aa5874

The character called "Paul" in the NT was an IMPOSTOR.

When one examines the ABUNDANCE of evidence from antiquity it becomes clear that "Paul" in the NT cannot be properly corroborated externally and even internally there are major problems.

The very first problem with "Paul" is that he claimed to have written letters to Churches asserting that Jesus Christ was crucified and RAISED from the dead on the THIRD day and that he was preaching that Jesus was crucified and RAISED from the dead SINCE the time of King Aretas or from about 37-40 CE. See 2 Cor.11.32-33.

And further, "Paul" claimed he stayed with the apostles Peter in Jerusalem for 15 days and met the Lord's brother, the apostle James. See Galatians 1.18-19

But, Jesus Christ and the apostles in the NT are NOT known to have existed. They all appear to be FICTITIOUS characters and have NO known historical records of their existence in the 1st century.

Now, "Paul" compounded his own problems when he claimed he RECEIVED revelations from the RESURRECTED Jesus since even if Jesus did exist and had died the dead Jesus could NOT have revealed any historical data to "Paul".

It appears "Paul" INVENTED his OWN gospel or doctrine and then falsely claimed he received the doctrine from a non-historical resurrected Jesus Christ.

We have the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius and there is NO documented evidence that there was a Jewish MESSIAH called Jesus by the Jews up to the Jewish War c70 CE.

Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius all claimed that Jews used their Scriptures to PREDICT that Messianic rulers were EXPECTED at around c70 CE.

Based on Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius it can be deduced that the Jesus Christ story was INVENTED after the Fall of the Jewish Temple, after c 70 CE.

Any mention of a character called Jesus Christ with apostles are AFTER the Fall of the Temple c 70 CE.

"Paul" mentioned Jesus Christ OVER 150 times and that he had apostles and that he PREACHED Jesus Christ CRUCIFIED and was RAISED from the dead on the THIRD day since the time of King Aretas or since 37-40 CE.

"Paul" is an IMPOSTOR. He is NOT who he claims to be and did NOT preach the Faith BEFORE the Fall of the Jewish Temple.

We have the writings of Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius.

Wars of the Jews 6.5.4Tacitus' Histories 5Suetonius' "Life of Vespasian" The records will show that "Paul" in the NT was an IMPOSTOR. He is NOT who he claims to be. "Paul" in the NT could NOT have met fictitious characters, apostles of Jesus, in Jerusalem.

The Jews did NOT even expect a Messiah during the time of Pilate.

It had ALREADY been ESTABLISHED all OVER the ORIENT that the Messiah would come sometime around c 70 CE.

Kent F

You yourself say that the historical Jesus is a fallacy, and yet you can't for one moment consider that Paul's Jesus was NOT historical but spiritual? IF you do, most of what you write in this thread and others comes tumbling down.(see also my reply in your thread The Pauline Epistles Are After gMark).

If you haven't read Earl Doherty's book Jesus: Neither God Nor Man, I recommend that you do.

None of the apostles mentioned in the Pauline epistles can be verified as actual historical persons, true, but the same goes for most of the names in the entire Bible. Was there a Cephas, a James and a John in Jerusalem? Who knows? It could have been. But the main point is, again, that Paul's Jesus was a heavenly figure not once setting foot on earth.

A question: does Paul in his epistles spell out the name Jesus Christ or Christ or does he always use the nomina sacra? If the latter, which I recall having read on this forum that this is indeed the case, there's no proof whatsoever that Paul considered his Jesus to be the Messiah.

aa5874

Spirits do NOT exist. "Paul's" Jesus was NEITHER historical nor Spiritual.

"Paul's" Jesus was a LIE.

Right now, I am dealing WITH evidence from antiquity. When a case is reviewed it is the EVIDENCE, not opinion, that is examined.

Who knows? God knows!! But Gods and heavenly figures have NO evidence of existence.

2Co 12:2-3 Please, tell me what is a heavenly figure?

Please tell me how a non-historical figure could have spoken to "Paul".

"Paul" got his gospel, his doctrine, from MAN. He got it from HIMSELF.HE invented his doctrine and FALSELY claimed he got it from a NON-EXISTING resurrected creature

"Paul" was an IMPOSTOR. He was NOT who he claimed to be.

Kent F

OK, I understand what you are getting at. YOU don't believe that Paul's Jesus was historical or spiritual because YOU simply don't believe in such things. Neither do I. But Paul did! HE believed in a spiritual Jesus, just as he believed in God. Paul's Jesus was his inspiration.

Earl Doherty does not offer mere opinions. He goes through many sources from antiquity. He provides lots of EVIDENCE that Paul believed in a spiritual Jesus. Read it, challenge yourself!

That's beside the point. This is not about what you or I believe. During the 1st century and lots of centuries after that, I reckon almost 100% believed in God or gods. Had we been born in the 1st century, we too would have been believers.

This was Paul's vision. He was brought up to the third heaven and heard unspeakable words which became his gospel of no man. HE heard his Jesus, in a dream or in his fantasy. He got an IDEA about Jesus, and believed this to be a vision, a revelation from above. I don't find that hard to understand at all.

Yes, he got it from himself but HE didn't understand it that way. HE believed his gospel was inspired from heaven. There are thousands upon thousands of people who claimed to have been inspired by God. In your eyes, they are all impostors, because such spiritual figures can't exist but with such an approach you will never understand how religion was and is possible.

Every man or woman who speaks about Jesus is an impostor, you say. Since I'm an atheist, I can agree with you there, but where will that get me if I'm interested in the roots of christianity? It simply won't explain anything. I have to try to understand how people at that time thought to be able to learn something about how christianity started and evolved.

aa5874

What "Paul" believed do not prevent him from being an Impostor.

Steve Weiss

If everything in the bible comes down to beliefs and not facts, what is the point of taking it seriously and not just classifying the book as fiction? Is there any more credibility for the bible than any other work of fiction, or even less so because the bible is being passed off as "gospel truth" and is thus deceitful at a minimum? Other works of fiction must have some believability, some credibility to allow one to suspend disbelief and to enjoy the story, but with the bible miracle is heaped upon miracle destroying any empathy for the characters or vicarious identification with the plot. The bible is something that could be great for producing special effects escapism in Hollywood, but nothing more than that. Critical reviewers of the bible story would certainly pan worldwide floods, virgins births and resurrections. They would also be unhappy with the fact that the authors of the book cannot be identified and operate under noms des plumes.

aa5874

In the Pauline writings a writer called "Paul" claimed he was commissioned to preach to the Gentiles and that an apostle Peter was commissioned to preach to the Jews.


Galatians 2 But, in gMatthew, Jesus COMMISSIONED the apostles to PREACH to ALL NATIONS.

Mt 28:19 - Based on gMatthew, the apostles were to PREACH to ALL NATIONS and NOT just to the circumcision.

Justin Martyr will SHOW that it was claimed even up to the middle of the 2nd century that it was the 12 illiterate disciples that PREACH the Gospels to every RACE of Man.

"First Apology" 39 "Paul" was an Impostor.

"Paul" started to PREACH the FAITH AFTER the writings of Justin Martyr.