bookslover
Puritan Board Doctor
Paul strongly implies that his father was a Pharisee (Acts 23.6). He also notes that his father was a Roman citizen (Acts 16.37-38; 22.25-29). So: Paul's father was both a Pharisee and a Roman citizen. This raises some interesting questions:
Was it unusual for Pharisees to be Roman citizens? Why would a Pharisee - a member of the strictest and most theologically orthodox group in Judaism - even want to be a Roman citizen? Would Paul's father have been condemned as a heretic for having Roman citizenship? Could this be a reason Paul's family was located in Tarsus and not Jerusalem (or at least Israel)? With this latter question, I do think it explains why, growing up in Tarsus, he was sent to Jerusalem for his theological education - family tradition. Paul's father, with a foot in both the secular and Pharisaic worlds, made sure his son was educated likewise. Did Paul's father - or Paul himself - experience any cognitive dissonance between the strictness of Pharisee-ism and his secular Greek/Roman education?
Etc., etc.
I wonder if anyone has written on this subject.
A Pharisee and a Roman citizen. Fascinating!
Was it unusual for Pharisees to be Roman citizens? Why would a Pharisee - a member of the strictest and most theologically orthodox group in Judaism - even want to be a Roman citizen? Would Paul's father have been condemned as a heretic for having Roman citizenship? Could this be a reason Paul's family was located in Tarsus and not Jerusalem (or at least Israel)? With this latter question, I do think it explains why, growing up in Tarsus, he was sent to Jerusalem for his theological education - family tradition. Paul's father, with a foot in both the secular and Pharisaic worlds, made sure his son was educated likewise. Did Paul's father - or Paul himself - experience any cognitive dissonance between the strictness of Pharisee-ism and his secular Greek/Roman education?
Etc., etc.
I wonder if anyone has written on this subject.
A Pharisee and a Roman citizen. Fascinating!