Suffering that atones, and the third heaven

The idea that suffering can bring forgiveness of sins is stated in the Babylonian Talmud, Berakhot 5a:

אמר רבי שמעון בן יוחאי: שלש מתנות טובות נתן הקדוש ברוך הוא לישראל, וכולן לא נתנן אלא על ידי יסורין

Amar Rabbi Shimʿon ben Yoḥai: Shalosh matanot tovot natan ha-Qadosh Barukh Hu le-Yisraʾel, ve-khullan lo natan ella al yedei yisurin.

Rabbi Simeon ben Yohai said: Three good gifts the Holy One gave to Israel, and none of them was given except through suffering.

The concept was then developed by Paul into the theology of the cross, the suffering of Jesus as the means of redemption from sin. It cannot be denied that the idea had long been rooted in the rabbis’ interpretation of the wisdom behind suffering.

In Sanhedrin 98b an important idea appears:

אם ראית דור שצרות רבות באות עליו כנהר, חכה לו, שנאמר: כי בא מים צרה

Im raʾita dor she-tzarot rabot baʾot alav ka-nahar, ḥakeh lo, she-neʾemar: ki va mayim tzarah.

If you see a generation on which many troubles come like a river, wait for him (al-Masīḥ), as it is said: “for distress comes like flooding water.”

Here collective suffering is tied to the coming of a savior, an idea Paul took and widened when he attributed the suffering of Jesus as savior to all humanity. That is a reinterpretation of an old idea in a form shaped by Greek culture and made universal.

So too in Avot de-Rabbi Natan 34:

מיתת צדיקים מכפרת על הדור

Mitat tzaddikim mekhaperet ʿal ha-dor.

The death of the righteous atones for the generation.

The phrase gives moral justification for death as collective atonement. Paul adapted the idea and arranged it into the doctrine of “Christ crucified” as a sacrifice for the sins of the people, as in 1 Corinthians: “Christ our passover is sacrificed for us.”¹ The concept derives from the sacrificial ritual of the rabbinic tradition, as set out in Pesachim 65a–70a, which describes the preparation of the Passover lamb in memory of the Exodus.

7ἐκκαθάρατε τὴν παλαιὰν ζύμην, ἵνα ἦτε νέον φύραμα, καθώς ἐστε ἄζυμοι. καὶ γὰρ τὸ πάσχα ἡμῶν ἐτύθη Χριστός·

7Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:²

In the teaching of the rabbis this sacrifice is symbolic and a matter of ritual law only. Paul took it and turned it into the basis of a theology of redemption through blood, and so departed from the true teaching of ʿĪsā ibn Maryam (ʿalayhi al-salām), who never taught that he was a saving sacrifice.

The chief element of Paul’s doctrine of redemption is therefore nothing original. It already existed in the religious frame of the rabbis before he appeared.

Paul’s adaptations from rabbinic tradition go beyond stories of individuals and legal interpretation. There are deeper theological and mystical elements which, on examination, show that the frame of Paul’s “revelation” experience itself is rooted in speculation among the rabbis, and not in the genuine revelation he claimed.

The third heaven

One of the most striking examples is Paul’s confession in 2 Corinthians that he was “caught up to the third heaven” and heard “unspeakable words.”³

2οἶδα ἄνθρωπον ἐν Χριστῷ πρὸ ἐτῶν δεκατεσσάρων— εἴτε ἐν σώματι οὐκ οἶδα, εἴτε ἐκτὸς τοῦ σώματος οὐκ οἶδα, ὁ θεὸς οἶδεν— ἁρπαγέντα τὸν τοιοῦτον ἕως τρίτου οὐρανοῦ. 3καὶ οἶδα τὸν τοιοῦτον ἄνθρωπον— εἴτε ἐν σώματι εἴτε χωρὶς τοῦ σώματος οὐκ οἶδα, ὁ θεὸς οἶδεν— 4ὅτι ἡρπάγη εἰς τὸν παράδεισον καὶ ἤκουσεν ἄρρητα ῥήματα ἃ οὐκ ἐξὸν ἀνθρώπῳ λαλῆσαι.

2I knew a man in Christ above fourteen years ago, (whether in the body, I cannot tell; or whether out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) such an one caught up to the third heaven. 3And I knew such a man, (whether in the body, or out of the body, I cannot tell: God knoweth;) 4How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.⁴

The experience parallels descriptions in Jewish mystical literature such as the Hekhalot Rabbati and the teaching of the rabbis on the structure of the heavens. In the Babylonian Talmud, Ḥagigah 12b, seven heavens are described:

שבעה רקיעים הן… וערבות שבו צדיקים וקדושים… ומזיקים גהינם

Shivʿah reqiʿim hen … ve-ʿAravot she-bo tzaddikim ve-qedoshim … u-mazziqin Gehinnam.

There are seven heavens … and Aravot, in which are the righteous and the holy … and also the torments of Gehinnom.

Paul’s use of the phrase “the third heaven” reflects direct influence from the cosmology of rabbinic tradition, and none from prophetic teaching. If the experience was revelation, why do its form and frame resemble the picture in esoteric teaching?

Eye hath not seen

A second example is in 1 Corinthians, where Paul writes:

9ἀλλὰ καθὼς γέγραπται· Ἃ ὀφθαλμὸς οὐκ εἶδεν καὶ οὖς οὐκ ἤκουσεν καὶ ἐπὶ καρδίαν ἀνθρώπου οὐκ ἀνέβη, ὅσα ἡτοίμασεν ὁ θεὸς τοῖς ἀγαπῶσιν αὐτόν.

9But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.⁵

The verse exists in neither the Torah nor any book of the prophets. Its ipsissima verba are rabbinic, an expression in Midrash Tehillim (on Psalm 31):

עין לא ראתה אלהים זולתך

ʿAyin lo raʾatah Elohim zulatekha.

Eye has not seen a God besides You.

The expression is a spiritual poem in the rabbinic tradition. Paul raised it and adapted it as part of his doctrine of salvation. It proves that Paul’s ability to turn the poetry and reflection of Jewish tradition into “scripture” in his own version of the gospel is creative adaptation, and no revelation.

Revelation, or plagiarism?

From the examples given, it is plain that Paul drew much of his inspiration from the Talmud and the writings of the Jewish rabbis. How can we accept that Paul was a messenger from ʿĪsā ibn Maryam when he only plagiarized ideas that had existed long before he appeared? The act blackens the purity of the divine message, and it raises serious questions about the honesty and personal background of the individual who claimed to have received that revelation.

Paul’s teaching plainly holds many elements that are nothing original. That challenges his claim to apostleship, and it raises serious questions about the integrity and real source of his teaching. If the claim of revelation can be refuted and the content of the teaching turns out to be adaptation, then Paul was a re-arranger of religious narrative for personal and ideological ends.

The question worth raising is this: did Paul receive revelation from heaven, or did he plagiarize an oral tradition and dress it as the word of God?

1. 1 Corinthians 5:7. ↩
2. 1 Corinthians 5:7 (SBLGNT; KJV). ↩
3. cf. 2 Corinthians 12:2–4. ↩
4. 2 Corinthians 12:2–4 (SBLGNT; KJV). ↩
5. 1 Corinthians 2:9 (SBLGNT; KJV). ↩