How Paul wrote the old testament.

[outhouse]

Either way Paul is referencing the chosen apostles and downplaying their authority.

What authority did they have all over the Diaspora in the wide and diverse beliefs of the early movement before the religion had any structure?

 

[Hawkins]

It is similar to how Stephen quoted the Bible before his death. A valid witnessing is precise up to the point that the message is sincerely conveyed. Paul, as a Hebrew speaker, possibly speaking in Greek to his audience may not necessarily quote from the Greek Septuagint. He may translate the verses from Hebrew writings directly to Greek. As a formal Pharisee, it's more likely that Paul's scripture knowledge is directly from the Hebrew version of the Scripture. There are also a small variance between the Scripture used by the Rabbis and that used by other Jews, especially used by those not living in Jerusalem area. There could also be other Greek translations of the Hebrew Psalm. The Writings (where Psalm is placed) was not yet finally canonized at Jesus time. Plus that publishing of books and writings may not be as so well controlled as today's publishing companies. There could be various translations of the Hebrew writings into Greek, it's not limited to Septuagint translation. The Hellenistic Jews gain Scripture knowledge from Septuagint only though.

The bottom line is, as long as Paul's quote is as sincere as up to his best knowledge, whether it is translated from Hebrew by himself or quoted from one of the Hebrew Psalm translations, his writing is considered legitimate from the perspective of witnessing, with its content properly and correctly conveyed.

Moreover,

Psalm 53:1-3 (NIV)
The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, and their ways are vile; there is no one who does good.
God looks down from heaven on all mankind to see if there are any who understand, any who seek God.
Everyone has turned away, all have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one.

The fool says that "There is no God", while Everyone has turned away and all have become corrupt (not just the fools) but everyone and all.

 

[Kolibri]

Verses 7-9 shows how Paul was putting himself on equal, but not superior footing with Peter. They were both 'sent forth' directly by Jesus.
And he was adding that their understanding of what was given by Christ as 'the truth' was equal (as per verse 6.)

"On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the good news for those who are uncircumcised, just as Peter had been for those who are circumcised - Just as Peter had been for those who are circumcised - for the one who empowered Peter for an apostleship to those who are circumcised also empowered me for those who are of the nations - and when they recognized the undeserved kindness that was given me, James and Ce'phas and John, the ones who seemed to be pillars, gave Bar'na-bas and me the right hand of fellowship (or "partnership.") so that we should go to the nations but they to those who are circumcised."

Note that the verse mentioned "James, [Peter] and John, the ones who seemed to be pillars."
Where some read it to be that he was implying they were not pillars, others might note that these were the ones that were most visible as 'leaders' of those holding up the congregation.
What of the other 9-10 of the Twelve? Would they not also been 'sent forth'? But they were not as apparent to the human eye as little mention is made of them after the Gospels.
(I do not remember if this James is one of the Twelve or Jesus' half brother.)

 

[Simplelogic]

It is similar to how Stephen quoted the Bible before his death. A valid witnessing is precise up to the point that the message is sincerely conveyed. Paul, as a Hebrew speaker, possibly speaking in Greek to his audience may not necessarily quote from the Greek Septuagint. He may translate the verses from Hebrew writings directly to Greek. As a formal Pharisee, it's more likely that Paul's scripture knowledge is directly from the Hebrew version of the Scripture. There are also a small variance between the Scripture used by the Rabbis and that used by other Jews, especially used by those not living in Jerusalem area. There could also be other Greek translations of the Hebrew Psalm. The Writings (where Psalm is placed) was not yet finally canonized at Jesus time. Plus that publishing of books and writings may not be as so well controlled as today's publishing companies. There could be various translations of the Hebrew writings into Greek, it's not limited to Septuagint translation. The Hellenistic Jews gain Scripture knowledge from Septuagint only though.

The bottom line is, as long as Paul's quote is as sincere as up to his best knowledge, whether it is translated from Hebrew by himself or quoted from one of the Hebrew Psalm translations, his writing is considered legitimate from the perspective of witnessing, with its content properly and correctly conveyed.

Moreover,

Psalm 53:1-3 (NIV)
The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, and their ways are vile; there is no one who does good.
God looks down from heaven on all mankind to see if there are any who understand, any who seek God.
Everyone has turned away, all have become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one.

The fool says that "There is no God", while Everyone has turned away and all have become corrupt (not just the fools) but everyone and all.

The problem still remains. As I stated earlier:

Now here is the passage quoted accurately, and in its context.

The fool has said in his heart, "there is no God". They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none who does good. The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men to see if there are any who understand, who seek God. They have all turned aside, theyhave together become corrupt; there is none who does good, no, not one. Have all theworkers of iniquity no knowledge, who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call on the Lord? There they are in great fear, for God is with the generation of the RIGHTEOUS. Psalm 14:1-5

Guess what? In David's picture there are no atheisticfools who do good! This passage is obviously not speaking of every human being, but of a distinct group of people whom David describes as fools, atheists, workers of abominations, corrupt, ignorant, and workers of iniquity. Of course, not one of them do good. And these evil people are contrasted with a second group of real people known as "my people" and "the generation of the righteous". Right there in this very Psalm that Paul quotes from, there are obviously those whom God calls "righteous"! This is hardly the picture Paul wants us to get from this Psalm. Notice also Paul's embellishment of this passage. He would have us believe the phrase, "no, not one" is used twice when it is only used once. The first time Paul uses the phrase is where it doesn't exist, and it is coupled with the word "righteous". This word does not exist in this part of the Psalm, or anywhere near the words "no, not one". The word "righteous" only shows up later in verse 5, and there it directly implies that there are those who are righteous! So much for "no, not one".

 

[Hawkins]

The problem still remains. As I stated earlier:

Now here is the passage quoted accurately, and in its context.

The fool has said in his heart, "there is no God". They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none who does good. The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men to see if there are any who understand, who seek God. They have all turned aside, theyhave together become corrupt; there is none who does good, no, not one. Have all theworkers of iniquity no knowledge, who eat up my people as they eat bread, and do not call on the Lord? There they are in great fear, for God is with the generation of the RIGHTEOUS. Psalm 14:1-5

Guess what? In David's picture there are no atheisticfools who do good! This passage is obviously not speaking of every human being, but of a distinct group of people whom David describes as fools, atheists, workers of abominations, corrupt, ignorant, and workers of iniquity. Of course, not one of them do good. And these evil people are contrasted with a second group of real people known as "my people" and "the generation of the righteous". Right there in this very Psalm that Paul quotes from, there are obviously those whom God calls "righteous"! This is hardly the picture Paul wants us to get from this Psalm. Notice also Paul's embellishment of this passage. He would have us believe the phrase, "no, not one" is used twice when it is only used once. The first time Paul uses the phrase is where it doesn't exist, and it is coupled with the word "righteous". This word does not exist in this part of the Psalm, or anywhere near the words "no, not one". The word "righteous" only shows up later in verse 5, and there it directly implies that there are those who are righteous! So much for "no, not one".

I simply think that your concept is not clear enough to make a correct translation.

Prophetically, David's Psalm contexts can be used in a deeper level. The term righteous has two fold meanings. One absolute while the other relative. The absolute sense comes from the judgment of Law. Under this situation, no one is deemed righteous, not even one. However, a covenant (you may not grasp the concept either) is a combination of a specific set of Law plus God's grace granted through faith). In terms of a covenant (instead of God's absolute Law), one can be deemed righteous in God's eyes.


Take a look at several verses down,

Romans 3:20 (NIV)
Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

This is the main point Paul was trying to make. Paul's message here actually applies in both the absolute and the relative sense. That is, whether it is measured by God's absolute Law, or by the specific set of Law attached to a covenant (the Mosaic Law in this case), no one can be deemed righteous now (at Jesus' time or Paul's time), this drives the necessity of the New Covenant which even the specific set of Law (attached to a covenant) is minimized to none, while God's grace is maximized. It's a covenant of pure Grace of God (one needs only faith to be saved).

 

[gsa]

I don't think you have the knowledge to fully grasp what is going on here.

maybe you don't understand the previous scripture was the foundation of ALL of the NT, and it will be different because it is a different religion that evolved away from Judaism.

This is why I think that you may be talking past one another. I am not sure what simplelogic's position is, but I doubt he disagrees that Paul is using scripture to justify his own theological innovations, or the theological innovations of part of the early Christian community. The major difference seems to be that simplelogic still embraces Jesus on some level, notwithstanding the rejection of the Pauline teachings.

 

[Simplelogic]

This is why I think that you may be talking past one another. I am not sure what simplelogic's position is, but I doubt he disagrees that Paul is using scripture to justify his own theological innovations, or the theological innovations of part of the early Christian community. The major difference seems to be that simplelogic still embraces Jesus on some level, notwithstanding the rejection of the Pauline teachings.

Well put. I might add that I don't just embrace Yeshua on some level. I believe the Torah declares him to be our only leader/rabbi/pastor and is to be followed exclusively.

 

[Simplelogic]

I simply think that your concept is not clear enough to make a correct translation.

Prophetically, David's Psalm contexts can be used in a deeper level. The term righteous has two fold meanings. One absolute while the other relative. The absolute sense comes from the judgment of Law. Under this situation, no one is deemed righteous, not even one. However, a covenant (you may not grasp the concept either) is a combination of a specific set of Law plus God's grace granted through faith). In terms of a covenant (instead of God's absolute Law), one can be deemed righteous in God's eyes.

Psalm 14 is not talking about absolute righteousness at all! Its talking about the evil men and righteous men, like every other place in the Hebrew Scriptures. Paul believed that the law can't make someone righteous. Because Paul could not prove this concept from the Hebrew text, he decided to rip verses out of context to try to prove his beliefs. The Hebrew text clearly teaches that the law of Moses can make a man righteous in God's eyes.

 

[Norman]

I'm really enjoying this conversation but I realize we haven't even discussed the OP at all!

Is anyone at all interested in the fact that Paul's misquotes of the Tanakh are found in the Greek LXX? I find this remarkable.

Norman:
Why would this be a remarkable thing? I will use the book of Romans, Matthew and Peter as an example. The Old Testament was quoted in the New Testament directly and indirectly 266 times. In Romans 9:25–26, Paul quoted from Hosea 1:10; 2:23 (he referred to Hosea as “Osee”), and in Romans 9:29, he quoted from Isaiah 1:9; 29:16 (see also Romans 9:20). By referring to these Old Testament prophets, Paul taught that God’s desire is to save all His children and that many Gentiles, who are not His people by birth, will become His people by being grafted into the gospel covenant.

“I Tertius, who wrote this epistle, salute you in the Lord” (Romans 16:22; compare 1 Peter 5:12). Paul may have used scribes to compose many or all of his epistles. Ancient scribes had varying degrees of influence in what they wrote. Some would write a manuscript word for word as dictated by the sender, others would revise and edit a draft written by the sender, and others would compose much of a text themselves, working from notes or instructions provided by the sender. Whichever approach was used, the sender would make sure the final text represented his or her intentions.
Some New Testament scholars have debated whether some of the epistles bearing Paul’s name were actually written by Paul. Much of this debate deals with subtle differences in style and wording among the epistles. However, many of these differences can be explained by Paul using different scribes on different occasions with varying degrees of personal input.

Paul and the New Testament writers weren't immoral or ignorant. I don’t believe they didn't illegitimately rip passages out of their context and deviously reduce them to messianic predictions. Rather, a theological point is being made: many Old Testament events and institutions-usually related to Israel-foreshadow something greater in Christ and the new community He called together (Jesus calling 12 apostles, reminiscent of Israel's 12 tribes). First, if the New Testament writers "plundered" the Old Testament for proof texts, why, for example, didn't Luke who mentioned the virgin birth-quote Isaiah 7:14 (Like Matthew did)? The same could be asked about other such passages too numerous to mention here. The New Testament writers only appear to take Old Testament verses out of context to make them fit their theology about Jesus' teaching or ministry.

“Paul was an absolute genius at devising illustrations to drive home his gospel teachings. Here [in Romans 7:1–6] he compares Israel’s allegiance to the Law of Moses with that of a wife to her husband. As long as her husband lives, a wife is bound to him, must obey his laws, and if she be with another, she is an adulteress. But when the husband dies, he can no longer direct her actions, and she is free to marry another; she can no longer be subject to him that is dead. “So with Israel and the law. As long as the law lived, and was therefore in force, Israel was married to it and required to obey its provisions. If she went after other gods, or followed other religions, it was as adultery. But now the law is fulfilled; it no longer lives; it has become dead in Christ; and Israel is married to another, even to Christ, whose gospel law must now be obeyed”
(Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 2:253–54).

Romans is the most systematically written of Paul’s Epistles and perhaps the most doctrinal book in the New Testament. It points to Jesus Christ as the source of salvation by teaching how we can put off sins and replace them with a newness of life. Romans also emphasizes the importance of walking after the Spirit over legal formalism. (The Life and Teachings of Jesus and His Apostles, p. 316.)

“Whom [God] will he hardeneth” (Romans 9:18). A key to understanding Paul’s statement is to recognize that he was reasoning from the book of Exodus, which tells of the Pharaoh who opposed God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt. The Exodus account, which would have been familiar to Paul’s readers, speaks of God hardening Pharaoh’s heart

Paul quoted Deuteronomy 30:12–14 to make the point that one need not “ascend into heaven” or “descend into the deep” to find Christ (Romans 10:6–7).
Paul quoted Isaiah 52:7 in “Romans 10:14-15…Verse 15 contains the wonderful message referenced in Isaiah: ‘How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings’ (see also Isaiah 52:7).

Paul talked about how Elijah believed that he was the only righteous Israelite remaining; however, God told him, “I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed to Baal” (1 Kings 19:14–18; Romans 11:2–4).
Paul noted that the scriptures were written “for our learning” and to provide comfort and hope (Romans 15:4). To illustrate this truth, Paul then quoted several Old Testament scriptures to reassure the Saints that missionary work to the Gentiles was in accordance with God’s plan, and he encouraged all Church members to accept one another ( Romans 15:9–12, quotes Psalm 18:49; Deuteronomy 32:43; Psalm 117:1; and Isaiah 11:10).

 

[Simplelogic]

Norman:
Why would this be a remarkable thing? I will use the book of Romans, Matthew and Peter as an example. The Old Testament was quoted in the New Testament directly and indirectly 266 times. In Romans 9:25–26, Paul quoted from Hosea 1:10; 2:23 (he referred to Hosea as “Osee”), and in Romans 9:29, he quoted from Isaiah 1:9; 29:16 (see also Romans 9:20). By referring to these Old Testament prophets, Paul taught that God’s desire is to save all His children and that many Gentiles, who are not His people by birth, will become His people by being grafted into the gospel covenant.

“I Tertius, who wrote this epistle, salute you in the Lord” (Romans 16:22; compare 1 Peter 5:12). Paul may have used scribes to compose many or all of his epistles. Ancient scribes had varying degrees of influence in what they wrote. Some would write a manuscript word for word as dictated by the sender, others would revise and edit a draft written by the sender, and others would compose much of a text themselves, working from notes or instructions provided by the sender. Whichever approach was used, the sender would make sure the final text represented his or her intentions.
Some New Testament scholars have debated whether some of the epistles bearing Paul’s name were actually written by Paul. Much of this debate deals with subtle differences in style and wording among the epistles. However, many of these differences can be explained by Paul using different scribes on different occasions with varying degrees of personal input.

Paul and the New Testament writers weren't immoral or ignorant. I don’t believe they didn't illegitimately rip passages out of their context and deviously reduce them to messianic predictions. Rather, a theological point is being made: many Old Testament events and institutions-usually related to Israel-foreshadow something greater in Christ and the new community He called together (Jesus calling 12 apostles, reminiscent of Israel's 12 tribes). First, if the New Testament writers "plundered" the Old Testament for proof texts, why, for example, didn't Luke who mentioned the virgin birth-quote Isaiah 7:14 (Like Matthew did)? The same could be asked about other such passages too numerous to mention here. The New Testament writers only appear to take Old Testament verses out of context to make them fit their theology about Jesus' teaching or ministry.

“Paul was an absolute genius at devising illustrations to drive home his gospel teachings. Here [in Romans 7:1–6] he compares Israel’s allegiance to the Law of Moses with that of a wife to her husband. As long as her husband lives, a wife is bound to him, must obey his laws, and if she be with another, she is an adulteress. But when the husband dies, he can no longer direct her actions, and she is free to marry another; she can no longer be subject to him that is dead. “So with Israel and the law. As long as the law lived, and was therefore in force, Israel was married to it and required to obey its provisions. If she went after other gods, or followed other religions, it was as adultery. But now the law is fulfilled; it no longer lives; it has become dead in Christ; and Israel is married to another, even to Christ, whose gospel law must now be obeyed”
(Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, 2:253–54).

Romans is the most systematically written of Paul’s Epistles and perhaps the most doctrinal book in the New Testament. It points to Jesus Christ as the source of salvation by teaching how we can put off sins and replace them with a newness of life. Romans also emphasizes the importance of walking after the Spirit over legal formalism. (The Life and Teachings of Jesus and His Apostles, p. 316.)

“Whom [God] will he hardeneth” (Romans 9:18). A key to understanding Paul’s statement is to recognize that he was reasoning from the book of Exodus, which tells of the Pharaoh who opposed God’s deliverance of Israel from Egypt. The Exodus account, which would have been familiar to Paul’s readers, speaks of God hardening Pharaoh’s heart

Paul quoted Deuteronomy 30:12–14 to make the point that one need not “ascend into heaven” or “descend into the deep” to find Christ (Romans 10:6–7).
Paul quoted Isaiah 52:7 in “Romans 10:14-15…Verse 15 contains the wonderful message referenced in Isaiah: ‘How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings’ (see also Isaiah 52:7).

Paul talked about how Elijah believed that he was the only righteous Israelite remaining; however, God told him, “I have left me seven thousand in Israel, all the knees which have not bowed to Baal” (1 Kings 19:14–18; Romans 11:2–4).
Paul noted that the scriptures were written “for our learning” and to provide comfort and hope (Romans 15:4). To illustrate this truth, Paul then quoted several Old Testament scriptures to reassure the Saints that missionary work to the Gentiles was in accordance with God’s plan, and he encouraged all Church members to accept one another ( Romans 15:9–12, quotes Psalm 18:49; Deuteronomy 32:43; Psalm 117:1; and Isaiah 11:10).

Looking forward to responding to this one.