Paul's Angelic Conundrum

[Conversator]

To adequately comprehend Paul's Gospel, it is crucial to grasp his view on God's Law. Paul considered the Law to be spiritual and humanity to be hopelessly unspiritual ( e.g., Romans 7:14), and utterly incapable of remedying the dilemma through sheer resolve ( .e.g., Romans 3:10-18 and 7:18). This is basic Christianianity and hardly a matter of disputation. The focus of this deliberation is the agency through which the Law was given.

Classic Judaism unambiguously considers the Law to be transmitted to Moses directly by God himself. The Talmud ( covering rabbinic musings from 5th century BCE, to 2nd century CE) repeatedly and unequivocally gives this statement of faith such credal significance that nothing surpasses it in relevance, except only the doctrine of monotheism itself (Note:the Talmud preserves only the Pharisees' views, and is scarcely a fair background for varying Jewish sects of the time. i.e., The Talmud says nothing of the Essenes, and verly little about the Zealots, Sadducees, Christians etc)

Paul's Angelic Conundrum: Paul's convictions, received by various esoteric revelations, e.g., "whether in the body or out of the body, only God knows" ( 2nd Corinthians 12:3); departed drastically from the Pharisees' Judaism. Paul considered angels, not God, to be the agency through which the Law was given. Galatians 3:19 " Why the Law then? Sin necessitated that it be arranged ( Gk, diatasso: to arrange, prescribe) by angels". Acts, which espouses Paul's doctrines and defends his Apostolic authority echoes this : "you received the Law by Angelic arrangement, and have not kept it", 7:53. Paul describes the Law as a "tutor", (Galatians 3:24), which restrained people " in custody " (Galatians 3:23), and illustrates the angelic agency of the Law as " guardians and managers", Galatians 4:2.

Paul castigated Christians who desired to convert to Judaism, as returning to the "worthless elements to which you desire to be enslaved again", Galatians 4:9. Though the Greek word, stocheion, denotes anything of elementary principle ( be it a basic natural element or an abstract, conceptual element ), it seems clear that the angels are implied here, since the stocheion are referenced as " by nature are not gods" ( Galatians 4:8), thus eliminating a natural element as stocheion. Seems highly implausible and contextually strange that Paul would call the Law "not gods" ( so says the apologetic minority ). Or that he merely meant the elementary religious rules of pagans are " not gods " ( so says the apologetic majority ). The author of Colossians ( a pupil of Paul's epistles) seems to settle the matter when he rebukes " the worship of angels" (2:18) , as the height of absurdity since the angelic Law had been "cancelled" (2:14), and the angelic rulers "disarmed" (2:15).

Paul's angelic agency of the Law puzzled early Christians, whether these angels were supposed to be cursed for their Law (" reviling angelic majesties and rejecting their authority" , Jude 8. " Those in the flesh with corrupt desires, despise authority ... and revile angelic majesties ", 2nd Peter 2:10 ) or even cursing Christ for their Law, 1st Corinthians 12:3! The author of Titus ( another pupil of Paul's epistles ) seeks to alleviate the angelic conundrum Paul's earlier epistles created altogether : " Avoid controversies and genealogies ( angelic rank is implied here, not patriarchal pedigree. ) ... about the Law, for they are worthless, 3:9. Indeed, as worthless as the elements Paul lamented in Galatian 4:9!

These angelic genealogies are further belittled by the author of Hebrews, who insinsts that Christ has, " become greater than the angels" ( 1:4 ). To this Paul agrees, and has no reservation calling Christ an angel: " you received me as an angel of God, as Christ Jesus" ( Galatians 4:14 ), but a Son nonetheless ( Galileans 4:6). Paul's mystery ( Romans 16:25-27, Ephesians 6:19,Colossians 2:2 ), received by esoteric revelations, was mankind's need to be redeemed from the angelic agency of the Law. A Law relegated by angels necessitated an angelic redeemer from it; and thereby a lofty promotion to the angelic redeemer above the angelic genealogy of it; and certainly a curse to any angel who held a grievance with it, ( Galatians 1:8 ).

This is the Gospel of Paul. Indeed, the Gospel of the New Testament. Though traces of opposition to it can be found, i.g., the Galilean tradition verses the Jerusalem tradition. The Galilean tradition, inadvertently preserved by Mark, insisted Christ's resurrection occured only in Galilee, and by implication designated it as the environment of the kingdom of heaven. The Ebionites ( Aramaic, 'the impoverished', i.e., those who sold all their possessions and gave everything to the poor ) were considered Galilean monks who disavowed the virgin birth by the early Church Fathers and scant else is known of them. The Galilean primacy of the Ebionites unilaterally rejects not only the prominence of the Jerusalem church, but the Syrian church ( Antioch's later prominence as the birthplace of Christians, Acts 11:26 ) more broadly. Unfortunately, nothing is know of their angelical views. Whether they shared anything remotely similar to Paul's angelic conundrum is unknown, and thus they are irrelevant for the sake of this deliberation.
1) Did Paul's angelic agency of the Law redifine Christianianity or could it have somewhat resembled the historical Jesus's own views? 2) How could Paul's angelic agency of the Law have originated from what is known of 1st century Judaism? i.g., The Essenes held a similar obsession with angels and their agency of the Law, as well as a belief that a ' righteous teacher was killed by the Sadduceen priests of Jerusalem ' (1st to 2nd century BCE). 3) Was the obsession with angels and their angelic agency of the Law, the sole reason why Jesus was deified, or were there other considerations? I am not a Christian, but this fascinates me greatly.

[brunumb]

[Replying to Conversator in post #1]

Some people believe that paragraphs are the tool of the devil. Rest assured, they are not.

[Conversator]

Ha ha My PlayStation no Bueno with paragraphs

[1213]

...
Paul's Angelic Conundrum: Paul's convictions, received by various esoteric revelations, e.g., "whether in the body or out of the body, only God knows" ( 2nd Corinthians 12:3); departed drastically from the Pharisees' Judaism. Paul considered angels, not God, to be the agency through which the Law was given. Galatians 3:19 " Why the Law then? Sin necessitated that it be arranged ( Gk, diatasso: to arrange, prescribe) by angels". Acts, which espouses Paul's doctrines and defends his Apostolic authority echoes this : "you received the Law by Angelic arrangement, and have not kept it", 7:53. Paul describes the Law as a "tutor", (Galatians 3:24), which restrained people " in custody " (Galatians 3:23), and illustrates the angelic agency of the Law as " guardians and managers", Galatians 4:2.
...

I think this is interesting point. God gave ten commandments in the stone tablets to Moses, but did He give directly more than that? It seems to me that Paul is speaking of the other rules than the ten commandments. And I don't know any Bible scripture that says the others were directly given by God, not arranged by angels.

[Conversator]

Traditionally, God was understood to give the entire Pentateuch to Moses, Deuteronomy 5:31. Indeed, Sunday school teachers may give the ten commandments precedence over the rest, but that is not the focus here. Paul taught the entire Law was given to Moses by angelic mediation. This created a dilemma. A Law given by angels, necessitated an angelic redeemer from it, whereby humanity is no longer governed, accused, and condemned by angelic principalities. The relegation of the Law to angels lowered its efficacy, but not its condemnation. This rids God of the ineffectiveness of the Law, yet praises Him for sending an angelic redeemer from it.

[Thomas123]

Conversator: Was the obsession with angels and their angelic agency of the Law, the sole reason why Jesus was deified, or were there other considerations? I am not a Christian, but this fascinates me greatly.


Why was Jesus defied?
When was this done?
How was it done and by whom?

A proper answer to this would fascinate me too!

[Thomas123]

Angels and Demons.......Angles or Decoys

This is excellent thesis material, in my view.

I always considered these matters as embellishments, as superstitions that phase themselves in and out of fashion within theology.

In the Films by Tom Hanks ,etc there is only a hint of supernatural involvement when the female descendant of Jesus appears to possess healing powers.

I never considered the presence or absence of these things as being indicative of real doctrine formation.
I assumed they were a legacy from previous beliefs and superstitions. What if the Pauline Era is reinventing this genre with direct purpose to redirect.
How many Gospels have Angel's in Bethlehem?
How many Gospels have an Angel visit Mary?
How superstitious were the Jews of Nazareth in the 1st Century? Were illnessesregarded as demonic possession, etc?
So many fascinating considerations, and that is before we explore these phenomenas in the Talmud, and the NT. This is book , film material, indeed.

One incident intrigues me ,in all this and it is not the Demons being chased into the herd of swine, etc.

"Your sins are forgiven" "You are healed"
Which is easier to say/do?

That incident, in its construction and delivery looks like a bauble on the Christmas tree of Jesus deification.

So much to do and so little time!

Thanks!

[1213]

Traditionally, God was understood to give the entire Pentateuch to Moses, Deuteronomy 5:31. Indeed, Sunday school teachers may give the ten commandments precedence over the rest, but that is not the focus here...

I think that what Bible tells is crucial in this, not what some teachers say.

...Paul taught the entire Law was given to Moses by angelic mediation...

I am not sure about that. But, angels are servants of God and do what God tells them to do. So, in any case it would be from God, even if angels would be mediators.

[Conversator]

Conversator: Was the obsession with angels and their angelic agency of the Law, the sole reason why Jesus was deified, or were there other considerations? I am not a Christian, but this fascinates me greatly.


Why was Jesus defied?
When was this done?
How was it done and by whom?

A proper answer to this would fascinate me too!

That's the triple-decker! As far as academia goes, Paul's genuine epistles ( Romans, both Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1st Thessalonians and Philemon ) give us a peak at a rather unpopular sect of Christianity in the 50s-60s CE. I say unpopular, because Paul spent a great deal of ink defending it from the criticisms of other contemporaneous Christian sects! The four Gospels were written decades later, and meet the needs of the communities they were written to, rather than the inquiries of later generations. Thus we find ourselves stuck with Paul.
As to your triple-decker, I believe Paul is responsible on all counts: the why, how and by whom. Paul's fixation with angels is our best clue. Paul taught that the same angelic principalities that governed the world ( Ephesians 1:21, Colossians 2:15, a Pauline sect wrote Ephesians and Colossians decades after Paul's death, but they articulately express his views found else where , 1st Corinthians 2:6-8, etc.) , were also responsible for the transmission of the Law ( Galatians 3:19). This dilemma put mankind at the constant condemnation of the Law, and by implication subject to angelic principalities, the rulers of our world. These angelic principalities are an obstacle between God and humanity. It prevents God's sovereignty from taking full effect ( 1st Corinthians 15:24) , and it keeps humanity subject to angelic rulers rather then ruling the world themselves ( and thus ruling over these angelic principalities, 1st Corinthians 6:3).
Paul believed God's plan of redemption was kept secret from these angelic rulers ( Ephesians 3:10), and even said, with a touch of irony, If these angelic principalities had known they wouldn't have crucified Jesus! ( 1st Corinthians 2:8). Simply put: Paul's obsession with angelic governance, is the background which framed Christian theology!
As I said, this is a sect of Christianity from the 50s-60s CE. Though scant is known of the other contemporaneous sects of that time, we can deduce a little from Paul's constant defense to his opposition. 1) He was accused of not being a genuine apostle ( 2nd Corinthians chapter 11). 2) He was accused of being a financial scam artist ( 2nd Corinthians 12:16-18, 1st Thessalonians 2:5-10).

Its interesting to note that Paul's bizarre teachings actually compelled Christians to convert to Judaism and abandon the Jesus thing altogether ( Galatians 5:2). Whenever Paul's writings mention the 'circumcision sect' it reflects Christians who returned/or-converted to Judaism. Removal of foreskins was not the issue, nay, abandoning the Jesus movement altogether was!
The hybrid Christian-Judaism of Acts 15, is another matter entirely ( Academia actually debates Luke's pseudo-dilemma as being a retrospective interpretation of Paul's conflicts with Judaism, rather then some fabled Jewish-Christian sect).

I must point out the elephant in the room ...academic scholarship. Christians scorn academia for being sacrilegious, and Jesus skeptics scorn it for not being sacrilegious enough! Scholarship is not attempting to please either camp, but simply employing the same methods critical scholarship uses to study any other subject. Therein lies the offense, Christians insist it is divine fact and beyond critical scholarship, and the skeptics insist its rubbish and below critical scholarship . This rant wasn't directed at you, but rather to a comment from someone else that doesn't merit a direct response.

[JehovahsWitness]

Paull considered angels, not God, to be the agency through which the Law was given. ...

Paul correctly indicated that, according to the Hebrew scriptures, the Mosaic law was given by angels to Moses [the mediator] from God:

GALATIAN 3:19

Why, then, the Law? [..] it was transmitted through angels by the hand of a mediator

.

Obviously biblically, God didn't send the message through ...himself. Scripture is quite clear, the only part of the law that came directly from God was the ten commandments which he wrote himself, all the rest Moses was in communication with angelic forces which transmitted the words of God.

EXODUS 3:2 - Aramaic Bible in Plain English

And the Angel of LORD JEHOVAH appeared to him in a flame of fire from within the bush, and he saw the bush that was on fire with fire in it, and the bush was not burned

JW

For further details please go to other posts related to ...

CHRISTIANITY, THE MOSIAC LAW and ...SABBATH KEEPING