Reddit mentions of Paul: A Very Short Introduction

> It need hardly be said that this must be what Paul had in mind when
he speaks of himself as a "zealot" and of his "zeal" manifested in persecution of the church (Gal. 1.13-14; Phil. 3.6). First, his zeal for the ancestral
traditions (Gal. 1.14) was the other side of the coin of his zeal as a persecutor
(Phil. 3.6). He would no doubt have understood his zeal as a reflection of
God's zeal, a necessary reflection if Israel was to maintain its set-apartness
to God. Second, it was certainly expressed in a physically violent way: even
though we cannot deduce that the Hellenist Christians whom he persecuted
were put to death, it must be significant that he can speak of persecuting the
church "in excessive measure" and of "trying to destroy it" (Gal. 1.13). And third, as we have already noted, his persecution seems to have been
directed principally (solely?) against fellow Hellenist Jews. In other words,
Paul the persecutor undoubtedly saw himself as a "zealot" in the tradition of
Phinehas and the Maccabees.

• The Theology of Paul the Apostle
  
  > Though the call to be an apostle had reversed the direction of his life, Paul in many ways remained the
  same. Paul the apostle shared many of the characteristics of Paul the Pharisee. One of the principal ones
  was that he was a zealot fully and totally committed to the course to which he felt called by God.
  
  
• Paul: A Very Short Introduction

I highly recommend Paul: A Very Short Introduction by E. P. Sanders, Luke Timothy Johnson on the New Testament, or Timothy Lim on the Dead Sea Scrolls. Richard Bauckham did the one on Jesus, but I have not read it.

I sense a common thread in some of these answers: The Revised Standard Version. The NRSV is a descendent of the RSV, while the NASB a reaction to perceived flaws of the RSV:
>The NASB is a revision of the American Standard Version of 1901. This translation was an alternative to the Revised Standard Version (1946–1952/1971), itself a revision of the ASV, but considered by many to be theologically liberal. Wikipedia

Do you guys have a favorite "dynamic equivalence" translation?

And do some scholars respect the RSV or ESV enough to use them? I'm reading EP Sanders' 2001 entry on Paul in the Very Short Introductions series, and he quotes the RSV because he believes it's the "best translation" (p.150) even though the NRSV had been out for over a decade.

The best academic intro in my opinion is EP Sanders' Paul: A Very Short Introduction. I'm Jewish and reading this in college helped me understand what the whole deal is with Paul. It's about Paul the person and writer, not about everything that later Christians said about Paul.

http://www.amazon.com/Paul-A-Very-Short-Introduction/dp/0192854518

Too much to type, but this super short, very well written book deals primarily with what the author calls "being righteoused through Christ."

> expanding my view and having my views challenged

Two books that come to mind -- which are accessible to a layperson like yourself -- that will help you better understand the historical context of early Christianity and how it spread:

[How Jesus Became God] (https://www.amazon.com/How-Jesus-Became-God-Exaltation/dp/0061778184) by Bart Ehrman

[Paul: A Very Short Introduction] (https://www.amazon.com/Paul-A-Very-Short-Introduction/dp/0192854518) by E.P. Sanders