Based on these principles as a foundation for understanding, I now wish to consider some of the sociological influences in the life of Paul, which must be taken into consideration if we are to understand what he means. Paul as he grew up was subjected to a two-fold training and influence, Hebrew or Rabbinical on the one hand, and Greek or classical on the other. When we understand his situation in those two particulars we shall understand many things in his forms of presentation and expression which, if we do not take the conditions into account, really obscure for us his meaning. We must also realize that he was writing to Jews and Greeks who had the Rabbinical training or the classical training, and it was absolutely essential that Paul should write to them in terms and forms which could be apprehended by them in view of the conditioning of their minds.
First of all, Paul was a Hebrew,—"a Hebrew of the Hebrews," he said. He was of the tribe of Benjamin, and bore the name of Saul, the name of the only king who ever came from that tribe.
Here is what Paul says of himself:
Phil 3:5, "As touching the law, a Pharisee."
Gal I:14, "I forged ahead in Judaism beyond many of my own age and race and was more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers."
Acts 26:5, "According to the strictest sect of our religion, I lived a Pharisee."
When Paul mentions that he was a Pharisee, we want to bear in mind that this was more than a matter of words. To-day the real differences between the various branches of the Protestant Church are very slight. If it is said of a man that he is a Methodist, or a Baptist, we cannot attribute too much significance to the distinction. But with Pharisaism it was different. Here we have to do not with a mere system of doctrine, but with a way of life,—and not only a way of life actively, but also emotionally and intellectually. This was always of the essence of the Jewish religion. It had no theology. It is impossible to systematize the attributes of their God. Instead of a system there was a living personal relation. I cannot think of anything at all comparable in more modern times except the Jesuits, the Society of Jesus. They are profound psychologists. It is not that a child subjected to the Jesuitical training will not depart from the system, but, such is the training that he is absolutely unable to escape from his conditioning. It was something fundamental of this kind that Pharisaism meant. It entered into every fibre of the being.
A part of this influence Paul never got away from. It is very noticeable in the Epistle to the Romans. In spite of his spiritual experience, he kept reverting to an intellectual difficulty due to his early training, which he knew to be an immaterial and meaningless problem, but which intellectually he could not escape.
He knew Christ; he knew Him more than after the flesh. Christ was the only reality in Paul's life. Yet, being convinced from his Pharisaic training that the Jews were God's chosen people, for whom the Messiah was promised, Paul could not intellectually dismiss the question why the Jews rejected Christ if he was indeed the Messiah. It seems to me that this is a very good example indeed of the sort of thing which appears in Paul's letters from time to time and which we must take into account if we are to get the Apostle's real meaning. In other words, in spite of this intellectual difficulty, we should be far afield if our conclusion as to Paul was that he was in doubt whether Christ was really the Messiah.
We also find in the Apostle's letters many instances of analogies and arguments drawn from his Rabbinical training which are meaningless to us, and even strange and disturbing, but, read in the light of the schooling of that day, we can see just what they meant to Paul, and we can understand that they would have a very definite significance to his Jewish readers.
A striking instance occurs in I Cor. 10:4, where, in speaking of the experiences of the Israelites in the Wilderness, Paul says, "They drank of the spiritual rock that followed them"—"went with them" is the right translation. What does that mean? Does anybody know?
It is only in recent years that there has been any understanding of this passage, and the explanation was found in Talmudic interpretation. You will note that in Ex. 17:6 it is recorded that at the beginning of the Wilderness experience Moses struck the rock and the waters gushed forth for the children of Israel. In Num. 20:11, it is recorded that the same incident occurred at the end of the passage through the desert. It is also recorded that in the desert during the journey the Israelites were fed with quail and manna, but it is not recorded where they got their water. The Jewish interpreters were not at a loss. They said that the rock mentioned at the beginning of the Widerness experience and the rock at the end were one and the same rock, and that this rock went along with the children of Israel in all their journeyings. Each night the camp was made about the rock, and channels passing each tent were dug, through which the waters from the rock were carried to all the children of Israel.
Now this story Paul had undoubtedly heard from childhood. I question whether he ever thought of rejecting it. Certainly this intellectual conception has nothing to do with his spiritual experience, and as soon as we know the source of its arising it cannot disturb us or put us off the track in any way. Even if Paul himself did not believe the story, it will readily be seen that to his readers the reference would have immediate meaning, just as one of us might refer to the story of George Washington and the cherry tree.
I will not speak any more about the Hebrew side of Paul's training, but I wanted to give a hint, at least, about it, because the Epistle to the Romans, especially, is full of arguments and illustrations drawn from the Old Testament which had immediate point for Paul's hearers, and which were undoubtedly considered by him to be appropriate material to use for imparting his message. To us the method of argument often seems strange and the illustrations not appropriate nor pointed. We must, therefore, be in a position to recognize these things and allow for them if we are to understand Paul's real message.