aa5874

Now, when was the Pauline writer called by the grace of God??? When did God reveal his Son to the character called Paul?? When did Paul go to Arabia?? How long was Paul there???

In the Pauline writings themselves we have NO way of determining when the Pauline letters were written or when Paul was called by the grace of God.

How can we establish that any Pauline writings were made before c 70 CE??

We NEED credible sources to corroborate the veracity of the Pauline letters but there is NONE---Only forgeries between Paul and Seneca.

outhouse

is paul, or is not paul a self proclaimed apostle.?


he also claims to be the least of the apostles

outhouse

if you look at their history, they did not believe in places, but preached around dinner tables, as with the kingdom of god coming, a place was not needed.

they never charged for healing people, but dinner/food they would accept.

Duvduv

In any case, unless one accepts the narrative of the Marcion Story it is impossible to make such assertions anyway.

Duvduv

If the claims of the heresiologists are rejected as plain bunk and there is NO EVIDENCE of a Marcion sect in the 2nd century, then the entire argument collapses.

Duvduv

There isn't a shred of surviving material of Marcion's writings or texts, and even Justin, who supposedly lived in Rome at the same time as Marcion, doesn't mention a single thing Marcion actually wrote or text that he possessed.

outhouse

why would he?

marcion had his own theology, he wasnt well liked for it either and was condemned by many.

Duvduv

How do you know what Marcion's theology was??
We won't take the word of the biased church propagandists, will we?
Check with the book An Inquiry into the Third Gospel by C.P. Sense from about 100 years ago. It's online.

aa5874

The letter to the Galatians as found in an English translation of the Sinaiticus Codex is most likely AFTER the Gopspels and Acts of the Apostles was composed.

In order to CLEARY see that Galatians was written LATE we ONLY need to read Galatians WITHOUT using the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles.

Galatians 1 The Galatians 1.15-19 is extremely Ambiguous.

1. We have no idea what he is talking about.

2. We have NO idea when those things happened.

The only way to understand the chronology of events in the letter to Galatians there must be the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles.

There is nothing in Galatians that could NOT have happened in the 2nd century.

1. The Galatians writer claimed that when God was ready to reveal his son that he did NOT immediately confer with Flesh and Blood--but when did such a thing happen???

There is SILENCE--we need the Gospels and Acts to find out what happened.

2. The Galatians writer claimed he did NOT go to Jerusalem to see the Apostles before him.

But, What Apostles??? When were there Apostles in Jerusalem???

There is SILENCE in Galatians--we need the Gospels and Acts for answers.

3. The Galatians writer claimed he met the Apostles Cephas and James.

Who are these Apostles??? When were they in Jerusalem???

SILENCE from Galatians--we need the Gospels and Acts for answers.

It is NOT logically reasonable that the Galatians writer would write Ambiguously hoping that some unknown person would someday write Acts and the Gospels at some Unknown time in the future.

The fact that the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles are needed to understand the supposed chronology of Galatians then it most likely means that the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles were composed BEFORE the letter was fabricated.

Surely, there is NO evidence that these events in Galatians 1 could NOT have happened in the 2nd century and the authors of the Gospels and Acts did NOT need Galatians 1 for their stories.

From a logical analysis, the Gospels and Acts were composed BEFORE Galatians.

Duvduv

AA, I think we all recognize your repeated comments about what you think is the chronology of the production of the NT texts, i.e. that the epistles came AFTER the gospels.
My usual response has been that this is NOT LOGICAL because the epistles never refer back to ANY the storylines found in the gospels or even Acts, where there is a one-man freelance persecutor named Saul, who is never called Saul in any epistles.

In your reply just previous you assume that the author of Galatians wanted his readers to refer back to the gospels and Acts for "further information," which is NOT UNLIKE the Christian reply that the readers did not need any information about the Christ because they ALREADY knew that information.

However, I am open-minded enough to consider a third possibility, i.e. that the epistles originated as a composite of unrelated letters of monotheistic teachings cobbled together with Christian references showing a belief in a HJ but that were cobbled together BEFORE the gospels actually appeared, which would be why the epistles do not express the gospel stories, and only hint at certain elements that find their way into the gospels.

I haven't seen much that addresses the second possibility, and I assume that the mythists could not accept this because if the epistles have no integrity as actual complete letters written by someone named Paul at least in the 2nd century, there was no mythist Paul religion at all, and even no celestial Jesus myth religion at all.

Rather an invented HJ ideology that emerged and developed in the 4th and 5th centuries, which benefited from church propagandists who had writings backdated into the 1st or 2nd centuries to provide antiquity to the religion.