up but he who rests his trust on it will not be humiliated now Romans 10:1 was continuing brothers my heart's deepest desire and my prayer to give to God for Israel is for their salvation for I can testify to their zeal for God but it's not based on a correct understanding ok the next several verses right on through all of Romans chapter 10 right on into Romans chapter 11 is the body of the discussion about whether or not Gentiles ought to be able to participate in Israel's covenants of God and if they did what effect might this have on Israel a number of Old Testament Scriptures are quoted to bolster Paul's position along with some of his comments on those scriptures until we finally arrive at Romans 11:11 and there we read in that case I say isn't it that they Israel have stumbled with the result they've permanently fallen away heaven forbid quite the contrary it is by means of their stomach that delivering has come to the Gentiles in order to provoke them to jealousy so essentially Romans 9:30 through Romans 1111 is a unit and we have the issue presented and then the debate that follows beginning of Romans 9:30 essentially Paul is having this debate with himself he sets up the straw man then he argues with him very rabbinical the beginning of this unit is indicated and identified with the phrase what shall we then say standard rabbinical means this standard rabbinical saw a signal that it is that at some point a conclusion or ruling is going to be made then the person leading this discussion Paul is going to indicate he strongly disagrees with that conclusion and he does it by saying heaven forbid the erroneous conclusion the Paul is battling against with himself is that if Israel has indeed stumbled and now God has included Gentiles does that mean that Israel has permanently fallen away from God that's the matter that's the conclusion of the straw man rabbi Paul's answer to this erroneous conclusion heaven forbid then in the next sentence he states what he considers to be the right ruling the correct Holika which is that by means of Israel stumbling deliverance has come to the Gentiles but all of this is with the hope that all of Israel will be saved so for him that's the right rule now most Gentile New Testament commentators who have no idea of Second Temple Judaism or Jewish culture and certainly have no working knowledge of the Talmud look at this erroneous conclusion in Romans 11 about Israel having permanently fallen away and say see Paul has just admitted Israel's falling away from God forever and Paul is so dismayed by this terrible outcome that he cries out in agony for his fellow Jews Oh heaven forbid nothing could be further from reality because I've just demonstrated to you but if one is ignorant of how Jewish society and culture religion operated in New Testament times how could one possibly come to the correct conclusions about what these Bible characters and writers meant by what they said my points this we need to read Paul's letters through the eyes of a rabbi in the first century AD and that is no easy task anybody here a rabbi how about from the first century when Paul wrote he realized he was handcuffed by the fact that many who will read his letters are Gentiles who have little means to truly understand what he's telling them because they have no understanding of Jewish culture or Judaism or the Hebrew Bible so he tries his best to use terms that Gentiles might understand better terms that may not be an exact fit to what he's trying to communicate but terms that Gentiles with a low level or more likely no level of biblical knowledge can better understand but this brings up another important matter who then but a Jew in Paul's day can explain to Gentiles with the Hebrew Scriptures the Bible the Old Testament meant who but a Jew could expound upon what Paul meant in his letters and then explain it to Gentiles see this is why Paul was so firmly synagogue based in his evangelism he needed believing Jews in the synagogues of foreign lands to be representatives of the faith believing Jews who had a heart for Gentiles being included I'd go so far as to say that Paul counted on he depended upon believing Jews to interpret his letters to believing or even seeking Gentiles because by the end of Paul's century when Gentiles began to dominate the Jesus Movement and then quickly moved to sever all Jewishness from it in order to make it a new Gentile religion called Christianity the message of the several inspired Jewish writers of the Bible suffered from distortion some accidental some intentional it would not be until early in the 3rd century AD that the New Testament was ordained into existence didn't exist before then by then anti-semitism was a basic foundational doctrine of the church so there was little hope that these New Testament writings written by Jews would be properly interpreted and applied by Gentiles but today is demonstrated by the recent new perspective on Paul that so far has been adopted by a few of our most prestige Bible scholars we are starting to see a change of attitude perhaps we are living in the era in which the spirit is moving across the face of this planet and the souls of his believers to bring a better understanding of the Word of God to his worshipers finally I have no other way to explain the sudden eruption of the Hebrew roots movement this is the challenge that we face as 21st century believers when reading Paul's epistles and none more so than the book of Romans since followers of Christ rely so heavily on the book of Romans it's imperative that we get it right and it is clear that anti-jewish prejudices have for centuries tainted the teachings of Bible scholars and Bible translations now the good news is that because of the lateness of our era is the time of messiahs return approaches we are seeing a movement of believers towards an openness to rediscovering the Bible in its Hebrew context your proof of it and towards looking to Jews to help unravel the true meaning of Holy Scripture so I think that while what I intend to teach you may presently not be very well accepted within the institutional Church more and more believers will see the truth of it and grab hold as the days go by why do I think this because it was prophesied 2500 years ago and I see it happening with my own eyes Zechariah 8:23 Auden is a vote says when that time comes 10 men will take hold speaking all languages of the nations they will grab hold of the cloak of a Jew and say we want to go with you because we've heard that God is with you next time we'll conclude our introduction and we'll get started in the first chapter of the book of Romans [Music] you see [Music] you

Channel: Torah Class

Views: 9,479

Rating: 4.8888888 out of 5

Keywords: Synagogue, Romans, Holy Spirit, Church, Bible Study, Apostles, Torah Class, New Testament, Tom Bradford, Jerusalem

Id: euuBjPUwXPA

Length: 52min 14sec (3134 seconds)

Published: Fri Jun 29 2018