Did the Jews really kill Jesus?

[Cow Poke]

Meh.....

Scripture Verse: Philippians 3

4 though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more: 5 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; 6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law,[a] blameless.

© Copyright Original Source

Scripture Verse: Acts 22

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

© Copyright Original Source

I'm trying to find any version of the Bible where Acts 22:3 (I left out the verse reference above) is NOT interpreted as Paul very clearly saying "I am a Jew".

Scripture Verse: Acts 22:3 Young's Literal Translation

`I, indeed, am a man, a Jew, having been born in Tarsus of Cilicia, and brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, having been taught according to the exactitude of a law of the fathers, being zealous of God, as all ye are to-day.

© Copyright Original Source

Scripture Verse: Acts 22:3 The Passion Translation

`Then Paul said, “I am a Jewish man who was born in Tarsus, a city of Turkey.[a] However, I grew up in this city and was properly trained in the Mosaic law and tutored by Rabbi Gamaliel according to our ancestral customs. I’ve been extremely passionate in my desire to please God, just as all of you are today.

© Copyright Original Source

Scripture Verse: Acts 22:3 NIV

“I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city. I studied under Gamaliel and was thoroughly trained in the law of our ancestors. I was just as zealous for God as any of you are today.

© Copyright Original Source

Scripture Verse: Acts 22:3 KJV

I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day

© Copyright Original Source

Curious why a claim would be made that Paul never said he was a Jew.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I'm trying to find any version of the Bible where Acts 22:3 (I left out the verse reference above) is NOT interpreted as Paul very clearly saying "I am a Jew".

Scripture Verse: Acts 22:3 Young's Literal Translation

`I, indeed, am a man, a Jew, having been born in Tarsus of Cilicia, and brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, having been taught according to the exactitude of a law of the fathers, being zealous of God, as all ye are to-day.

© Copyright Original Source

Scripture Verse: Acts 22:3 The Passion Translation

`Then Paul said, “I am a Jewish man who was born in Tarsus, a city of Turkey.[a] However, I grew up in this city and was properly trained in the Mosaic law and tutored by Rabbi Gamaliel according to our ancestral customs. I’ve been extremely passionate in my desire to please God, just as all of you are today.

© Copyright Original Source

Scripture Verse: Acts 22:3 NIV

“I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city. I studied under Gamaliel and was thoroughly trained in the law of our ancestors. I was just as zealous for God as any of you are today.

© Copyright Original Source

Scripture Verse: Acts 22:3 KJV

I am verily a man which am a Jew, born in Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, yet brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers, and was zealous toward God, as ye all are this day

© Copyright Original Source

Curious why a claim would be made that Paul never said he was a Jew.

In his authentic writings Paul never uses the word "Jew" to describe himself nor does he inform his reader as to where he was born or his familial origins.

As for the verse from Acts that is not Paul writing about himself, that is from a piece of pious fiction which bears many of the hallmarks of an ancient Hellenistic novel, and whose author puts those words into the mouth of Paul.

[Sparko]

Ah, the "no true scotsman" fallacy.

[Cow Poke]

In his authentic writings Paul never uses the word "Jew" to describe himself nor does he inform his reader as to where he was born or his familial origins.

As for the verse from Acts that is not Paul writing about himself, that is from a piece of pious fiction which bears many of the hallmarks of an ancient Hellenistic novel, and whose author puts those words into the mouth of Paul.

You knew him personally, did ya?

[mikewhitney]

In his authentic writings Paul never uses the word "Jew" to describe himself nor does he inform his reader as to where he was born or his familial origins.

As for the verse from Acts that is not Paul writing about himself, that is from a piece of pious fiction which bears many of the hallmarks of an ancient Hellenistic novel, and whose author puts those words into the mouth of Paul.

I would have thought you would recognize some areas where Paul affirms his Jewish background. You maybe get into the debate whether some of the Pauline letters were not by Paul. However, that theory probably is rejected because the Pauline letters are found to remain together from the earliest discoveries of his letters.

Rom 9:1-6 -- he speaks of his fellow countrymen

I am speaking the truth in Christ—I am not lying; my conscience confirms it by the Holy Spirit— 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my own people, my kindred according to the flesh. 4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises; 5 to them belong the patriarchs, and from them, according to the flesh, comes the Messiah, who is over all, God blessed forever. Amen.

Philipians 3:3-6 -- he speaks of his background as a Pharisee

For we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh— though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. 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.

If you are being hyper technical, Paul has probably not used the word we translate as "Jew" to speak of himself. There may be rhetorical reasons for this or he had more specific terms he used, as needed. However, by common parlance today, Paul called himself Jewish. (I'll sometimes use more cautious or exacting terms as needed, but I don't deny the common vernacular.)

[Sparko]

Why would anyone doubt Paul was Jewish? None of his writings (or other's) make any sense if he wasn't.

[Cow Poke]

Why would anyone doubt Paul was Jewish? None of his writings (or other's) make any sense if he wasn't.

I think she made a claim, was proven wrong, but doesn't have the grace to admit it.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I think she made a claim, was proven wrong, but doesn't have the grace to admit it.

Paul never uses the word"Jew" when describing himself. Paul’s claim to be of the “Tribe of Benjamin” is also interesting. ‘Benjamin’ sometimes functioning as a variation of the “Belial/Balaam terminology and. Bela in Old Testament genealogies – reliable or otherwise – is not only an Ediomite King but the son of Be’or, the same parentage ascribed to Balaam. It is therefore not inconceivable that Paul was, in fact, a Herodian.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

You knew him personally, did ya?

Read the original Greek texts.

[rogue06]

In his authentic writings Paul never uses the word "Jew" to describe himself nor does he inform his reader as to where he was born or his familial origins.

As for the verse from Acts that is not Paul writing about himself, that is from a piece of pious fiction which bears many of the hallmarks of an ancient Hellenistic novel, and whose author puts those words into the mouth of Paul.

While he may not use the word "Jew" to describe himself, in Galatians (which I'll assume you accept is an example of "authentic writings" of Paul, he does say at 1:13

"For you have heard of my former life in Judaism"

How else would you take that but as his being Jewish? While he was now a Christian and no longer lived "in Judaism" he was still Jewish.

And in the very next verse he notes that he

"was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers."

Kinda hard to do if you weren't yourself Jewish, don't ya think?

Moreover, if Paul wasn't Jewish then why in the world would he have been so driven to hunt down and persecute early Christians for what he saw as violating Jewish law? Galatians 1:13-14 were in reference to this activity

Scripture Verse: Gal. 1:13

For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers

© Copyright Original Source

He reaffirms this in Philippians 3:6 (another epistle everyone pretty much agrees is an "authentic writing" of Paul's) where he says while describing himself

"as to zeal, a persecutor of the church"

[Cow Poke]

Read the original Greek texts.

So you can discount that, too?

[Cow Poke]

Paul never uses the word"Jew" when describing himself. Paul’s claim to be of the “Tribe of Benjamin” is also interesting. ‘Benjamin’ sometimes functioning as a variation of the “Belial/Balaam terminology and. Bela in Old Testament genealogies – reliable or otherwise – is not only an Ediomite King but the son of Be’or, the same parentage ascribed to Balaam. It is therefore not inconceivable that Paul was, in fact, a Herodian.

wow

[mikewhitney]

Paul never uses the word"Jew" when describing himself. Paul’s claim to be of the “Tribe of Benjamin” is also interesting. ‘Benjamin’ sometimes functioning as a variation of the “Belial/Balaam terminology and. Bela in Old Testament genealogies – reliable or otherwise – is not only an Ediomite King but the son of Be’or, the same parentage ascribed to Balaam. It is therefore not inconceivable that Paul was, in fact, a Herodian.

The testimony of Paul as a Jew in Acts favors Paul being of proper Jewish bloodline. You are overthinking this to support unlikely theories.

There are some interesting discussions about Paul's background and his ability to persecute the followers of the Messiah. However, his clout among Jews (and of being a student of Gamaliel) would tend again to speak of him being truly of the Tribe of Benjamin.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

The testimony of Paul as a Jew in Acts favors Paul being of proper Jewish bloodline. You are overthinking this to support unlikely theories.

There are some interesting discussions about Paul's background and his ability to persecute the followers of the Messiah. However, his clout among Jews (and of being a student of Gamaliel) would tend again to speak of him being truly of the Tribe of Benjamin.

In his letters Paul never mentions that he was a pupil of Gamaliel, even when he is most concerned to stress his qualifications as a Pharisee.

We therefore have to ask was Paul ever really a pupil of Gamaliel or was this claim made by Luke as an embellishment to his narrative? Likewise Luke's contention that Paul had Roman citizenship requires some examination.

A Pharisee and a Roman citizen?

[mikewhitney]

In his letters Paul never mentions that he was a pupil of Gamaliel, even when he is most concerned to stress his qualifications as a Pharisee.

We therefore have to ask was Paul ever really a pupil of Gamaliel or was this claim made by Luke as an embellishment to his narrative? Likewise Luke's contention that Paul had Roman citizenship requires some examination.

A Pharisee and a Roman citizen?

Sure. It was important that Paul has said everything about his life whether or not it was applicable to the audiences or to the purpose of his writings.

It is not a contradiction to be both a Pharisee and a Roman citizen. I have not seen the estimates of Sadducees and Pharisees that got Roman citizenship or higher status. Why would his citizenship status prevent him from being a Pharisee?

If you want to make an issue about the mention of Gamaliel, you have to then observe that Acts was also written for Jews. Gentiles would not have cared who Paul's teacher was.

We have nothing but speculation to challenge the content of Acts. The conspiracy theories on this can get rather ridiculous.