Torah Apologetics
  • Home
  • About
  • Videos
  • Articles
    • Apologetics & Daily Life
    • History & Culture
    • Language & Word Studies
  • Resources
    • Logos 9 Review
    • Logos 10 Review
  • Contact
  • Donate
  • Home
  • About
  • Videos
  • Articles
    • Apologetics & Daily Life
    • History & Culture
    • Language & Word Studies
  • Resources
    • Logos 9 Review
    • Logos 10 Review
  • Contact
  • Donate

Was Paul a Tallit-Maker?

3/3/2016

18 Comments

 
Many times over the last 15 years, I have heard the assertion that the Apostle Paul (Rav. Sha'ul) was not a tent-maker, as most Bibles render it. Rather, he was a tallit-maker. This assertion is even popularized in some Hebrew Roots Bible versions and HR-flavored commentaries. Indeed, so common is the acceptance of this belief, that few even question it. But one should be compelled to ask…why? Why does one need Paul to be a tallit-maker? Does it render him somehow more Jewish? Does it, in some way, make him any more of an Apostle? What do we gain by claiming this understanding? I'll let those questions hang there for a moment, while addressing the issue at hand.
Picture
In addition to the above stated belief that many assert that Paul was a tallit-maker, the following verses are often quoted in support of this:

7 Now Moses used to take the tent and pitch it outside the camp, a good distance from the camp, and he called it the tent of meeting. And everyone who sought the Lord would go out to the tent of meeting which was outside the camp. 8 And it came about, whenever Moses went out to the tent, that all the people would arise and stand, each at the entrance of his tent, and gaze after Moses until he entered the tent. 9 Whenever Moses entered the tent, the pillar of cloud would descend and stand at the entrance of the tent; and the Lord would speak with Moses. 10 When all the people saw the pillar of cloud standing at the entrance of the tent, all the people would arise and worship, each at the entrance of his tent. – Ex. 33:7-10 (NASB95)

So, they say, that when each man was "at the doorway of his tent" (in the NASB95 above, rendered as "entrance") it actually means, "wearing his tallit." They say that since Jews claim the tallit is a tent or doorway, that it means every man stood nearby, with his tallit on. Further, some sites, such as ngabo.org*, claim:

The word Tallit in Hebrew means a small tent, a Tabernacle or a dwelling place in the presence of God, which also was given a name as a prayer shawl in English. The scripture in Acts 18:3; talks about Apostle Paul being a tent maker, which simply meant that he was making tallits (prayer shawls).

[* Note: in 2016 this site was active. As of 1/7/2022 however, it is not.]

So there is the background. Now let's work on definitions.

First, what is a tallit? What is the purpose of it? The purpose of a tallit is merely to be a "four-cornered garment" that holds tsitsiyot (tassels/fringes). That is all. There is no Biblical command to wear a tallit, only to wear tsitsiyot (Numbers 15). The tallit, however, was invented as a way to hold the tsitsiyot and thus fulfill the command of the fringes.

Next, what word is used when it calls Paul a tent-maker? This is the Greek word σκηνοποιός (skeno-poios). This word appears only one time, and that is in Acts 18:3. The word is a noun, composed of two other Greek words. These are the noun σκηνή (skene), meaning "tabernacle, booth, tent, dwelling;" and the verb ποιέω (poieoh), meaning "to make, do, manufacture." Indeed, in the Greek Septuagint, the word translated as "tent" in Ex. 33:8 is, yet again, skene.

So this word, skenopoios, means "a maker of skene." As far as I can tell, prior to the rise of the Messianic movement in the mid-80s, no one ever doubted that skene meant "tent." However, due to a desire to see the Jewishness in the New Testament, many have begun to look further into things. At this juncture, I believe it is necessary to state that there is not a single lexicon or dictionary out there that I can find which lists "tallit" as a possible definition for the Greek skene. (And I have dozens)

Also, the claim above regarding tallit meaning "little tent" is also, as best as I can tell, false. For starters, tallit is an Aramaic word, not a Hebrew word. It is derived from the word טלל (talal), which means "to shade, to cover." Further, there is no support for believing Ex. 33 refers to each man being under his tallit. This is further evidenced by the fact that the prayer shawl (tallit) of today did not exists in Paul's day. They wore outer garments, yes, and those garments bore their tsitsiyot. But the tallit as a prayer shawl that one wears like a tent "began to take on the form known today beginning around 1,000 CE." [1] This is nearly a millennia after the death of Paul and the other Apostles. Now to be fair, Lupia also notes that a type of tallit began to take shape towards the end of the first century CE. This started as merely a standardized garment to hold the tsitsiyot, as mentioned earlier (similar to the Bedoiun abayya). Over time, it became the "prayer shawl" that it is known as today, around 1,000 CE.

But let's go further. Let's look at the logic presented here. Not only was Paul a skene-maker, but so were Priscilla and Aquilla. This means that this was an actual trade or business. This was a way to make a living. These three individuals were all Jews and all frequented the areas of the Diaspora, especially Priscilla and Aquila. This means that whatever they were selling, they could make a living. This is not the case with selling talitot to Jews, especially those in the Diaspora, who were far more Hellenistic than those in Jerusalem. Further, since the custom of the tallit was not yet a requirement, there is no reason to assume that every observant Jew would have needed one.

Further still, let's look at how some of the early translations of the Greek texts render this word, "tent-maker" to find out how the various people understood it.

The Latin Vulgate, in Acts 18:3, reads: et quia eiusdem erat artis manebat apud eos et operabatur erat autem scenofactoriae artis.

Translated, this is: And because he was of the same trade, he remained with them and wrought. (Now they were tentmakers by trade.)

Note that in the Latin text, the word second from the end (scenofactoriae), basically says, "sceno factory." Sound familiar? That is because the Latin borrowed the word skene from Greek, and the word factoriae means "to manufacture." So this doesn't offer much help. Clearly, though, the translation given is still "tent-maker." The early Latin translators seemed to have known it to be a tent.

The Syriac Aramaic Peshitta, in Acts 18:3, reads: ומֵטֻל דּבַר אוּמָנוּתהוּן הוָא שׁרָא לֵה לוָתהוּן ופָלַח הוָא עַמהוּן בֻּאומָנוּתהוּן דֵּין לָולָרֵא הוַו

This translates to: (and) because he was a son of their art, he dwelt with them and wrought with them: but in their art they were tentmakers.

However, the Peshitta translation by George Lamsa makes one interesting clarification: And because he was of the same trade, he stayed with them and worked with them: for they were saddle makers by trade.

Saddle-makers? How did they end up with that? Well, simply put, Lamsa was looking for a more literal translation of the Syriac word used. In this case, it is לָולָרֵא (lawlarei), which is defined by the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon as, "a maker of rough cloth." Where do they derive this definition? The J. Payne Smith Compendious Syriac Dictionary reads, "a maker of rough cloth for tents, or horsecloths." We find perhaps more information in William Jennings' Lexicon to the Syriac New Testament, which reads, "Latinism […], perhaps corrupt from aulaerii, or from lorarii. A saddle- or harness-maker does not make curtains or tent-cloth. Latin lorum with sense saddle, housing, trappings."

Jennings seemed convinced that it derived from a Latin source. It should be noted that each of these Latin words, all related to lorum, relate to "straps, thongs, flogs." This was, in that time, a reference only to leather products. Still, however, we find no reference to saddles or any creature that needed one. Indeed, the difficulty being that this word is nowhere used anywhere else in ancient Syriac literature. In fact, even the Greek and Latin terms are not used anywhere else, outside the NT. However, by comparing the ancient understandings, along with logic and the culture of the time, we can get a clearer picture of what really was happening.

(It may also be of note that in his Hebrew New Testament, Franz Delitzsch rendered the word as a form of ohel, meaning "tent.")

As noted earlier, Tallit is already an Aramaic word. If Paul was making Tallitot, why would the Peshitta, being Syriac and therefore of Aramaic derivationt, at the very least not read, "tallit maker"? Rather, it furthers the idea that Paul was one who worked with harsher fabrics (possibly even leather), which has never been a material for tallit-making.

So piecing the information together I find it much more logical (and believable) that Paul was indeed a maker of tents. Picture a Native American tee-pee, or a Bedouin tent. These were common in the Ancient Near East. The tallit is a later invention of Judaism, that did not exist two thousand years ago as it does today, and it certainly did not exist in the time of Moses. We must remember that wishful thinking and eisegesis (reading our own opinions into the Bible) do not render good exposition. And such vitriolic support of unfounded claims only serves to damage the reputation of Messianic scholarship.

​I pray this study has blessed you.

Be Berean. Shalom.
 
[1] Lupia, John N. The Ancient Jewish Shroud At Turin. Regina Caeli Press. 2010.

​Updated 1/7/2022
18 Comments
klaudiabae
7/7/2016 09:34:34 pm

Thank you so much!

Reply
J. A. Brown link
7/8/2016 09:15:59 am

Thank YOU for taking the time to read through it. Feel free to share.

Shalom.

Reply
Jason Thompson
9/28/2020 09:18:17 pm

Bro J.A. Brown I live in Jasper, AL. I such a desire to follow Torah. The scales are off my eyes and I was wondering if you could help me on my journey? I want to follow Gods laws and festivals and need direction please. My family thinks I’m crazy but I know this is the will of God is to follow His commandments!!!!

Glenn Reed
9/1/2017 09:32:26 am

Thanks for this insight and clarification.

Reply
Linda R Lamb link
2/7/2020 07:21:10 pm

this was a very interesting read ! I also believe Priscilla wrote the book of Hebrews anciate feedback on thisd if asked in those days, Paul would have graciously given the words of the Book of Hebrews to her. Would appreciate feedback on this

Reply
Daniel Trujillo link
1/6/2021 04:22:58 pm

I believe your spot on I can't see why the Apostle would be making prayer shawls I know in Corinthians he talks about the women covering their head for prayer but he said the men shouldn't cover their heads God bless you

Reply
Shoni
11/18/2016 10:00:25 pm

Well, all I can say, is that when I wear a my prayer shawl, I sense God's presence in a greater measure, and because of this I believe it is special to God.
Presence permiates cloth. Perhaps this is why many were healed as Paul passed by them. Having on his tallit, after spending countless hours in prayer God's presence would remain in the fibres of his garments - thus God's healing power to touch those he passed etc.

Reply
Jonathan A Brown
12/1/2016 05:10:01 pm

Shoni,

None of this negates the personal significance of a Tallit. It is simply to clarify that the Tallit did not exist in Paul's day, and indeed, was not the career Paul practiced.

As to your statement about Paul wearing one, I must disagree since, as mentioned, there is no indication that the Tallit existed for another few hundred years after Paul. It may be significant to his tsitsiyot, as with Yeshua's, but the Tallit was not yet an official and formal garment.

Shalom b'Mashiach

Reply
Gavriel ben David link
1/25/2017 11:09:00 pm

Your article has no grounds for truth since in Matthew 9:20 a wwoman with an issue of blood touched the hem of Yeshu's garment. I guess tizzit did not exist then either. What was his tzizit attached to?

You also make a claim that the oral torah Mishnah did not exist until 300 A.D. Well that is incorrect also. Dan Bahat Former District Archaeologist of Jerusalem and current professor at Bar-Llan University and St. Michael's College at University of Toronto, Dr. Dan Bahat talks about his renowned archaeological career.Dan has discovered a copy of the Mishnah Sanhedrin from 200 B.C

Some of the most anti -Jewish people are Jews, just ask Isaiah the prophet. Jews would be are greatest enemies.

J. A. Brown link
1/26/2017 10:47:29 am

Gavriel,

To address your initial claim, I will first state that you make a bold statement. You say there is no ground for truth in the article, yet when I provided support and sources for the point I made, you provided nothing. Simply claiming it is incorrect does not change the facts, even though you are biased towards the belief this article addresses. Your comment is fueled by emotion and bias, and lacks logic.

Now, to the point. I never once said tsitsiyot did not exist at the time. Rather, had you taken the time to actually read through the article, you would find that I specifically stated the opposite. A quote from above: "They wore outer garments, yes, and those garments bore their tsitsiyot. But the tallit as a prayer shawl that one wears like a tent 'began to take on the form known today beginning around 1,000 CE.'" Please read through the article in its entirety before making comments that prove you didn't take the time to consider the information presented.

Next, Matthew 9:20. It does not say she grabbed His shawl, or His tallit, or anything of that sort. It says she grabbed His κρασπεδον in Greek. Kraspedon specifically means tassel, or fringe. It is a word used EXCLUSIVELY for tsitsit. This is proof Yeshua wore tsitsiyot; it is not proof, in any way, the He wore a tallit. Please be consistent.

You pose the simple question, and I suppose it is a fair one: to what were tsitsiyot attached at the time? This was also answered in the article, though I'll state it again here. Tsitsiyot consisted of blue cords that were tied into the dangling strings of woven garments. At the time, garments were made on a loom (that's why we have references in the Torah to the warp and woof in places like Lev. 13:58). Since garments were woven on a loom, they ended up having all the threads dangling at the bottom. Now today, and even in many old societies, these strands would be sewn into the garment at the hem. However, back then, it was common to simply tie the strands together, forming tassels that would keep the garment from unraveling. The command for tsitsiyot is to attach a blue cord to the tassels on the four corners.

So to what were tsitsiyot attached back then? To the garments themselves; every garment. The tallit became a mechanism later for attaching tsitsiyot in a more convenient way than having to put them on any garment you may wear out for the day.

As for the Mishnah, I believe you may be referring to a different article, as I didn't state that here in this writing. Nevertheless, it is a fact that the Mishnah was not written until the late 2nd cent. CE. I have never made the claim that parts of it did not, or could not have existed prior to this, but the simple fact is that Judah HaNasi compiled the Mishnah himself, and he died in the early 3rd Century CE. For your claim about Dr. Bahat's findings on the matter, I cannot really comment, as I've never heard him make that claim, and you provided no source for the information. Even so, it could indeed be possible that parts of Tractate Sanhedrin existed that early, since it was one of the oldest and most important tractates. Though as I said, I have seen no evidence or proof of this at all.

As for your last comment, I can only hope you're not attempting to infer that my comments are "anti-Jewish." No doubt some Jews are anti-Jewish, just as some Italians are anti-Italian. None of this negates the evidence shown above, giving proof that Paul did not make tallits; rather, he made tents.

For future reference, I would appreciate it if you would attempt to engage in mutual discourse, and actually take the time to read the articles thoroughly before commenting.

Shalom b'Mashiach,

J. A. Brown

Mark Dean
10/14/2017 03:10:20 pm

Absolutely stellar article! I am blessed to teach high-schoolers the Hebrew Roots of Western Christianity! You really did you do your homework, your premises are true therefore rendering your conclusion airtight! Good job! As to the response to Mr. BenDavid, well done. You went on the defense in an inoffensive way. Great use of logic, critical thinking and debate! Very well answered in a very Messiah-like way! Thank you for this article. I am looking forward to many more from you! Gratefully grafted in,
Mark

Reply
Jessica Lee
7/18/2019 12:22:29 pm

I have the question of how would Shaun have carried all those supplies around with him? If this was his trade and he traveled so much how could he drag all the tools and animal skins and such everywhere he went?

Reply
Dr. Al Huba
11/5/2019 09:04:06 am

How, as a tent maker, could Paul carry all the animal skins and tools around with him? Much the same way that a roofer does not carry shingles with him.Tools are minimal and shingles or cloth is purchased locally.

Reply
louis arias
3/4/2020 08:32:48 am

Paul was Jewish and probably as good with the Tanakh as he was in business. He only had to carry around his work instruments, needed, scissors, and American Express so he could buy the skins locally and wouldn't have to shlep them all over. Shalom

Louis Arias
3/4/2020 08:28:05 am

Thank you, dear.brother, for this well researched article. It has blessed me and, I pray, it has blessed the one who hung for us, in our place, on a tree. The enemy uses distraction to get us off the path that blesses Yeshua, and then us, by focusing on nonsense. Self (Pride) is one its (not his but its) favorite tactics. Hermeneutics, research and word study have their place but so does evangelism, intercession and charity. Paul, Aquila, Priscilla were not hirelings but individuals that took the Word of God from the worldly to the eternal. Thanks for your article. Baruch haba b'ahem adonai

Reply
Robin link
9/1/2020 07:23:07 pm

Yes, I thank you too. I was taught by vendyl Jones, Torah scholar and archaeologist, that Paul made prayer shawls. I'm glad to learn that he actually was a tentmaker..

Reply
Anon
4/12/2020 12:06:50 pm

Switch to Print View - 6 posts
monkeyweather
8,223
Member
Mar 17, 2006#1
I just found out from a rabbi, well versed in Hebrew and the culture of Paul's day and the rules the Pharisees were bound by, that though Paul was described as a tent-maker, what he made were called "little tents". That was the nickname given to tallit. Prayer shawls. It was the only thing that Pharisees were ALLOWED to make.

I had always pictured Paul making big ole tents



Here is what a tallit looks like:







And here is what the tallit means - everything on it has a meaning. Jesus would have worn one

This is a very good article on why these are worn, what htey mean, and what is told of these garments in scripture, from the Jews for Jesus website:



The Origin and Significance of the Tallit and Tzitzit



Originally the tallit was a four-cornered outer garment to which were attached the fringes, or tzitzit. Though the wearing of the tallit has its basis in Old Testament Scripture, the word itself is not found in the Bible. The tzitzit (tassels), however, are:



Again the LORD spoke to Moses saying, "Speak to the children of Israel: Tell them to make tassels on the corners of their garments throughout their generations, and to put a blue thread in the tassels of the corners.



"And you shall have the tassel, that you may look upon it and remember all the commandments of the LORD and do them…and be holy for your God" Numbers 15:37-40



You shall make tassels on the four corners of the clothing with which you cover yourself Deuteronomy 22:12



The real significance of the tallit is not in the garment itself, but in the fringes. In modern terms, it might be likened to a sweatshirt or stadium jacket, where the importance lies not in the actual piece of clothing, but in the slogan or school emblem it carries.



Like many objects of Old Testament times, fringed garments were also found in non-Hebrew cultures such as Egyptian, Mesopotamian and Midianite. The fringes of the other nations probably were worn as decorations or amulets to keep away evil spirits. But, as with many other Old Testament laws, God took the already known and gave it a new significance for Israel. The tassels or fringes were to remind Israel of His commandments.



Along with the primary purpose of the tzitzit based on the Pentateuch, we find another, later meaning. In ancient times, tassels were part of the hem of a garment, and the hem symbolized the wearer's authority. When David spared Saul's life in the cave at En Gedi, he cut off the comer of Saul's robe, symbolically demonstrating that the king's authority would be cut off. This is seen in Saul's response:



And now I know indeed that you shall surely be king, and that the kingdom of Israel shall be established in your hand 1 Samuel 24:20).



Tassels added to the hem were not worn by commoners, but by the nobility or royalty.1 The second significance of the tzitzit, then, is that they showed the wearer to be more than a commoner. He was a noble, or a royal personage.



Not just the presence of the tzitzit but their colors also carried meaning. The color was white, but among the white cords on each tassel there was to be one blue strand. This color combination was part of the trappings of royalty, as were the colors blue and purple:



…Who were clothed in purple, captains and rulers, all of them desirable young men…of Assyria… Ezekiel 23:6-7



There were white and blue linen curtains fastened with cords of fine linen and purple on silver rods and marble pillars; and…couches…of gold and silver on a mosaic pavement of alabaster, turquoise, and white and black marble Esther 1:6



Now Mordecai went out from the presence of the king in royal apparel of blue and white, with a great crown of gold and a garment of fine linen and purple… Esther 8:15a



Blue was also used in settings where God's kingship was proclaimed. Blue was to cover the ark (and other tabernacle objects) whenever they were moved, and blue was also used with the curtains of the tabernacle where God dwelt "enthroned" between the cherubim (1 Samuel 4:4; 2 Samuel 6:2; 2 Kings 19:15; 1 Chronicles 13:6; Psalm 80: 1; 99: 1; Isaiah 37:16).



Then they shall put on it a covering of badger skins, and spread over that a cloth entirely of blue; and they shall insert its poles Numbers 4:6



You shall make a veil woven of blue and purple and scarlet yarn, and fine linen thread. It shall be woven with an artistic design of cherubim Exodus 26:31



You shall make a screen for the door of the tabernacle, woven of blue and purple and scarlet yam, and fine linen thread, made by a weaver Exodus 26:36



The third significance of the tzitzit, therefore, was in their colors. They spoke of royalty and kingship. Even today we talk of "royal blue" and "royal purple" from the custom of Roman emperors who wore purple mantles.



If the color symbolized royalty, the fabric of the fringed garment stood for priestly holines

Reply
J. A. Brown link
9/29/2020 02:58:13 pm

It is generally preferable to enter a discussion on material, to have familiarized oneself with said material. Your pasted quotes make claims they cannot support, and ignore the evidence in what I presented.

Yeshua wore tsitsiyot, without a doubt. But He did not wear a tallit, as they did not yet exist.

Reply



Leave a Reply.

    Author

    J. A. Brown

    Archives

    July 2022
    May 2022
    June 2020
    March 2019
    July 2017
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016

    Categories

    All

    RSS Feed

Home

About

Articles

Resources

Contact

​Donate

Copyright © 2020 Torah Apologetics