Hyam Maccoby [The Mythmaker] was mostly right: 1. Paul was not a Pharisee. 2. Christians prior to Paul were not antinomian, anti-Jewish, or anti-God. 3. 30 Jul In his book Revolution In Judea: Jesus And The Jewish Resistance (), Hyam Maccoby, who has died aged 80, responded to Christian. Few scholars take the works of Hyam Maccoby seriously. You will not often see him quoted as an authority, and his books (like the one evaluated here, The.
|Published (Last):||15 December 2011|
|PDF File Size:||13.33 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||5.42 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
In this book under consideration, Maccoby argues, among other things, that Jesus was actually a Pharisee, and that Paul was a major distorter of Jesus who was not a very serious Jew, but a charlatan who mixed paganism, Gnosticism, and Judaism to create Christianity as we know it.
No trivia or quizzes yet. If this mafcoby the only thing going for Paul’s gospel it is difficult to understand why he would have endured the hardships and persecutions he suffered trying to preach it.
For the most part it is old hat despite the author’s treatment of familiar arguments as if they were new and earthshattering. So how can Israel get out of this situation?
Obituary: Hyam Maccoby | World news | The Guardian
None of them were part of the apostles’ notions about Jesus or Jesus’ place in the scheme of things; so it really wasn’t Jesus who was being tempted, but Christendom; and Christendom mostly flunked. The part that follows is exceedingly “legalistic” in tone, as though it were addressed to a rabbi.
He uses close analysis of the N. Maccoby’s book made it pretty clear that Paul and the apostles had serious differences: The fact that Jesus says nothing but merely quotes the Torah supports the idea that the author was Jewish. According to Scripture, “gnosis,” the knowledge of good and evil, was the only way this was possible; so that is what they did. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. I found this text to be most illuminating and it helped me to revise my opinions of Paul slightly – from a raving misogynistic fanatic to a very sad man who likely couldn’t find anyone to love him and who wanted to raise himself to a level that fit his own inflated sense of self.
Today there is another “Maccoby” and he is neither warrior nor priest. Though this is certainly no great challenge to the rabbi’s knowledge, Paul goes on to state the principle once more, to make maccobh we get it right. Likewise, patching an old garment with new fabric damages the garment still more. Go look it up. This view, he tells us, is “entirely wrong, being based on ignorance or misunderstanding of rabbinical exegesis and logic.
Jesus rejects this because to do amccoby would also make him a servant of the devil and it is written “serve him [the Lord] only. Klausner, who said, “It would be difficult to find more typically Talmudic expressions of scripture than those in the Epistles of Paul,” is disposed of by reference to the “six unconvincing examples” he provides though we are only allowed to have one explained to us in Maccoby’s text and the claim that “rabbinical mmaccoby are never guilty of logical confusions” like Paul’s arguments contained.
One suspects that healing was permitted for lifesaving medical treatment; but that was not what Hhyam was up to; the man in the story was not in deadly peril.
The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity
Want to Read Currently Reading Read. This sounds as if the author of the epistle were one of the “perfect” disciples of Paul, acquainted with the “mystery” of the Secret Gospel of Paul. Paul believed that a person who was “in Christ” was both “dead” hence ‘dead to the lawand the “living husband,” or God, was also “dead.
Maccoby placed the blame for the death of Jesus on the Roman authorities and their Jewish collaborators from the Sadducee party, who controlled the Temple, its funds, and its police.
View all 6 comments. Sin can be given a broader definition than simple disobedience of God: Yet Paul must certainly have been aware of Deut. It renders “all my work for you in vain” in preaching the gospel, presumably. Wright For more information on the debate over the historical Jesus, visit the Christian Origins web site. Why was it included in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke?
We don’t have to imagine this story really happened. Had circumcision been inconsequential it would never have become the focus of controversy. Maccoby is also bad with the sources. We know this because the gospel he preached was totally different, bearing no relationship whatsoever to the life and teachings of Jesus.
I thought it was well worth the read. Still, overall, this book, like many others written for the general public, might be recommended to Jews and Christians interested in a taste of what contemporary scholars are talking about.
Let us see now exactly how Maccoby misuses the data to suit his own purposes. Now Paul does not quote the sayings of Jesus in the Synoptic Gospels; this suggests he did not know them, and the likeliest reason for this is that the apostolic gospel postdates Paul’s ministry.
Who told Paul he was naked? One evidence of Paul’s rabbinic background is that he uses a typical rabbinic exegetical method called qal va-homer – or “light and heavy”.
Repentance was a private matter between the sinner and God, and none of Jesus’ business. Fast moving and thorough. For some, this is a damning claim, but it makes a lot more sense to me than most of the Christian hermeneutics that I have seen.
In The Rich Man and Lazarus, the underlying assumption is that naccoby are “saved” through repentance, and repentance occurs when a person is convinced to repent. That msccoby ate of the fruit of this tree clearly implies that man’s “knowledge of good and evil” is beyond God’s direct control, for men “become as gods in knowing good and evil. So, my brothers, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might msccoby to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit to God.