In recent years their has been a theological movement known as the New Jewish Perspective on Paul. It has been a reevaluation of the writings of St Paul based from the context of the Second Temple Judaism and seeing Paul as an observant Jewish Rabbi. This evaluation was much needed especially with the often anti-Judaism perspectives of the past which had become entrenched in Christian theology. This has been a very important endeavour in the light of the horrors of the Shoah in World War 2 in the 20th century.

These articles or blog posts reflect my own reflection and understanding of Paul as both a devout Jewish rabbi and mystic and a zealous apostle of the Nazarene. I think there is a need of more Catholic theologians to embrace an understanding of Paul in his lived context as a devout Jew and to reread his writings in that perspective without in any way challenging the infallible teachings of the Catholic Church.

I Beheld The Lord Through The Mirror: A Hebrew Catholic Reflection

“But all of us, with open (unveiled) faces, behold (see/adore/contemplate) the magnificence (Beauty/Glory) of the LORD (YHVH) like (as) in a mirror, and we are being transformed in to that Likeness from glory to glory by the Spirit who is the Lord (YHVH).” 2 Corinthians 3:18.

Thus writes St Paul in his second letter to the followers of the Way in the city of Corinth. Paul was his Roman name but he was also known as the Pharisaic Rabbi Sha’ul of Tarsus. He was trained by one of the greatest Torah scholars of his age – Gamaliel. This one verse in 2 Corinthians has a deep richness when examined in the light of the Jewish mystical tradition. This tradition was very familiar to Rabbi Sha’ul.

Paul reveals in veiled terms his own ascent to the third heaven where he beheld unspeakable Divine mysteries. Many scholars in my opinion make a mistake with Paul and other New Testament writers by examining the meaning of the Greek words without realizing that the ideas are Hebraic and Paul and the other writers are choosing Greek words that best express the Hebraic meaning. This verse demonstrates this perfectly. In order to understand this verse one needs to understand the Jewish concepts of ‘open faces’, ‘the magnificence of YHVH’, ‘Likeness’, ‘glory to glory’ and ‘Spirit of YHVH’.

Open Faces

The verse begins “But all of us, with open faces….” What does Rabbi Sha’ul of Tarsus want us to understand? What does it mean to have an open face or an unveiled face? He refers to the veil that Moses (Moishe Rabbenu) wore after his encounter with God when he beheld the Divine Presence also called the Divine Face and Divine Glory. The Divine Face was also veiled and Moses could only behold the back of the Divine Glory.

Paul comments further that a veil covers the minds and hearts of the Rabbinic Jews when they read the Old Covenant hiding from them the identity of the Eucharistic Lord. But the New Covenant believer who receives the Holy Spirit can now with unveiled and open faces adore the Beautiful Presence of the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament. The Letter to the Hebrews* (i.e. Hebrew Catholics) confirms Paul’s insights:

“Let us then approach the Throne of Grace (i.e. Jesus in the Eucharist) with confidence, so that we may receive Mercy and attain grace to assist us in the time of need.”

In Jewish thought the face (panim) is in the plural form. This is connected with the idea of the right and left profiles of the face. However, a deeper understanding, found in the mystical tradition, is the concept of the outer and inner faces (panim). The face, in the Jewish mystical tradition, has a deep symbolism. Even the outer face mirrors or signifies the 10 major Divine Attributes of the Divinity as Divine Man (Adam Kadmon). Paul calls this Divine Man who is to become the Messiah Jesus the Second Adam.

Each feature of the face signifies one of the 10 Attributes of the Godhead. The inner face however, in adoration of the Shekinah (Divine Presence), shines forth as a shining light from the inner to the outer face. This is why Moses’ face shone and why many Eucharistic adorers leave the chapel with a glow on their face. This inner face reveals the person’s soul which mirrors the Divine Attributes of the Son of Man (Ben Adam).

In the Torah, in Genesis 32:31, Jacob beheld (raiti) God face to face. In Hebrew this is ‘panim el panim’ (faces to faces). Here, we understand that the face is not just limited to the physical face but the face represents the whole person body and soul. It is their whole being. Jacob wrestled with the Divine Man in prayer and adoration with many tears, according to the Jewish tradition.

Jacob refers to this as seeing God face to face. In the verse we are discussing from Paul (2 Cor. 3:18), he alludes to this passage about Jacob. The verse in Hebrew in which Paul probably composed his draft copy refers to the words of Genesis 32:31 and even makes a pun of them. Jacob uses the word raiti (I beheld/saw) and Paul also uses it for we behold and also mariah (mirror/from or through the mirror). The Jewish mystical tradition associates the concept of the Divine Face with the Divine Glory (Kavod). One’s glory shines through the face. This is why Paul calls a woman's hair her crowning glory. For her hair is like a crown surrounding her face.

The Divine Man or Likeness

When the Jewish mystics, such as the prophet Daniel and John the Beloved, ascend to the Divine Realms through adoration, they behold the Divine Likeness, in the form of a Man. Daniel calls him Ben Adam (Son of Man), as does Enoch. In the Jewish mystical tradition this Celestial or Divine Man is called ‘Yosher’ and also Adam Kadmon (Primordial Man/ God -Man).

The ‘Yosher’ is the visible manifestation of the invisible deity in his 10 chief Attributes. This is visualized as a Divine Man or Body and it is also called the Tree of Life. St Louis de Monfort calls Mary the mirror of the Tree of Life. God’s Attributes are infinite but the Jewish tradition groups them into 10 types or emanations. They are called the Sefirot. The root of Sefirot is SPR (samech peh resh), which is connected with the words for counting (numbers), book and Sapphire. In a sense the Sefirot are the source of all mathematical knowledge (counting), the Sefirot are also the divine Book or Living Torah and the Sapphire (Blue) Sea in Heaven is linked to the Sefirot. Each one of the 10 Sefirot are seen as crowns, garments, fruit and mirrors of the Divine King – YHVH.

The first Sefirah (Attribute) is the highest or deepest level of the Divine Likeness and is called Keter/Nezer (Crown) and also it is the Sefirah of Divine Will (Ratzon Elohee). This Crown of the Divine King is linked directly with the last and tenth Sefirah of Malkut (Kingdom) which is also the Shekinah (Divine Presence). In a sense, the union of the Crown (Keter/Ratzon) with the Kingdom creates the white cloud of the Divine Presence, that encompasses all of the Sefirot in an inseparable unity (echad). The Divine Will uniting with the Kingdom of the Divine Will is Shekinah. For the Catholic this white cloud symbolizes the White Host of the Eucharist.

This process of Shekinah is also connected to the ‘concept of the heart’, which is the mirror known as the heart devotion of the Mother. Catholics call this the ‘alliance of the two hearts’ or ‘two hearts that beat as one’. This, in time, is the face (mirror/glass/window) of the Mother beholding her Son’s face at his birth, during his life and especially at the Cross on Golgotha. At Golgotha her Heart became one with his wounded heart, her face in Adoration became one with his disfigured face- his Divine Glory was mirrored in her.

Mary became and is a Living Host and in Eternity she is always united to her Son. The ‘Divine Will to Create’ is the Son and he chose to create his Mother as the perfect and unblemished mirror of the Divine Likeness. At the foot of the Cross on Golgotha, the Mother’s will became one with his Divine Will in recreating and restoring Man to his place beside God. This is why the ‘Divine Will to Create’ is also called Gulgalta (the Aramaic for Golgotha) in the Jewish mystical tradition. This adds understanding to St John’s concept that Jesus is the Lamb of God slain before the foundation of the world.

This uniting of the Mother and Son at Gulgalta is taken up into Eternity in the heart of the Divine Will. This is God’s Plan from all Eternity. This is the Blueprint (Adam Kadmon) which is the Living Torah. This is why the whole of Creation is made in the image of this unity of the Mother and the Son through the powerful action of the Holy Spirit. This is the single act of the Divine Will and the Divine Desire (Volition) to Create.

The second Sefirah (attribute) that blazes forth from the Divine Will is Wisdom and the third attribute is Understanding (Binah). These first three attributes make up the divine Head are also called the Higher Glory and the higher or inner Face of the Godhead. The next seven Attributes make up the Divine Body. The first three of these seven are called the Heart or Torso of the Body. The whole ten are also called the Divine Heart and Body.

The fourth Sefirah is Divine Mercy (Chesed) and the fifth Divine Judgement or Justice (Din). The Attribute that most closely represents the Heart or the inner heart is Tiferet/Rahamim (Beauty/Compassion). This Heart unites the Divine Mercy with the Divine Justice and they shine forth from the Divine Heart as rays of white and red light. In time this is the blood and water gushing forth from the heart of Jesus on the Cross at Golgotha. The Divine Mercy is perceived as the right white arm of the Divine Man and the Divine Justice/Judgement is the left red arm. This is our right and left as we gaze on him in the Mirror.

The lower three attributes are Victory (Netzach), Majesty (Hod) and Foundation/Righteousness (Yesod/Tzaddik). They are associated with the two legs and phallus of the Divine Man. The last attribute of Malkut (kingdom), as mentioned above, unites with Keter/Ratzon (Crown/Will) and manifests in time and space as the Shekinah. These 10 Sefirot (Attributes) are one essence with God – they are three Lights (or persons) in the one Godhead.

This Divine Man or Likeness is the Divine Face, known as the Prince of the Face (Sar ha Panim) in Jewish tradition. The inner face of this Divine Face or Prince of the Face, beholds the Father’s glory and mirrors it to us, through and with and in the Heart and Face of the Mother, united and consumed with the Holy Spirit. The lower or outer Face of the Divine or Holy Face is the face that beholds man’s face with love and mercy, through the face of the Mother, who is Queen and Mother of all mankind. In beholding her face at Golgotha, he beholds the face of her children and this appeases his Divine Judgement/Justice.

Magnificence of YHVH

The word that Paul uses for magnificence is the same word used in the Aramaic (Peshitta) in 1 Chronicles 29:11 ‘teshbuchta’. In Hebrew this is Tiferet (Beauty/magnificence). This is also the inner heart of the Divine Man- the Heart of compassion. It is the heart that we are called to console or compassionate.

We can only behold this Divine Heart ‘as in a mirror’. This mirror is the heart devotion of the Mother. Mirror is Mariah or Mar'ah in Hebrew. This mirror is also in Catholic terms the Eucharistic Host/Bread which is the body and blood of Jesus. This body and blood he receives uniquely only from his mother. He is blood of her blood, bone of her bone, flesh of her flesh and heart of her heart.

Paul is alluding to the fact that when we gaze on this magnificent and beautiful Divine Heart, as/like in a mirror, then we activate or transform the Sefirot of our being more closely to this Divine Likeness, which is the Divine Glory (Kavod). The inner light of the Attribute of Tiferet is the ‘light of glory’ (Or Kavod).

The higher or deeper glory is the Divine Face or Head beholding (seeing) the Father- and the Father beholding his Son’s Face. This is the glory of the Father. The lower or manifesting glory is the concept of the Son, through the power of the Spirit, united with his Mother beholding the Spirit, working in and through and with the Mother of Mankind. This is the glory of the Son.

The divine glory perceived as uniting the Father and the Son and uniting the 10 attributes as one form or body, is the glory of the Holy Spirit. Thus we have three glories that are One Glory and three faces that are one Face and three heads that are one Head. Glory of Glories, Faces and Faces, Head of Heads, Lord of Lords, Holy of Holies, Sanctity of Sanctities and Eternity of Eternities are all terms of a Trinitarian nature.

Likeness

The Divine Likeness is mentioned in Genesis and is the Divine Man. Paul in 2 Corinthians 4:4 states “…the Messiah who is the likeness of God.” Thus Jesus is the Divine Likeness mentioned in Genesis. The concept of going from ‘glory to glory’ is connected with the spiritual ascent of the Divine Tree or Body seen as/like in a mirror. This begins with entering the Kingdom (Malkut) and immersing ourselves in the Divine Presence (Shekinah) in the Blessed Sacrament. As we gaze at or adore our Eucharistic King, through the Mother’s Heart, we ascend the spiritual Tree or Ladder, ascending from one glory to the next level of glory, along the 32 paths of Wisdom which are the Divine Heart.

Thus the use by Paul of the term ‘glory to glory’, is referring to the Divine Attributes of the ‘Likeness’, which our faces/souls/inner being receive from on High by the Spirit of YHVH. Here Paul is alluding to Isaiah 11:2 which links the Spirit of YHVH with the Divine Attributes. This single verse of Paul’s Second Letter to the Corinthians reveals the Triune God at work. With open or receiving faces/souls/hearts we behold the Divine Beauty of the Lord (God the Father), in the mirror of the Hearts of Jesus and Mary.

We are transformed into a ever purer mirror of the Divine Likeness (God the Son), through his Divine Attributes (glory to glory/Divinization). This beholding and transforming is achieved by the Holy Spirit (spirit of YHVH). Thus the only way of being transformed into Christ, as other Christs and as living Hosts is through adoring (beholding) the Divine Trinity, in the mirror that is Mary’s Heart, in Perpetual Adoration of the Blessed Sacrament.

This Divine Likeness is also called by Paul in Romans 8:29 “the Likeness of the Image of his Son” and in Colossians 3:10 “the Likeness of his Creator” and in 1 Corinthians 15:49 “the Likeness of the One who is from Heaven”. This is how we put on Christ.

We were created in the Divine Image but in Adam we lost his Divine Likeness and now through the second Adam, we can regain that Divine Likeness, in our souls or beings. Man was made in a unique way in the Image of God, revealed in his chief 10 Attributes, as a vessel that could receive the Divine Likeness or Glory to the greatest extent and give that glory or likeness as a reflected light to others.

By living in the Divine Will, we enter in to the highest level of the eternally ‘new and Divine Holiness’. We participate by adoption as co-Creators, co-Redeemers and co–Sanctifiers in and with and through the Mirror which is the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Posted 16th September 2005

Misunderstanding the argument with Peter and Paul: A Hebrew Catholic Perspective

In Galatians 2 Paul relates an incident where he rebukes Peter and Barnabas for eating with Gentile Christians and then when the more strict Jewish Christians (who followed the Shammai tradition) visited they ceased eating with the Gentiles. Most Christians interpret this passage in regard to kosher food laws and assume that Peter and Paul no-longer observed kashrut. This however is not the case. Peter and Paul observed kashrut as did all the Jewish Christians who were zealous for the Torah and the Jewish customs (see Acts 21). If this was not about kosher food laws what was it about? One needs to understand the context of their situation. At this time the Pharisees were divided into two main groups the House of Hillel and the House of Shammai. After the death of Hillel, Shammai and his followers seized control of the religious Sanhedrin and imposed 18 articles of rigid separation of Jews with Gentiles. These 18 articles were opposed by the Hillelites and their followers consider the day they were imposed as a day of mourning. These rules meant that Jews not only couldn't sit at the same table with Gentiles but they couldn't even enter their homes.

The Holy Spirit taught Peter that these eighteen articles (gezerot) were not binding by showing him through a vision of animals that he should call no man unclean whom God has cleansed and taking Peter into a Gentile house. His vision of the animals did not mean it was ok to eat non-kosher food but it used animals to give Peter the message that the 18 articles of the House of Shammai were of no-effect for the Jewish Catholics. This artificial barrier or wall between Jews and Gentiles was abolished by the Cross. These 18 articles were later abolished by the Rabbis after the destruction of the Temple when the Hillelites gained full control of the Sanhedrin once again and it is taught in the Talmud that a voice spoke from heaven and decreed that these laws were abolished and that wherever the teachings of the House of Hillel differed from those of the House of Shammai the teachings of the Hillelites was the Halakah.

The Pharisees who Jesus identified as the 'leaven'[Chametz] were the Shammaites or Shomerim (the observant ones). The Talmud speaks of seven different types of Pharisees. Five of these groups are described in a negative way and they are known as 'Chametz' by Jesus as there were five kinds of "chametz" to be avoided on Passover. One of these groups are called the Shikmi who follow the actions of their founder known as Shechem or the Shechemite Pharisee. The city of Shechem was the Samaritan religious centre and after John Hycanus destroyed their Temple many of the Samaritans entered Judaism. They are the group Jesus speaks about when he says that they lay heavy burdens on men's shoulders. The use of the word 'shoulders' is an allusion to this group as the word for shoulder in Hebrew is similiar to Shechem. The Samaritans were also known as Shomerim and Shechemites. Another group were called the Nikpi who knocked their legs together and walk with small steps thus showing how 'humble' they were- this group were masters of 'fake humility'. They would also put off doing good deeds by elaborate cautiousness. A third group were the Kizai who would walk around with their eyes closed and smash into walls and draw blood in their efforts to avoid looking at women. A fourth group were the Medukhia or Hankaia Pharisees who are described like a pestle in a mortar. Like a pestle they oppressed, ground and smash down people by their exaggerated observances. Always looking for the faults in others rather than looking skyward to the heavens. A fifth group were those self righteous pharisees who would think they were so good at observing all the Torah that they pompuously would inquire about doing more. Two groups were associated with the matzah of Passover- they were the Essene followers of Menachem (the reverent mystics) and the followers of Hillel (the humble peaceloving Pharisees).

Paul had been brought up in the Hillelite tradition but later joined the Shammaites and took on their fanatical ideas about observance and salvation. After his conversion he returned to the teachings of the school of Hillel on relations with the Gentiles and salvation. Even though his teacher Gamaliel (the grandson of Hillel) was Nasi (Davidic President) of the religious Sanhedrin he was outnumbered by the Shammaites. It is these teachings of Shammai that Jesus opposes as contrary to the Law of Moses and in this the Hillelites stood on the side of Jesus. They made their own man-made traditions equal with the Traditions of the Sages. The Shammaites taught that it was not possible for Gentiles to enter the World to Come and that it was the strict observance of Torah that gave salvation and thus all Gentiles were doomed. The School of Hillel taught otherwise and saw salvation not in observance of the Torah but in the coming of the Messiah and that Gentiles who lived according to the laws of Noah could attain to the World to Come. These Gentiles were known as the God-fearers (Ger Toshav).

According to the Shammaites those like the Hillelites who had social communications with Gentiles were living 'like Gentiles' not like observant Jews and the Shammaites persecuted and even killed some of the Hillelites. Paul rebukes Peter and Barnabas for relapsing into these rigid Shammaite observances of separation when they already in the eyes of the House of Shammai were living 'like or as Gentiles'. Paul was horrified to think that Peter might by his example encourage Gentiles to feel that they must become Jews in order to be equal citizens in the Church. By Peter and Barnabas' actions they were re-erecting the wall of separation between Jewish and Gentile believers. Salvation is gained through the grace of the Messiah not through observances. Observances, whether the particular Jewish observances or the observances appropriate for Gentiles, aid in ones sanctification but salvation comes from the Redeemer and Saviour with an act of Divine Grace.

For more on this topic see "Jesus the Pharisee" by Rabbi Harvey Falk.

Also see this Shammai article
Also see this on Bet Shammai and bet Hillel

Posted 25th November 2008

St Paul on the Damascus Road: Haacker and Stendahl

by Brother Gilbert Bloomer

I have chosen two readings to reflect on in regards to Paul’s Damascus road experience. I do this coming from a background of being both fully Jewish and fully Catholic. When one reflects on the Scriptures and the Faith one often sees things in a different manner than those Christians who come from a Gentile perspective. In recent years there has been a new theological movement that seeks to read St Paul from a new perspective taking into account his background and life in the Judaism of the Second Temple period. This is a positive step in my opinion but can have a weakness in that many people presenting this perspective do not have the lived experienced of believing and living in the thoughts and concepts of religious Judaism.

The first article I have chosen is Klaus Haacker’s “Paul’s Life”. Haacker states that St Paul has been a subject of division and controversy. “In modern times generations of scholars have hailed or blamed him as the true founder of Christianity, granting that Jesus himself had not crossed the borders of ancient Judaism.” Haacker seeks to re-examine the evidence and come to what he calls a more ‘balanced view’.

Even among Jews one also hears the opinion that Jesus was a holy Rabbi but Paul was the apostate who started a new religion called Christianity. However even within Orthodox Judaism there have been those who do not accept this false dichotomy. One of the leading halakhic authorities of the last few hundred years Rabbi Jacob Emden saw both Jesus and Paul as holy Rabbis who observed the Jewish Torah while founding a religion for Gentiles who did not need to observe the Torah in a Jewish manner. Even some recent Rabbis have also revived this teaching of Rabbi Emden such as Hasidic Rabbi Harvey Falk in his book “Jesus the Pharisee”.

Haacker refers to Paul’s experience on the road to Damascus as a conversion. However he is quick to clarify that this concept has nothing to do with converting from one religion to another but as a conversion of grace. It seems to me that many Christians however seemed to refer to Paul’s experience as a conversion from Judaism to Christianity. They also seem to think and speak as if after the Resurrection Mary and the Apostles and Paul abandoned Jewish Torah life and threw some pork chops and prawns on the barbeque and entered into the wonderful ‘freedom’ of being Gentiles. This thinking has dominated in the churches for centuries causing a regime of assimilation and conversion to Gentile Christian lifestyle for all Jews who accept Jesus as Messiah.

However Haacker points out that this is what Paul’s enemies have accused him of doing but the last part of Acts demonstrates that Paul is indeed loyal and obedient to Israel’s hope and heritage. He also states that this coincides with Paul’s teaching in Romans 9-11. Romans 9-11 is a great eschatological and mystical discourse in my opinion and is essential for comprehending Paul’s understanding of his call rooted in his life as a devout Jew.

The second reflection “Paul Among Jews and Gentiles: And Other Essays” by Krister Stendahl complements my first reading. Stendahl emphasises that the road to Damascus experience is not a conversion from Judaism to Christianity. He prefers the word ‘call’ and he heads a whole section of his article “Call rather than conversion”. As a Catholic Jew I have never liked this word conversion or convert when speaking about a Jew who embraces Jesus according to the teachings of the Church. I prefer the term often used by Russian Jews who have embraced Jesus as Messiah in the Russian Orthodox Church- doubly chosen. Chosen first as Jews and then in baptism.

Stendahl’s use of ‘Call’ is also attractive to me as being more Pauline and more respecting of every Israelites’ election (call/ vocation) that is not lost at baptism but is enhanced. One eschatological day, according to Paul in Romans 11, all Israelites will enter into that deeper call which will then bring about a mystical eschatological experience known as “Resurrection or Life from the Dead” which will enrich the whole Church and the world.

Stendahl also speaks of the early church linking Paul’s letters to the seven churches mentioned in the Apocalypse of John. Catholic seers, such as the German priest Venerable Bartholomew Holzhauser (1613-1658), perceive the seven churches as seven periods of church history. The fifth period known as Sardis (which is the period of church history we are presently in) culminates in a hidden eschatological and mystical coming of the Messiah Jesus as a Thief (distinct from his glorious coming at the end of time). This Sardis period is also called ‘Dead’. Thus this ‘ingrafting’ of the Jews and the mystical “Life from the Dead” (which will be individual and communal) is believed to occur at the end of this period which leads to the great church era of Peace associated with ‘Philadelphia’. It is in our time that we have seen large numbers of Jews freely embracing faith in Jesus as the Messiah beginning with the 60,000 Zoharist Jews (Frankists) who embraced Catholicism around 1760. Is this a sign of the times?

I do not however agree with Stendahl’s opinion that Paul is trying to argue that the Torah is not Eternal. On the contrary the Torah is Eternal but takes on different forms throughout salvation history. I think a great confusion has occurred when reading Paul in that not every reference to nomos (law) is referring to the Torah. The early Jewish Christians saw Jesus himself as the Living Torah.

The Eternal uncreated Torah manifests in time and space through the created vessel of the Torah as uman or umanuta- the blueprint and Nursing Mother. Before Sinai it manifested as Promise, at the first giving on Sinai it manifested as law or way of sanctification, at the second giving as tikkun (reparation) and in the new covenant as Faith. The newer level of messianic faith does not end the other levels but embraces and consumes them into an ever greater whole leading to the restoration of living in divine will as our first parents did in Eden and then moving on to ever deeper glories.

Posted 26th May 2013

The Halakhic Measuring Rod and the Israel of God: Galatians 6:16

Due to a long tradition of replacement theology found in the Gentile Church, Scripture has been and is translated in a way to support the concept that the Church has replaced Israel. One of the texts used to support this idea is found in Galatians 6:16.

"...And whosoever shall follow this rule, peace on them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God..."

Different versions translate the Greek slightly differently. Christian theologians also give their own slant on the translation. Paul has just been vigorously discussing that Gentile believers don't need to become circumcised in order to be saved and that Jewish believers don't need to deny their circumcision and its value in order to be saved and is summing up the discussion.

In Gal 6:16 he is saying that he places peace (shalom) upon those Christians who obey his ruling or Halakah. However many translate the last part of the sentence that refers to mercy (rachamim) and the Israel of God as if he is still speaking of those who received his "shalom". However if the peace and mercy apply to those believers who follow his halakah, it would have been clearer to just say ἐρηνη και ἐλεος (peace and mercy). However it makes more sense that peace is associated with Jewish and Gentile believers being reconciled and that the mercy refers to the Israel of God. The και (and) after mercy is most likely to be translated as the explicative (even) rather than the additive (and). It is the Israel of God (the Jewish people and authorities who haven't accepted Yeshua as the Messiah yet) that has stumbled and is in need of God's mercy or salvation.

Many read this "Israel of God" as referring to the new Church made up of Jews and Gentiles. However this may possibly be the case if it had said the "Israel of Christ" or some such expression. If we refer to Romans 9-11 then we see Paul's greatest desire is for the full salvation of the Jewish people and their attaining to God's mercy in the Messiah. Another way of translating Galatians 6:16 is:

"...And peace be upon those who measure according to this halakah and mercy even upon the Israel of God (the still chosen Jewish people)..."

The Greek word στοιχήσουσιν (they will walk) refers to the Rabbinic term Halakah (the way one walks). The Douai Rheims Bible uses the word "follow" in English. The Greek word κανόνι means a rule or measure or level and translates the hebrew קְנֵח (kaneh) (a measuring rod). This evokes the imagery of a well balanced or level scales between Jews and Gentiles in Messiah. Unfortunately the Gentile believers gradually decided to place everything on the Gentile side of the scale and ignore the Halakah as taught by Paul and the early Church. Not only did they want Jews in the Church to deny the value of their circumcision and all Jewish observances, they then decided to nullify the Jewish people by replacing themselves as the Israel of God and taking the special mercy and role reserved for the Jewish people to themselves.

Many today and in the past read Paul in a literalistic and Gentile manner. Rabbi Sha'ul of Tarsus is a great Rabbinic Jewish mystic and has trained as a master of the Torah both written and oral under the tutelage of Hillel's grandson Gamaliel. Paul uses a Jewish midrashic approach including the seven rules of Hillel for biblical exegesis and their expansion by the great mystic master Rabbi Nechunya ha Kanah.This is why Peter, the down-to-earth fisherman reflected in Mark's Gospel, warns us that Paul can be difficult for some to understand. 2 Peter 3:15-16:

"15 Consider also that our Lord’s patience brings salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom God gave him. 16 He writes this way in all his letters, speaking in them about such matters. Some parts of his letters are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. "

When the divine peace and measure between Jews and Gentiles in the Church is restored will the special saving mercy of God touch the Jewish people when the Halakah of Paul and the early Church is restored? Will we have a new and fresh Hebraic penetration of Paul's teaching when the future ingrafted Rabbis and mystics of Judaism are reconciled with their Gentile brothers and sisters in the Church? Will this be part of the resurrection or life from the dead that will bless the Church and the world mentioned by Paul in Romans 11?

Enoch a Gentile ancestor of both Jews and Gentiles and Elijah a Jewish prophet coming again to preach repentance to the Jews and Gentiles as the two Olive Trees and to be martyred by the Antichrist or Beast like a Leopard (the Third Beast of Daniel). This Antichrist will have the oratory power of the Beast like an Eagle or Lion (Hitler) and the ruthlessness of the Beast like a Bear (Stalin).

Note: The Peshitta text in Aramaic or Syriac states:

ואילין דלהנא שׁבילא שׁלמין שׁלמא נהוא עליהון ורחמא ועל איסריל דאלהא .

and in Hebrew translated from the Aramaic:

(והללו שדבקים בדרך הזאת שלום יהא עליהם ורחמים ועל ישראל אלהלם)

This also demonstrates that the peace is for those who follow the path (Halakah) and the compassionate mercy is for the Israel of God

see St Thomas Aquinas and New Law: A Hebrew Catholic Opinion

Posted 30th August 2016

Doubly Chosen: Galatians 1:15-16: A Hebrew Catholic Interpretation of a Marian and Eucharistic Mystery

I have discussed in other places the wonderful book by a orthodox Jewish scholar Judith Deutsch Kornblatt. Her book is titled "Doubly Chosen: Jewish Identity, the Soviet Intelligentsia, and the Russian Orthodox". 'Doubly chosen' is a term used by Russian Orthodox Christians of Jewish ancestry to demonstrate that they are firstly chosen by God through their birth into the Jewish people and secondly chosen by the Lord through the grace of baptism. Many Hebrew Catholics (Catholic Jews) also like this term for understanding their relationship to the Jewish people and the Church (which is mainly Gentile).

According to orthodox Jewish teaching one is Jewish if one's mother is Jewish or of maternal Jewish ancestry or if one converts to Judaism according to Halakah. The convert to Judaism is said to have come under the wings of the Shekhinah. In a sense the feminine Shekhinah as a mother brings through the waters of the conversional mikveh (a kind of symbolic womb) the new son or daughter of Israel. Thus a Jew receives his election or chosenness through the womb of his mother whether a biological mother or the heavenly mother Shekhinah who is also Kneset Yisrael.

St Paul the great Pharasaic Rabbi of Tarsus who embraced Yeshua as the Messiah also alludes to this concept of the 'doubly chosen'. In Galatians 1:15 he speaks of this double call or election. In the Douai Rheims Bible it says

"...But when it pleased him, who separated (ἀφορίσας) me from my mother's womb, and called (καλέσας) me by his grace..."

Here we see that Paul associates his selection as a Jew as coming from his mother's womb. In the Greek two different words are used to represent these elections. For the physical chosenness as a Jew is used ἀφορίσας (aforisas) which means to separate which alludes to God separating the people Israel from the nations to be his separate or set apart holy nation. For the calling or chosenness of the new covenant grace of baptism is used καλέσας (kalesas) which means to call or invite.

Thus Paul confirms the teaching of orthodox Judaism that one's set apart or separate status is due to the maternal status of coming from the mother's womb not from the seed (sperma) of the father. Paul elaborates more on this in Romans 9 where he uses Isaac as his example that not all who come from the seed (sperma) of Abraham and Israel are part of the separated children of Israel. He alludes to the verse in Genesis about "in Isaac shall thy seed (zera) be called (κληθήσεταί)". Abraham had Ishmael and the sons of Keturah but they are not considered the children of the promise as they had Gentile mothers. Paul singles out Sarah and Rebecca as Hebrew mothers who conceive those who are considered the children of the promise.

It is interesting that Paul uses in the Greek the same word for his call to grace as the call of Isaac's seed. In a sense he is saying that even in Old Testament times the grace of the New Law (living the Torah according to the spirit and heart) was in act as it was not only one's birth but the grace of the promise that was important in one being one of the chosen children of God. Gentiles in the New Covenant receive the grace of baptism which also alludes to the sanctified waters of the mother's womb of Our Lady and the Church.

The encounter of Paul with a bright light and then the voice of the Lord speaking to him in Hebrew parallels Moses encounter of the burning bush and the voice of the Lord speaking to him in Hebrew from its midst. The burning bush represents the pure and immaculate Virgin (manifesting out of Eternity) and thus as Moses' encounter with God though the burning bush is a Marian encounter so is Paul's bright light the light of the pure and immaculate Virgin (manifesting out of Eternity) through which he encounters the crucified Lord. In both accounts the Name of God is revealed. This is in a sense the Marian mystery and light of the Incarnation manifesting out of Eternity into time in different but similar manifestations. At the Incarnation Our Lady is bathed in the light of God as the angel reveals the Name of her Son the Messiah to her.

Paul also in Romans 9:24-26 alludes to the fact that the Gentiles who God is calling are considered to be of the status of the lost Tribes of Israel and he also alludes to Hosea where it speaks about Ephraim returning to Judah and to their finding grace in the wilderness of the Gentiles (Jer. 31:2). Orthodox Jewish law states that the lost Tribes are classified as Gentiles for the purpose of Halakah and would need a conversion ceremony to rejoin the Jewish people in keeping Halakah. Judaism traditionally accepts anyone back into Judaism who has proven maternal Jewish ancestry for up to ten generations without a conversion ceremony. Some groups however especially among the Ashkenazim will only accept them if it is only 3 or 4 generations that they are outside the Jewish community.

In this sense Paul would seem to see the Gentile believers as the Gentile-status House of Israel/Ephraim and the Jews as the Torah-observant House of Judah. He forsees their eventual reunion in Romans 11 when "all Israel will be saved".

Galatians 1:16 reads in the Douai-Rheims Bible:

"...To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the Gentiles, immediately I condescended not to flesh and blood..."

It has traditionally been translated to mean that Paul didn't defer to any human authority. However it could be interpreted to mean that after Paul received baptism and confirmation from Ananias he didn't at once enter into eucharistic (flesh and blood) priesthood which imparts through the laying on of hands the body and blood of the Messiah to others. It is only after 3 years of training in the exile of Arabia that he returns to Jerusalem to Peter and James where he enters into the ministry of the fullness of the priesthood. The word translated as condescended (προσανεθέμην) can mean "to lay on besides, hence to undertake besides" and is often translated "to consult, impart or communicate". Thus Paul may be saying that his primary call was to proclaim to the Gentiles first about the grace of baptism and only later to impart the mystery of the Eucharist (body and blood) to them. Thus we could translate Galatians 1:15 as:

"...To reveal his Son in me that I might proclaim him; among the Gentiles I didn't immediately impart the body and blood (Eucharist)..."

This reflected Paul's apostolic strategy based on that of the House of Hillel's teaching of introducing the faith in stages that would not burden the new converts too much. It also reflects the early Church's great reverence and secrecy surrounding the mystery of the Eucharist. Marian and Eucharistic mysteries had to be gradually introduced to the former pagans or they would be led astray into pagan and superstitious practices. This would also reflect Our Lord's example where he proclaimed the Gospel and baptised the apostles first and only after 3 years did he reveal the Eucharistic mystery to his apostles at the Last Supper. This interpretation of Paul lessens the idea that Paul is stressing his own independence and authority as opposed to that of the Jerusalem Church.

The phrase "and called (καλέσας) me by his grace (χάριτος) to reveal his Son in me" should not be separated by a verse division. This feminine charitos alludes to Our Lady who is the"Full of Grace" and God's created Grace in action. Thus Paul is revealing in hidden form (perhaps unwittingly) a Marian mystery connected with the Double Marian calling or election of the Jewish disciple and a Marian calling of the Gentile disciple. Like Paul, the Jewish disciple of the Messiah Yeshua, is called by Our Lady (grace) in order to reveal the hidden crucified and Eucharistic Yeshua dwelling in him and all Jews. Paul then desires to share this with the Gentiles, through Our Lady in the womb waters of baptism in order to lead them to behold the crucified and Eucharistic Yeshua who is the God who dwells in the flesh and blood of his Mother as Man. This is Our Lady of Zion (the Woman of Israel) as the Woman in Travail (Labour) and Mother of the Church (Rev.11-12). Thus we can now read Galatians 1:15-16 as:

"...But when it pleased him, who separated (ἀφορίσας) me from my mother's womb, and called (καλέσας) me by his grace (χάριτος) to reveal his Son in me that I might proclaim him; Among the Gentiles I didn't immediately impart the body and blood (Eucharist)..."

Our Lady as the Burning Bush

Posted 1st September 2016

Galatians 2 and the Highly Esteemed Ones: A Hebrew Catholic Interpretation

The Jerusalem Council

In my last blog post I wrote about how my alternative reading and translation of the Greek of Galatians 1:15-16 gives a more humble and different understanding of Paul. The present translations into English make Paul sound very self-willed and almost arrogant in his claims to "preach" the Gospel. Paul does take pains to stress that he was called to God's grace and given his mission of proclamation to the Gentiles by a direct revelation of the Resurrected Messiah and not by any man- made group. However when read and translated slightly different, the present almost hostility in the text, in regard to the Jerusalem Church, is lessened and even removed.

The Greek word δοκοῦντες (thokountes) and its variants are found in Galatians 2:2,6 and 9. Based on the root meaning of δοκεω (thokeo) meaning 'I think, appear, seem'. It has been translated in to English as reputed which in modern English has a rather negative inference as if one is questioning the reputation. Thayer's Greek Lexicon however states:

"...2. intransitive, to seem, be accounted, reputed: Luke 10:36; Luke 22:24; Acts 17:18; Acts 25:27; 1 Corinthians 12:22; 2 Corinthians 10:9; Hebrews 12:11; ἔδοξαἐμαυτῷδεῖνπρᾶξαι, I seemed to myself, i. e. I thought, Acts 26:9 (cf. Buttmann, 111 (97)); οἱδοκοῦντεςἄρχειν those that are accounted to rule, who are recognized as rulers, Mark 10:42; οἱδοκοῦντεςεἶναιτί those who are reputed to be somewhat (of importance), and therefore have influence, Galatians 2:6 (9) (Plato, Euthyd., p. 303 c.); simply, οἱδοκοῦντες those highly esteemed, of repute, looked up to, influential, Galatians 2:2 (often in Greek writings as Euripides, Hec. 295, where cf. Schafer; (cf. Winer's Grammar, § 45, 7))..."

Thus δοκοῦντες in Galatians 2 should be translated as "esteemed ones" or "highly esteemed ones" of the early Church of Jerusalem. Paul is not questioning their authority but he is humbly acknowledging their esteemed positions as the leaders of the Church and he humbly goes to see them in Jerusalem to submit his style of proclaiming the gospel to the Gentiles, with gentleness that doesn't burden the new believers with too much too soon, for their approval.

It would seem Ananias who baptised Paul sent him to the desert of Arabia for three years where he most likely lived in a Essene-like monastic community of new believers from among the Essene mystical Jews learning more about his new Messianic faith and planning his strategy for his future mission to the Gentiles. This would explain Paul's preference for the simple life and his great appreciation of the celibate life. It is probably there he learnt the Essene mystical secrets and the Essene method of studying Scripture (from these disciples of Menachem the Essene) which he combined with the seven principles he learnt from the Pharisee House of Hillel under Rabban Gamaliel.

After Paul's return to Damascus he goes to see Peter and James before he undertakes his mission to the Gentiles in Syria and Cicilia. He spent 15 days with Peter and it may have been Peter who ordained him as a priest and Bishop or it may have been Ananias in Damascus after he returned from Arabia. We see that the early church used the model of training men for the priesthood for at least 3 years in imitation of Yeshua training his 12 apostles for three years before their ordinations to the new covenant priesthood.

As Paul took his revelation of the crucified Messiah very seriously so does he take the further divine revelation given to him to go to Jerusalem to submit his strategies for evangelisation of the Gentiles (after he had been practicing them for 14 years) to the people and leaders of the Churches in Judea (Gal.1:22). Paul is concerned to confirm that his revelations and strategies are true and valid and that he is not being led astray. He thus besides meeting with the Churches of Judea, goes humbly to the "highly esteemed ones"(δοκοῦντες) of the Jewish Mother Church in Jerusalem - Peter, James and John. These three hold the three high seats of the New Covenant Sanhedrin with Peter as the Messianic Av bet Din (chief Rabbi or Teacher), James (the Lord's Brother) as the Messianic Davidic Nasi or President and John (the Presbyter) as the Messianic High Priest.

Galatians 2:2 thus reads:

"Moreover I went up (to Jerusalem) according to a divine revelation and set before them (the Jewish Churches of Judea), the good news that I proclaim to the Gentiles, as well as a personal meeting with the "Highly Esteemed Ones" lest by some manner I was running or had run in vain."

Paul was obviously pleased with reception of his plan for the Gentile evangelisation and their acceptance that the Gentile believers did not have to be circumcised and become Jews. He saw his success in that his Gentile disciple Titus was not made to be circumcised. He had to fight hard against a group of false brothers who wished to burden these new believers with certain Jewish customs and circumcision as necessary to salvation in the Messiah. This is recorded by Luke in the Book of Acts. Paul in Galatians uses a play on words and refers to these false brothers as the δοκούντων εἶναί τι (certain ones reputed to be someone) as opposed to the apostles who are the true οἱ δοκοῦντες (the Highly Esteemed Ones) who added nothing extra to Paul's proposal for the Gentile believers. Galatians 2:6-7 reads:

"Moreover there are those certain ones reputed to be someone (the false brothers) but what sort they were at one time doesn't make a difference to me. God doesn't take notice of the outward appearance of a man. Indeed the Highly Esteemed Ones (the true Apostles) had nothing to add to me (his position in regards to the Gentiles) but on the contrary they saw that I have been entrusted with the evangelisation of the uncircumcision, just as Peter with the circumcision."

Paul does not undermine Peter's role but proclaims it while proclaiming his unique mission to those who would question it under the influence of the false brothers. In verse 9 he once again refers to these Highly Esteemed Ones (οἱ δοκοῦντες) of Peter, James and John who approve his apostleship. Paul adds another title to them as the Pillars (στῦλοι/ styloi). His respect for them however doesn't blind him to the fact that they can be wrong and need godly correction from a fellow apostle when they don't practice what they teach. Nor does it mean that the apostles can't have disputes in good Jewish style for the sake of the Kingdom in order to come closer to the truth. Galatians 2:9 reads:

"And having known the grace given to me James, Peter and John the Highly Esteemed Ones, being the Pillars, they gave to Barnabas and I, the right hands of Eucharistic Communion which we should take to the Gentiles and they to the circumcision (Jews)."

Anti-Semites in the church often quote Galatians which has been translated by those with anti-Jewish and anti-Judaism prejudices throughout the history of the Gentile Church. However many times this is done unwittingly, just out of Gentile ignorance of the Jewish background of Paul and his teachings. Paul would be horrified at this distortion of his wonderful plan of freedom in the Messiah for both Jews (allowing them to be Jews) and Gentiles (allowing them to be truly of their distinct cultures). It is time that we Catholics take seriously the call of Cardinal Schonborn to take the propositions of the Messianic Jewish Rabbi Mark Kinzer in his book addressed to the Catholic Church on Nostra Aetate and its further development in the living Tradition of the Church. Is Rabbi Kinzer a new reversed St Paul coming to proclaim the place and freedom of the Jewish believers in the Church?

Posted 3rd September 2016

St. Paul and the Letter of Philemon: A Hellenistic Jewish Context

Philemon is the shortest letter of St Paul in the Bible however it can act as a door to understanding the much larger corpus of the Pauline Literature in its biblical and historical context. All Scripture including Philemon can be read at many levels and thus one can gain insights that relate to contemporary people and their modern concerns. However in order to read Scripture at different levels one needs to understand the literal historical level or sense first. While this historical level is primary it is not necessarily the most important or meaningful sense.[1] We all read Paul according to our own understanding or interpretation of the biblical and historical evidence and from one’s own world view and culture.

In recent years there has arisen a school of theology that is given the name of the ‘New Perspectives on Paul’ in which reference to the Jewish context of Paul is central. In fact Dunn calls this new perspective a quantum shift.[2] I would suggest that this occurred partly due to the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1948. The previous theological approach used by many Protestants was of the Higher Critical School which in the 20th century was taken on by many Catholic scholars. This German theology was at its very core anti-Semitic and anti-Jewish according to a number of authors.[3] These insights of the ‘New Perspective on Paul’ have caused many to not see Paul as an antinomian rebel but as one faithful to the Torah as represented in Acts 21. Rabbi Jacob Emden (1697-1776) a leader among the Litvak Jews of Eastern Europe in his famous letter proposed an interpretation of Paul as a faithful Torah observant Rabbi who only taught that Gentiles didn’t need to be Jewishly Torah Observant but insisted on full Torah observance for the circumcised.[4][5] This was demonstrated when Paul circumcised Timothy because he had a Jewish mother.[6] Paul taught in Galatians 5:3 that one who was circumcised was obligated to keep the whole Torah.

There are many diverse opinions among scholars of the context of Paul’s Letter to Philemon. However almost everyone is agreed that the letter was originally written in Greek. Certain puns or word plays in the Greek make this clear.[7] There is a word play or pun on Onesimus’ name, which means useful, in verse 11. Marchal perceives a more sexual connotation to the term ‘useful’ in regards to the use of slaves for sexual pleasure. Is Paul by the use of this pun letting Philemon know that Onesimus has revealed something more shocking in their relationship than just simple master and slave?[8] Is this Paul’s version of Jesus writing in the sand?[9]

Even though the letter is written in Greek one of a Jewish background can’t help but perceive the Jewish expressions behind the Greek words. An example is in verse 7 where a Jewish reader may detect simcha gedola (much joy) and Chizzuk (encouragement/strength) with its deeper Hebrew meaning under the Greek equivalents. Is this because Paul comes from Tarsus and as well as being a Pharisee he is also an educated Hellenistic Jew? It is also possible that Paul speaks to them in this manner because Philemon, Apphia and Archippus are Hellenistic Jews too. Eastern Orthodox Tradition holds that Philemon, Apphia and Archippus were of the seventy apostles (Shelikhim) and thus must have been Jewish.[10] This tradition holds that Apphia was the wife of Philemon and that with Archippus they went as Shelikhim to evangelise Colossae where Archippus became the Bishop (Parnas Hegemon). These traditions also say that Philemon became the Bishop of Gaza in Palestine. Other scholars think that Archippus was the son of Philemon and Apphia. If they were Hellenised Jews then this would explain Paul’s expectation that Philemon knows the obligations of the Torah.[11] Paul doesn’t want to appeal to what is “anekon”( דזדקן righteous according to the Torah) but to love (agape/ahavah).[12] However by even mentioning “anekon” he has indeed reminded Philemon of his moral duty (chovah musarit) according to the Torah.

Most scholars believe that the Letter was written around 60-62 AD from Rome where Paul was imprisoned. Others hold that it was written almost a decade earlier and possibly from Ephesus.[13] While most believe that Paul was actually in prison others believe the term ‘Prisoner of Jesus Christ’ has a more spiritual rather than a literal meaning. It is believed by most to be addressed to the Church in Colossae but it is also possible it was a personal letter that was only addressed to the three Shelikhim especially if the allusion to a sinful[14] homosexual relationship was involved as suggested by Marchal. It may have later after the death of its protagonists were dead been then read to the wider Church. In that case the mention of the “Church in your House” may refer to Archippus rather than to Philemon.[15]

The structure of this letter has also been the subject of intense discussion by scholars. Some believe that this is a letter of recommendation of the kind that a patron wrote on behalf of another that uses deliberative rhetoric. Deliberative rhetoric is that which was used when writing to convince someone to change their mind or actions. FF Church writes an interesting article about the use of rhetoric in the context of the letter to Philemon.[16] Osiek states that it is impossible to separate the indicative from the imperative in this letter.[17] Others have questioned this rhetoric approach as they don’t think it reveals the purpose of the letter. Could this be due to the hidden purpose suggested by Marchal? Is this a letter that is trying to encourage repentance by a prominent and influential leader in the Church? That Philemon is a saint of the Church and went on to be a Bishop in Gaza suggests that Paul’s purpose was achieved.[18] Frilingos stresses the use of familial language and metaphors in the letter. He sees this as part of Paul’s purpose to challenge and displace Philemon’s claim of power over his slave by the use of this familial imagery. [19] Elliot sees this as a rhetoric of tact that Paul uses to manipulate others in a demonstration of his own power and authority.[20]

However some scholars don’t believe that Onesimus is an actual slave but someone Philemon was treating like a slave. And there are many other scenarios that could be proposed. Many people have focused on the issue of slavery and perhaps read into the text the concerns of later Christians. Others have focused on the message of love, mercy and kindness that Paul seems to be proposing to those who have power over the lives of others. This letter may demonstrate that Paul practiced tough love in that he lovingly corrects, admonishes and lures his fellow believers into behaving in a more Christ-like manner rooted in love. Dunham perceives the Letter as providing a model of transformation of life in the resurrected Messiah.[21]

There are many open questions regarding this Letter and its context and background, thus certain opinions cannot be held dogmatically and one needs to be open to further reflection and the insights of further scholarship. In such a small essay one cannot cover the issues presented by Paul’s Letter to Philemon adequately but I have endeavoured to briefly touch on points of interest which need further explication.

At this point I incline towards believing that Philemon, Apphia and Archippus are Hellenistic Jews and that Paul and Timothy are writing to them from Rome in the early 60’s from prison. I also would at this stage accept the more traditional interpretation that Onesimus as an escaped slave who Paul is seeking to reconcile with his master and I think that Marchal’s interpretation about a sexual “usefulness” may have some merit that may explain some of the question marks about the true purpose of the letter raised by some scholars.

If Paul is dealing with a more serious and scandalous situation among the higher leaders he may be using his Messiah’s advice of being as gentle as a dove and as cunning as a serpent[22] in order to correct and reconcile sinners in the Church (Kehilla). Philemon himself may be fond of Greek rhetorical approaches and Paul may be displaying his policy of being all things to all men in order to win them back (in this case) to a Christ-like way of life[23] by writing in a style that Philemon would appreciate. I think that the aspect of the New Perspectives on Paul that emphasises the Jewish context is opening fresh insights to Paul’s writings and ideas in general and to Philemon in particular.

[1] Called the Peshat level in Judaism. The other levels or senses are Remez (analogical), Drash (moral or homelitical) and Sod (anagogical or mystical)

[2]James DG Dunn. "The new perspective on Paul." HTS Theological Studies 64, no. 4 (2008): 1956-1958 .

[3] Roy H. Schoeman. Salvation is from the Jews (John 4: 22): The Role of Judaism in Salvation History from Abraham to the Second Coming. Ignatius Press, 2003.

[4]Harvey Falk. Jesus the Pharisee: A new look at the Jewishness of Jesus. Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2003.

[5] Pawel Maciejko believes Emden drew this conclusion from an earlier Jewish work written by David Nasi in 1430. David Nasi was the brother of the famous Joseph Nasi, Duke of Naxos.

[6] Acts 16:3

[7] Robert E Dunham, “Between text and sermon: Philemon 1:1-25”. In Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology; Richmond Vol. 52, Iss. 2, (Apr 1998): 191-194.

[8] Joseph A Marchal. "The Usefulness of an Onesimus: The Sexual Use of Slaves and Paul's Letter to Philemon." Journal of Biblical Literature 130, no. 4 (2011): 749-770.

[9] John 8:4

[10] Apostle Philemon on OrthodoxWiki

[11] See verses 8-9

[12] Verses 8-9

[13] Raymond Edward Brown, , Joseph A. Fitzmyer, and Roland Edmund Murphy, eds. The new Jerome biblical commentary. (Prentice Hall, 1990), 869-870.

[14] Perceived as sinful to Jews and Christians but not to the pagan Greeks and Romans of the Empire and possibly less so to the Hellenistic Jews especially those who had assimilated the most to Greek and Roman culture among the wealthy upper class which Philemon may have belonged.

[15] Philemon 1:2

[16]F. Forrester Church. "Rhetorical structure and design in Paul's letter to Philemon." Harvard Theological Review 71, no. 1-2 (1978): 17-33.

[17] Carolyn Osiek. "Philemon." In The Catholic Study Bible. Oxford Biblical Studies 2016.

[18] Apostle Philemon on OrthodoxWiki

[19] Chris Frilingos. “‘For My Child, Onesimus’: Paul and Domestic Power in Philemon." Journal of Biblical Literature119, no. 1 (2000): 91-104.

[20] Scott S. Elliott. “‘Thanks, but no thanks’”: Tact, Persuasion and the Negotiation of Power in Paul’s Letter to Philemon.” New Testament Studies 57 (2011): 51-64.

[21]Robert E Dunham, “Between text and sermon: Philemon 1:1-25”, 191-194.

[22] Matthew 10:16

[23] I Corinthians 9:22

Posted 17th April 2018

St Paul of Tarsus: Proud Torah Jew or Former Jew Turned Antinomian Christian?

Paul’s experience on the road to Damascus transformed him so that he had an inner conversion to faith in Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. This Jewish Messiah would be the light for all nations. Was this however an experience that led to his conversion to a new religion that abandoned Jewish observances or did it deepen and broaden his understandings as one who remained solidly within the framework of the Jewish religion and culture? Scholars debate on both sides of this and seem to strongly disagree with each other.[1] A part of Paul’s call was to provide a religious structure for non-Jews (Gentiles) in which they could share with the Jewish believers in Jesus without becoming fully and ethnically Jewish.[2] In the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) he proclaimed his ideas of this freedom or dispensation from full Jewish Torah observance for Gentile believers and won the acceptance of the Jerusalem Church and its leaders (Galatians 2:2).[3] In this sense we can say that Paul did begin to establish a new religion for Gentiles. However it was not a new religion without any connection to Judaism.[4] Judaism was the roots and mother of this Gentile model of the Church. Some would describe this as a bilateral ecclesial Church of Jews and Gentiles.[5]

Many scholars will use Paul’s letters in the New Testament especially Galatians and Romans to work out what is Paul’s position in regards to his new Messianic faith and Judaism.[6] It is through the literary prism or icon of Acts 21 that one should read the epistles of Paul in order to evaluate Paul’s Damascus road experience (Acts 9:1-9; 22:1-21; 26:2-18) and his subsequent mission to the Jews and Gentiles. Paul under the guidance of the leaders of the Jerusalem Church set out to demonstrate that while he allows freedom from Torah observance for the new believers from among the Gentiles, he does not advocate such for believers from among the Jews.[7] This portion of Acts speaks approvingly of Jewish believers in Jesus maintaining the circumcision of their children and of them being zealous for the Torah observances (Acts 21:20-21). Paul elsewhere also affirms this when he speaks about the circumcised remaining circumcised (I Cor 7:18). In Romans he also writes that there is much value in being circumcised (Rom 3:1-2). Galatians 5:3 demonstrates that Paul believed that the one who is circumcised is called to full Torah observance.[8] Scholars such as Longnecker, Young, Lapide, Shulam and Nanos hold that Galatians 5:3 means that Jewish believers and anyone who converts to Judaism is obligated to full Jewish Torah observance.[9] [10] [11] [12] [13] Thus Paul himself must have remained Jewishly Torah observant.

Campbell, Nanos, Eisenbaum and Tucker have supported the interpretation that Paul was a Torah observant Jew after his Damascus road experience.[14], [15], [16], [17] Nanos in his study of Romans states that Paul is a good practicing Jew although shaped by his conviction that Jesus is the Messiah of Israel.[18] Paul is also a Jewish mystic. Paul’s mysticism is rooted in the Pharisee’s desire to enhance Jewish domestic holiness by applying Temple sanctity into the life and home of the Jewish devotee.[19] Ephesians 2 is an example of this Pauline Jewish mystical context that alludes to mystical insights in regards to the Temple to explain the mystery of salvation. However due to the more mystical nature of Ephesians and Colossians some scholars have claimed that these letters were not written by Paul at all. However two important scholars Campbell and Wright both consider Ephesians to be written by Paul.[20], [21]

Paul in Romans 3 says that the Torah should be established or upheld (Rom 3:31). Ephesians states “He abolished the Jewish Law with its commandments and rules” (Eph 2:15, GNT). This however is better translated as “Making void the law of commandments contained in decrees” (Eph 2:15, DRA). These “commandments in decrees” (dogmasin in Greek) refer to the eighteen rabbinic decrees (gezerot in Hebrew) enacted by the Sanhedrin under the control of the Beit Shammai Pharisees.[22] These eighteen gezerot made a much stricter separation between Jews and Gentiles.[23] That these gezerot are the ‘commandments in decrees’ that has been nailed to the Cross and abolished makes much more sense than Paul saying that the Jewish Torah has been abolished.[24] [25]

Paul using this Temple theology or analogy refers to these gezerot as a dividing wall (mesotoichon in Greek and Soreg and Cheil in Hebrew) (Eph 2:14).[26] The original Temple had a court for the Gentiles but later the Soreg was introduced as a more strict separation of Jews and Gentiles.[27] Paul using the language of dividing walls and outer and inner courts alludes to the mystical Temple of the Messiah’s Body in which the dividing walls are broken down and those in the outer courts (women and Gentiles) are brought near in the Eucharistic Sacrifice and Body of the Messiah.[28] Thus the eighteen gezerot are abolished. This is confirmed in Peter’s vision of the sheet (Acts 10:11) and later Judaism would also abolish them.[29] [30]

The more mystical understanding of salvation in Paul (Gal 3:28) may then be understood that there are no barriers to salvation between groups or people even though they still have their distinct callings. This allows for the joining of Jews and Gentiles in the one family of Abraham.[31]. Paul confirms in Romans that God’s election of the Jews is irrevocable (Rom 11:29). Thus Paul after his Damascus Road experience is truly a Jewish prophet who is called to include the Gentiles in Israel’s inheritance without converting them to Judaism. While his place for Gentiles in the people of God has roots in the teachings of Beit Hillel, Paul provides a unique way or path for Gentiles who believe in Jesus as the Messiah. He does this while himself remaining a proud observant Jew and Pharisee (Phil 3:5; Acts 22:3,23:6). In Romans 11 Paul alludes to some great spiritual resurrection for the Gentiles and the world in the eschatological future as a result of the ‘ingrafting’ of the surviving Jewish community into the Olive Tree that is the Church.

[1] Ian J. Elmer, Paul, Jerusalem and the Judaisers: the Galatian crisis in its broadest historical context (Germany: Mohr Siebeck, 2009), 3-25.

[2] Harvey Falk, Jesus the Pharisee: A new look at the Jewishness of Jesus (Wipf and Stock Publishers: 2003): 19.

[3] The relationship of Paul with the Pillars of the Jerusalem Church is another area of scholarly debate. Depending on how the Greek of Galatians is translated can affect how one perceives this relationship.

[4]Falk, Jesus the Pharisee…, 19.

[5] Mark S. Kinzer, Searching Her Own Mystery: Nostra Aetate, the Jewish People, and the Identity of the Church, (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2015): 38, 218.

[6] Elmer, Paul, Jerusalem and the Judaisers…, 3-25.

[7] There were different levels of Torah observance among Jews. Some Jews like the Pharisees kept a more stringent form. There is nothing wrong with extra stringency when done from devotion either as individuals or as a group but should not be forced on other people or groups. Jesus often clashed with those who were trying to enforce extra stringencies on other Jews. The priests for example kept certain stringencies that were not meant to be forced on the lay Jews.

[8]“Once again I testify to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obliged to obey the entire law.” (Gal 5:3, NRSV).

[9] Richard Longenecker, Galatians, eds., Bruce M. Metzger, David A. Hubbard, Glenn W. Barker et al., Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas, TX: Word Books, 1990): 41:226.

[10] Brad Young, Paul the Jewish Theologian: A Pharisee among Christians, Jews and Gentiles (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2002), 90.

[11] Pinchas Lapide and Peter Stulhmacher, Paul: Rabbi and Apostle, trans. Lawrence W. Denef(Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Fortress, 1984), 42.

[12] Hilary Le Cornu and Joseph Shulam, A Commentary on the Jewish Roots of Galatians (Jerusalem: Akademon, 2005): 327.

[13] Mark D. Nanos, The Irony of Galatians: Paul’s Letter in First Century Context (Fortress Press: Minneapolis MN, 2002), 253.

[14] William S. Campbell, Paul and the Creation of Christian Identity (London: T&T Clark, 2008), 89-93.

[15] Mark D. Nanos, “The myth of the ‘Law-Free’ Paul standing between Christians and Jews,” Studies in Christian-Jewish Relations 4:1 (2009): 4. Accessed 30 April 2018. doi: 10.6017/scjr.v4i1.1511

[16] Pamela Eisenbaum, Paul Was Not a Christian: The Original Message of a Misunderstood Apostle (New York: HarperCollins, 2009), 252.

[17] Brian J. Tucker, ‘Remain in Your Calling:’ Paul and the Continuation of Social Identities in 1 Corinthians (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2011), 62-114.

[18] Mark D Nanos, The Mystery of Romans: The Jewish Context of Paul's Letter (Minneapolis MN: Fortress Press, 1996): 9.

[19] Albert Hogeterp, Paul and God's temple: a historical interpretation of cultic imagery in the Corinthian correspondence (Dudley, MA: Peeters Publishers, 2006), 55-57.

[20]Douglas A. Campbell, Framing Paul: An Epistolary Biography (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 2014), 337.

[21] Nicholas Thomas Wright, Paul and the Faithfulness of God (Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2013), 60.

[22] Solomon Schechter and Julius H. Greenstone, Jewish Encyclopedia, “Gezerah,” 1906, accessed 28 April 2018, http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/6646-gezerah.

[23] Schechter and Greenstone, Jewish Encyclopedia, “Gezerah.”

[24] Colossian 2:14 also refers to these dogmasin or gezerot which is translated as “handwriting in decrees”.

[25] Jesus saying in Matthew’s Gospel that the Torah was not abolished (Matt 5:17) seems to conflict with Ephesians saying the Law was abolished (Eph 2:15, NRSV) rather than just these rabbinic decrees being annulled when understood in its correct context.

[26]Clyde Weber Votaw, “The Temple at Jerusalem in Jesus' Day,” The Biblical World 23:3 (1904): 172-173. Accessed 1 May 2018, https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/473359.

[27] The Cheil is the stone wall and this is surmounted with lattice work and together they are called the Soreg. A sign threatening the death penalty for any Gentile passing this wall was hung on the wall.

[28] Tim Hegg, “The ‘Dividing Wall’ in Ephesians 2: 14: What is it? Who made it? How was it broken down?” accessed 1 May 2018, http://www.protorah.com/wpcontent/uploads/2014/12/The_Dividing_Wall_in_Ephesians_2_14.pdf.

[29] Schechter and Greenstone, Jewish Encyclopedia, “Gezerah.”

[30] This vision had nothing to do with the abolition of Kosher food laws but was referring to the 18 gezerot and their extensions of strict separation of Jews from Gentiles.

[31] Pamela Eisenbaum, “A remedy for having been born of woman: Jesus, Gentiles, and genealogy in Romans,” Journal of Biblical Literature 123:4 (2004): 671-702. Accessed 1 May 2018. doi: 10.2307/3268465

Posted 29th May 2018

Review of Six Pauline Studies Articles

Ian J. Elmer. “Pillars, Hypocrites and False Apostles. Paul’s Polemic against Jerusalem in Galatians”. In Polemik in der frühchrislichen Literatur. Tecte und Kontexte (2011), 123-154.

The article “Pillars, Hypocrites and False Apostles. Paul’s Polemic against Jerusalem in Galatians” by Ian Elmer proposes that the letter to the Galatians reveals the conflict in the early Church between Paul as the champion of a law-free Church and the Torah observant Jewish Christian community of Jerusalem. Elmer states that there are three hermeneutical keys or themes to understanding this perceived conflict between Pauline Christianity and Jewish Christianity to be found in Galatians. The first key or theme is Paul’s claim to a unique and divine apostleship, the second to Paul’s emphasis on the paternity of God and third theme that Paul’s gospel focuses on the efficacy of Christ’s death and perceives his opponents as following another gospel that’s focus is on Jewish law observance. Elmer links this conflict in Galatia with the events of conflict between the “Pillars” with Paul in Jerusalem and Antioch. Elmer’s approach and insights, which also make use of the higher critical school of theology, are a development of a traditional (especially Lutheran) understanding of the interchange between law and gospel or works of righteousness and faith. Elmer takes the insights of this so called older perspective on Paul to a more radical conclusion of an almost dialectical conflict or struggle between Peter, James and John and the Jewish Christians on one side and Paul and his new law-free Gentile faith on the other. [1]

Andrew Das, “‘Praise the Lord, All you Gentiles’: The Encoded Audience of Romans 15.7-13.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 34, no.1 (2011): 90-110, accessed May 28, 2018, doi: 10.1177/0142064X11415327

“‘Praise the Lord, All you Gentiles’: The Encoded Audience of Romans 15.7-13”by Andrew Das proposes that the encoded audience of Romans 15: 7-13 are Gentiles. He writes from the position of accepting the scholarship that proposes that Romans was written to an all-Gentile audience rather than to an audience of Jews and Gentiles. Criticism has been made that Stanley Stowers and Richard Hays pass over this section of Romans with little supporting evidence. Das with his article seeks to remedy this perceived lack. Through this discussion he then perceives chapter 14’s references to the weak and the strong as referring to a purely Gentile paradigm rather than one in which the weak are equated with Jews and the strong with Gentile Christians. This article strengthens the position of those scholars who perceive Paul as a Torah observant Jew after his Damascus Road experience. It weakens the position of those who would hold that Paul had a negative attitude to Jewish specific Torah observance by Jewish believers in the Gospel. The obvious erudite use and knowledge of the original Biblical Greek text in demonstrating his position is also a strength of this article.[2]

Frank J. Matera. “Christ in the Theologies of Paul and John: A Study in the Diverse Unity of New Testament Theology.” Theological Studies 67, no. 2 (2006): 237-256, accessed May 28, 2018, doi: 10.1177/004056390606700201

The article “Christ in the Theologies of Paul and John: A Study in the Diverse Unity of New Testament Theology” by Frank J. Matera proposes to discuss the differences in Christology between the letters of Paul and the Gospel of John. Matera perceives that Paul’s approach to Christology is focused on the redemptive aspects of the death, resurrection and parousia of the Messiah whereas John’s approach is focused on an incarnational insight of the Word becoming flesh. For Matera Paul’s understanding of the Messiah as the eschatological Adam is central. Matera links Paul’s redemptive focused missionary style with his dramatic experience of the risen Christ. Whereas John’s foundational experience is in the life of the Messiah as one sent by the Father. The importance of this sending by the Father in John is stressed by Matera. Matera sees these different approaches as providing insights into the mystery of Christ that allows for a multifaceted understanding of Christ. Others have written about these differences in a redemptive focus and an incarnational focus in regard to the differences between Dominican and Franciscan theology and Eastern and Western theologies. Matera provides an important insight that these two approaches go right back to the days of the early Church and that reflection on these two diverse ways of doing Christology leads to an enriched unity.[3]

Paula Fredriksen, "Why Should a" Law-Free" Mission Mean a" Law-Free" Apostle?"Journal of Biblical Literature 134, no. 3 (2015): 637-650, accessed May 29, 2018. doi: 10.15699/jbl.1343.2015.2974

Paula Fredriksen in “Why Should a “Law-Free” Mission Mean a “Law-Free” Apostle?” uses the term law-free with caution. Fredriksen does not believe that Paul proposed a law-free position for pagan converts but in fact Paul and the other Jewish Christian leaders imposed more Jewish aspects than the Synagogue did for God-fearers. In the article Fredriksen discusses the attitude of the Synagogue to pagan participation in its life. Fredriksen perceives Paul and the early Church’s position as based on an eschatological motivation. She stresses that Paul’s so-called law –free approach to Gentiles says absolutely nothing at all about whether Paul himself is Torah observant or not. However Fredriksen does believe that the New Testament demonstrates that Paul was Jewishly Torah observant. This article gives an important insight into the status of pagans in the Temple and Synagogue of the first century. The discussion of just how law-free or Jewish-free that Paul’s proposal for Gentiles in the Church was, is also another fascinating aspect of this article. This article demonstrates that Paul the Apostle is not necessarily also Paul the Apostate.[4]

Michael Benjamin Cover, "Paulus als Yischmaelit?: The Personification of Scripture as Interpretive Authority in Paul and the School of Rabbi Ishmael."Journal of Biblical Literature 135, no. 3 (2016): 617-637, accessed May 29, 2018. doi: 10.15699/jbl.1353.2016.3094

Michael Benjamin Cover asks the question in "Paulus als Yischmaelit?: The Personification of Scripture as Interpretive Authority in Paul and the School of Rabbi Ishmael” about what school of the Pharisees did St Paul belong to before his embrace of Jesus as the Jewish Messiah. Cover agrees with Joachim Jeremias that Paul was originally a Hillelite rather than a Shammaite as proposed by N.T Wright. Cover proposes that Paul’s approach to hermeneutics was similar to that of the Ishmaelite school within Hillelite Pharisaism as opposed to the Akiban school of interpretation. This approach is that of the personification of Scripture as a self interpreting authority. Cover discusses the importance of hearing Scripture in both Paul and Ishmael’s approaches as well as a lack of references to halakhic authorities outside Scripture itself. Cover also mentions two collaborating features of Pauline and Ishmaelian thought in regard to universalism and mystical ascent. Cover however does caution that Paul is not always proto- Ishmaelian in his approach and he gives some examples of how Paul can be proto-Akiban. This article is very important as it helps one to get a clearer understanding of the Jewish and Pharisaic background of Paul before his “conversion” and how this background manifests in his letters after his transforming experience of the risen Messiah.[5]

Mark Nanos, “Paul’s relationship to Torah in the Light of His Strategy to become Everything to Everyone (1 Corinthians 9:1-9),” accessed May 30, 2018, http://www.marknanos.com/1Cor9-Leuven-9-4-09.pdf

The article “ Paul’s relationship to Torah in the Light of His Strategy to become Everything to Everyone (1 Corinthians 9:1-9)” by Mark Nanos examines the common interpretation of this section of Corinthians, by those who think Paul abandoned his belief in Torah and mitzvoth. They understand this to mean that Paul changes how he behaves when he is with different groups of people. Nanos points out the rather dishonest, deceptive and hypocritical nature of such behaviour. Nanos holds to the position that Paul is still a committed and observant Jew after his transformative experience of the risen Messiah. Nanos proposes that Paul is thus proposing a rhetorical adaptability rather than a lifestyle adaptability. Nanos considers this as a discursive strategy for winning others to the Messiah. He also perceives this as a more productive approach which relieves Paul of the accusations of being a liar and deceiver which will help in Jewish Christian relations. Nanos’s insights coming from a scholar who is a non-Christian Jew is a strength of this article and of his other articles. In fact he is becoming a voice for this position which some call “Paul within Judaism” which is a theological child or sibling of the so-called “New Perspective on Paul”.[6]

[1] Ian J. Elmer. “Pillars, Hypocrites and False Apostles. Paul’s Polemic against Jerusalem in Galatians”. In Polemik in der frühchrislichen Literatur. Tecte und Kontexte (2011), 123-154.

[2] Andrew Das, “‘Praise the Lord, All you Gentiles’: The Encoded Audience of Romans 15.7-13.” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 34, no.1 (2011): 90-110, accessed May 28, 2018, doi: 10.1177/0142064X11415327

[3] Frank J. Matera. “Christ in the Theologies of Paul and John: A Study in the Diverse Unity of New Testament Theology.” Theological Studies 67, no. 2 (2006): 237-256, accessed May 28, 2018, doi: 10.1177/004056390606700201

[4] Paula Fredriksen, "Why Should a" Law-Free" Mission Mean a" Law-Free" Apostle?"Journal of Biblical Literature 134, no. 3 (2015): 637-650, accessed May 29, 2018. doi: 10.15699/jbl.1343.2015.2974

[5] Michael Benjamin Cover, "Paulus als Yischmaelit?: The Personification of Scripture as Interpretive Authority in Paul and the School of Rabbi Ishmael."Journal of Biblical Literature 135, no. 3 (2016): 617-637, accessed May 29, 2018. doi: 10.15699/jbl.1353.2016.3094

[6] Mark Nanos, “Paul’s relationship to Torah in the Light of His Strategy to become Everything to Everyone (1 Corinthians 9:1-9),” accessed May 30, 2018, http://www.marknanos.com/1Cor9-Leuven-9-4-09.pdf

Posted 22nd June 2018

My New Perspective on Paul: A Hebrew Catholic Collection

I Beheld The Lord Through The Mirror: A Hebrew Catholic Reflection

Misunderstanding the argument with Peter and Paul: A Hebrew Catholic Perspective

The Halakhic Measuring Rod and the Israel of God: Galatians 6:16

Doubly Chosen: Galatians 1:15-16: A Hebrew Catholic Interpretation of a Marian and Eucharistic Mystery

Galatians 2 and the Highly Esteemed Ones: A Hebrew Catholic Interpretation

St. Paul and the Letter of Philemon: A Hellenistic Jewish Context

St Paul of Tarsus: Proud Torah Jew or Former Jew Turned Antinomian Christian?

Review of Six Pauline Studies Articles

Trending Articles

Practice Sheet of Right form of verbs for HSC Students

Download: FK ft Shenky – Nakuyewa ”Prod by: Shenky”

How to win at Markstrat (Markstrat Tips and Tricks) – Vodites

Ominde Commission Report and Recommendations – Ominde Report of 1964

Bureau of Internal Revenue: Regional Offices (Directory)

GO 53 on Enhancement of Ex-gratia upto 5 Lakhs Toddy Tappers in Telangana

Cakewalk CA-2A Leveling Amplifier v2.0.1.97 WiN, v2.0.1.96 OSX Incl Keygen

Mp3 Download: Mdu - Kunjenjenjena

How the kill the job , when DTP request running for long hours.

Microsoft Intune から展開しているアプリのアップデートについて

18-year-old girl was beaten for half an hour by two Northampton men in 'an...

Car crash in Dunton Bassett leaves driver in critical condition

Macky 2, Two Others In Road Accident

Application log 00000000000000089514: Could not convert queue DLVST90CLNT

Detroit mafia: D’Anna Brothers agree to plea deal

Delivery block field greyed out using VA02

Muloraki Au

【個人撮影】スマホのプライベート映像♪「中に出さないで///」カラオケ屋での生ハメ撮りが流出ｗ【リベンジポルノ】＠PornHub

BREAKING NEWS: Diamond Platnumz Is Reported Dead After Ghastly Car Accident

FIAT 500 B0111 B0112