PhilosopherJay

Paul's scam Church,

I just wrote a post entitled Did the Apostle Paul Persecute or Embezzle Money From the Church of God?

Essentially, I suggest that Paul was a confidence man who was kicked out of the Church of God as a young man for embezzlement. He got a revelation from God that he could make more money on his own preaching the gospel. After a sojourn to Damascus, he ended up in Syria and Cilicia starting his own franchise Church with his own Gospel.

The story in Acts rewrites the narrative to make Paul into Saul a fierce Jewish persecutor of the poor Church of God. This is done largely through the mistranslation of two words ἐδιώκον and ἐπόρθουν. Ediokon is usually translated as "persecuted" when I think it should be translated in the epistles as "persued" and Eporthoun is usually translated as "destroyed" when it should be translated as "Plundered" or "ravished".

Thus Galatians 1:13, while generally translated as:

13. For you have heard of my former manner of life in Judaism, how I used to persecute the church of God beyond measure and tried to destroy it;

should be translated as:

13. For you have heard of my former manner of life in Judaism, how I use to pursue the church of God beyond measure and tried to plunder it.

I'm wandering who else has come up with this analysis before and what in the epistles proves it wrong.

Warmly,

Jay Raskin

aa5874

It is totally not necessary to invent and alter the NT to just to make claims about "Paul".

"Paul" just LIED for the Glory of God.

"Paul" claimed he SAW the resurrected Jesus and that without the resurrection the Christian Faith is vain and that there would be no remission of Sin. See 1 Cor.15

Diogenes the Cynic

It didn't have to be a lie. Paul could have had genuinely psychotic episodes.

JonA

Yup. No need to claim he 'lied' about his revelation.

Also, how would Luke have been subject to the pitfalls of a 'mistranslation' if he were writing his novel in Greek working from the Greek letters of Paul?

Jon

PhilosopherJay

Hi JonA,

Good point. Misinterpretation is more correct.

Vorkosigan

This is just the familiar lie of the crowing fundie who claims that he was a full blown atheist before converting to the light of Jesus. It is followed by other markers of this claim:

I am more awesome than others! ("But when (God), who from my mother's womb had set me apart and called me through his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son to me, so that I might proclaim him to the Gentiles")

Who? Me? Lie? (As to what I am writing to you, behold, before God, I am not lying.)

BTW How then do you handle 1:23
"""they only kept hearing that "the one who once was persecuting us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy."""

aa5874

Well, it didn't have to be psychotic episodes. Paul could have been really lying.

But, in any event, whether he had psychotic episodes or was lying it can be deduced that the Pauline writings do contain inaccurate statements about Jesus.

If Jesus never did exist as human then Paul could NOT have seen Jesus and Paul did state he was NOT the apostle of a man but of Jesus, God's own son, who was raised from the dead.

The author of Acts claimed Paul only HEARD a voice but Paul claimed he SAW the resurrected Jesus.


Acts 9:4 Acts 22:7 - Acts 26:14 - And now Paul in the Epistle.

1Cor 15:8 - Why did Paul claim he SAW Jesus? Why did Paul claim to be a WITNESS of the resurrected Jesus?

1 Cor.15 The dead rise not.

Paul was a false witness for the glory of God.

Diogenes the Cynic

I think Paul probably thought he he really saw Jesus. I also think he was a hustler in many ways, often parsimonious with the truth, and capable of being deceptive (he was especially self-serving and facile with his interpretations of the Hebrew Bible), but I don't think he was in it for the money. I don't think there was that much money in it. When I read his letters, I see a sincere zealot, though, not a cynical con artist.

I certainly have never seen any reason to believe that he was ever an embezzler from the Jerusalem church, or even a member of it before his claimed conversion.

PhilosopherJay

Hi Vorkosigan,

1:23 uses the exact same words so it would get the exact same treatment:

they only kept hearing that "the one who once was persecuting pursuing us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy plunder. 24And they were glorifying God because of me.

My thinking is that someone from the Church of God told the Galatians that Paul once tried to join them (pursued them to join) and they wouldn't let him in because he was just trying to steal their money (plunder). Paul here repeats the charge in a mocking fashion, adding that they were now "giving thanks to God" that he was preaching the gospel for them.

jgoodguy

The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity (or via: amazon.co.uk) discusses this idea in detail.

Paul did not have to embezzle as such, he could simple collect funds for the 'Church in Jerusalem' and not delver it. That is much like tent preachers of my youth always collecting for foreign missions and somehow the money never got there.