Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Newton's Cat · 05-04-2008, 11:33 PM

My take on the NT is that Paul invented Jesus, that the writings of Paul and the Story of Jesus were separate, that Paul did NOT advocate that people should "follow Jesus". Paul wanted people to follow God.

There is a Roman play, a comedy, written by a late 2nd century non-Christian playwright, that describes a religious sect that, whilst its founder was alive, was altruistic and acceptable to the authorities - but when its founder died it was taken over by a single individual who altered the texts of the founder, wrote others of his own, and made himself wealthy.

So - the picture is that after the death of Paul someone else used Paul's creation, Jesus, as a weapon against the message of Paul's writings.

This person, for instance, expanded the Gospel of Mark, by interpolation and addition, to twice its original size.

All references to PETER in Mark are by this man.

Paul was an extraordinarily intelligent man.

Maybe this is him?

In 71 ad the Emperor Vespasian sent people to investigate a man who was "travelling through the Greek islands preaching that he was (from) God".

They reported back that he was "harmless".

Maybe that's how Paul got involved with the Romans?

Newton's Cat · 05-04-2008, 11:49 PM

Mark and Paul are the same person.

paarsurrey · 05-05-2008, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newton's Cat

My take on the NT is that Paul invented Jesus, that the writings of Paul and the Story of Jesus were separate, that Paul did NOT advocate that people should "follow Jesus". Paul wanted people to follow God.

Paul was an extraordinarily intelligent man.

Hi

Paul invented "the present Christianity" and used Jesus name as a cover. By then Jesus had migrated to India with Mary and others. Jesus historicity gets established not by the Western history but by the history of the lands he travelled through and by Quran. I agree with you that "Paul did NOT advocate that people should "follow Jesus". Paul wanted people to follow his own cunning theology invented at Rome.

Paul was only a cunning man.

Thanks

William · 05-05-2008, 04:14 PM

Newton's Cat. I say yes, but my interpretation is a bit different than yours.

I think Paul invented what would later contribute to our understanding of who Jesus was, but he didn't fabricate it out of thin air. He turned Jesus into a figure which he believed represented the "core" of Jesus's teachings, but there is strong evidence that PAUL'S view of Jesus is quite different than how Jesus viewed himself, and how early followers of Jesus viewed him...

I barely have an armchair understanding of the subject, but from what I've read, it appears that Jesus did not view HIMSELF as the messiah, or as equivalent to God, or as the leader of an apocalyptic cult. After Paul, Jewish sects adhering to Jesus's teachings increasingly began to view Jesus in this way, and eventually as a religion separate from Judaism altogether (clearly NOT something Jesus was trying to do).

This is why men like Thomas Jefferson hated Paul. They believed they were "true" christians and that most around them were actually following PAUL'S religion, not that of Jesus. Of course, for obvious reasons, this is all very controversial though and it's tough for many people to discuss this in the way that, say, we try to get to the heart of some Roman Emperor's biography. In one, people have lots of reasons to support one interpretation as true regardless of what the evidence might suggest, whereas in the other, it's much easier to view it in a detached and objective manner.

......

I'm thinking this might fit better in BC&H...

Jedi Mind Trick · 05-05-2008, 04:34 PM

Paul was an innovator, to put it mildly, but I don't think he was a lier. I think he really believed that he received the latest revelation directly from the risen Christ. However, the original apostles disagreed with Paul, especially about Jesus' alleged divinity and the alleged superseding of the Law by a new Gospel. I do think that Jesus would have had nothing to do with Paul's theology. I think that the real Jesus was a student of Gautama Buddha and the Yogis of India.

Toto · 05-05-2008, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newton's Cat

...
There is a Roman play, a comedy, written by a late 2nd century non-Christian playwright, that describes a religious sect that, whilst its founder was alive, was altruistic and acceptable to the authorities - but when its founder died it was taken over by a single individual who altered the texts of the founder, wrote others of his own, and made himself wealthy.

Are you referring to the satire by Lucian?

Quote:

So - the picture is that after the death of Paul someone else used Paul's creation, Jesus, as a weapon against the message of Paul's writings.

This person, for instance, expanded the Gospel of Mark, by interpolation and addition, to twice its original size.

Why do you think this?

Quote:

All references to PETER in Mark are by this man.

??

Quote:

Paul was an extraordinarily intelligent man.

Maybe this is him?

In 71 ad the Emperor Vespasian sent people to investigate a man who was "travelling through the Greek islands preaching that he was (from) God".

They reported back that he was "harmless".

Maybe that's how Paul got involved with the Romans?

Reference? I recall reading this somewhere, but there seem to have been a lot of wandering preachers of various types at the time.

Jehanne · 05-05-2008, 07:19 PM

Moved to BC&H.

Sheshbazzar · 05-05-2008, 08:24 PM

Problem is, just how much of "Paul's" writings were actually written by the original Paul?
I tend to believe very little, if any at all, what we got under the "name" of "Paul" is all latter theology composed by others who hi-jacked his name and reputation to sneak in their own ideas and doctrines. It is not Paul's "Jesus" theology that they wrote down, but their own.
So whatever "Paul" says, is not "Paul's" fault, these other "pseudo-Paul's" took advantage of the fact that he was unable too, or no longer around to refute the crap that they were pushing in his name, same as they did with the "Jesus" character, stuffing his mouth full of sayings that he had never said.

aa5874 · 05-06-2008, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Newton's Cat

Mark and Paul are the same person.

This is all incredible speculation.

"Mark" is a complete unknown character and it has been deduced by scholars that more than one person used the name "Paul", so in effect, "Paul" is also an unknown character.

"Mark" and "Paul" are the same in this respect. They are both unknown.

Clivedurdle · 05-06-2008, 01:12 PM

Quote:

Lucian’s De Dea Syra (“Concerning the Syrian Goddess”) is of enduring value for an understanding of Canaanite religion.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/...#ref=ref559722

What did he write about xianity?

Quote:

LucianGreek writer Greek Lucianos, Latin Lucianus

Of the 80 prose works traditionally attributed to Lucian, about 10 are spurious. The writings of Lucian are outstanding for their mordant and malicious wit, embodying a sophisticated and often embittered critique of the shams and follies of the literature, philosophy, and intellectual life of his day. Lucian satirized almost every aspect of human behaviour. One of his favourite topics is the human failure to realize the transience of greatness and wealth. This Cynic theme permeates his dialogue Charon, while in the Dialogues of the Dead and other pieces, the Cynic philosopher Menippus is made to jibe at kings and aristocrats, reminding them how much more they have lost by death than he.
In Timon Lucian recounts how Timon, after impoverishing himself by his generosity and becoming a hermit, is restored to wealth, once again to be surrounded by toadies to whom he gives short shrift. Other human frailties Lucian satirized are the folly of bargaining with the gods by sacrifices, crying over spilt milk when bereaved, and the love of telling or listening to strange tales. In True History, which starts by warning the reader that its events are completely untrue and impossible, Lucian describes a voyage that starts on the sea, continues in the skies, and includes visits to the belly of a whale and to heaven and hell; the tale is a satirical parody of all those fantastic travelers’ tales that strain human credulity

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/350566/Lucian

05-04-2008, 11:33 PM	#1
Newton's Cat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London, UK Posts: 3,181	Did Paul invent Jesus? My take on the NT is that Paul invented Jesus, that the writings of Paul and the Story of Jesus were separate, that Paul did NOT advocate that people should "follow Jesus". Paul wanted people to follow God. There is a Roman play, a comedy, written by a late 2nd century non-Christian playwright, that describes a religious sect that, whilst its founder was alive, was altruistic and acceptable to the authorities - but when its founder died it was taken over by a single individual who altered the texts of the founder, wrote others of his own, and made himself wealthy. So - the picture is that after the death of Paul someone else used Paul's creation, Jesus, as a weapon against the message of Paul's writings. This person, for instance, expanded the Gospel of Mark, by interpolation and addition, to twice its original size. All references to PETER in Mark are by this man. Paul was an extraordinarily intelligent man. Maybe this is him? In 71 ad the Emperor Vespasian sent people to investigate a man who was "travelling through the Greek islands preaching that he was (from) God". They reported back that he was "harmless". Maybe that's how Paul got involved with the Romans?

05-05-2008, 07:19 PM	#7
Jehanne Veteran Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Iowa Posts: 2,567	Mod note. Moved to BC&H.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-04-2008, 11:49 PM	#2
Newton's Cat Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London, UK Posts: 3,181	Mark and Paul are the same person.

05-05-2008, 04:14 PM	#4
William Moderator - NAR Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Northern Japan Posts: 2,312	Newton's Cat. I say yes, but my interpretation is a bit different than yours. I think Paul invented what would later contribute to our understanding of who Jesus was, but he didn't fabricate it out of thin air. He turned Jesus into a figure which he believed represented the "core" of Jesus's teachings, but there is strong evidence that PAUL'S view of Jesus is quite different than how Jesus viewed himself, and how early followers of Jesus viewed him... I barely have an armchair understanding of the subject, but from what I've read, it appears that Jesus did not view HIMSELF as the messiah, or as equivalent to God, or as the leader of an apocalyptic cult. After Paul, Jewish sects adhering to Jesus's teachings increasingly began to view Jesus in this way, and eventually as a religion separate from Judaism altogether (clearly NOT something Jesus was trying to do). This is why men like Thomas Jefferson hated Paul. They believed they were "true" christians and that most around them were actually following PAUL'S religion, not that of Jesus. Of course, for obvious reasons, this is all very controversial though and it's tough for many people to discuss this in the way that, say, we try to get to the heart of some Roman Emperor's biography. In one, people have lots of reasons to support one interpretation as true regardless of what the evidence might suggest, whereas in the other, it's much easier to view it in a detached and objective manner. ...... I'm thinking this might fit better in BC&H...

05-05-2008, 04:34 PM	#5
Jedi Mind Trick Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Indianaplolis Posts: 4,998	Paul was an innovator, to put it mildly, but I don't think he was a lier. I think he really believed that he received the latest revelation directly from the risen Christ. However, the original apostles disagreed with Paul, especially about Jesus' alleged divinity and the alleged superseding of the Law by a new Gospel. I do think that Jesus would have had nothing to do with Paul's theology. I think that the real Jesus was a student of Gautama Buddha and the Yogis of India.

05-05-2008, 08:24 PM	#8
Sheshbazzar Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: On the path of knowledge Posts: 8,889	Problem is, just how much of "Paul's" writings were actually written by the original Paul? I tend to believe very little, if any at all, what we got under the "name" of "Paul" is all latter theology composed by others who hi-jacked his name and reputation to sneak in their own ideas and doctrines. It is not Paul's "Jesus" theology that they wrote down, but their own. So whatever "Paul" says, is not "Paul's" fault, these other "pseudo-Paul's" took advantage of the fact that he was unable too, or no longer around to refute the crap that they were pushing in his name, same as they did with the "Jesus" character, stuffing his mouth full of sayings that he had never said.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.