Torrey Seland, «Saul of Tarsus and Early Zealotism. Reading Gal 1,13-14 in Light of Philo’s Writings», Vol. 83 (2002) 449-471
One of the most consistent features in the portraits of Saul of Tarsus in the Acts of the Apostles and in the letters accredited to Paul, is the fervent zeal of his youth. The zeal of the young Saul has been dealt with in several studies, drawing on the issue of zealotry in Palestine, but the conclusions reached are rather diverse. The present study suggests that the often overlooked phenomenon of zealotry in the writings of Philo of Alexandria should also be considered. The material from Philo does not support the view that the early zealots formed any consistent movement or party, but that they were vigilant individuals who took the Law in their own hands when observing cases of gross Torah transgressions.
5. Some preliminary conclusions
The three paradigms outlined above concerning the zealots remain, and so do their influence on studies of the zeal of Paul. The theory of Hengel has, however, lost some of its impact as a general paradigm for understanding the zeal in vogue in the decades between Judas the Galilean and the Great War. Horsley’s emphases on sociological theories and models have made the variety of the many groups of this period come into clearer focus. His neglect of the importance of the zeal for God/the Torah, however, seems to be overdue skeptical. The texts about the role of such zeal are too many to be overlooked. Furthermore, the view of Smith and Morin still deserves further consideration. Hence the issue of the nature of the zealots of the pre-war times remains. And so does the question of the zeal of the pre-Christian Paul. In the following we will investigate how the issue of zeal in the works of Philo can offer new light on the nature of the zeal of the young persecutor Saul of Tarsus.
II. Fresh Light on Gal 1,13-14
from the Works of Philo of Alexandria
There is not much scholarly literature to be found dealing with zeal and zealotry in the works of Philo. But the term zh=loj and/or its derived forms are used several times in both Philo’s Exposition and in his allegorical works32. A. Stumpf asserts that "Philo uses zh=loj exclusively in connection with praiseworthy qualities, in the sense of ‘striving after things.’ He thus belongs to the sphere of Gk. ethics"33. M. Hengel states, however, that
zhlwth/j
is used predominately in Greek literature in the pedagogical and moral sense. Hellenized Jewish authors are no exception to this general rule. The affective emphasis is no less in the employment of the concept. As we shall see later . . . this emphasis is the distinctive characteristic of the specifically Jewish use of the term. There is no