Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 03-11-2013, 09:21 PM

The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul (or via: amazon.co.uk) seems to be available now at a more affordable price.

Excerpt - the Perils of Pauline Studies

Quote:

At the dawn of the twenty-first century, it is a strange time for Pauline studies. After seemingly having run out of other ideas to beat to death, the academy has ventured into new territory. One might even say that, on analogy with the intrepid Netherlanders of old, Pauline scholars have created new territory to settle. A visit to the seminary book store or the religion aisle at Barnes & Noble will acquaint the reader with books arguing that Paul was a culture critic of Hellenistic Judaism, that he was a Jew and remained a Jew, that he wrote against U.S. foreign policy, and so on. Indeed, more than ever, he seems like a new Oracle of Delphi whose equivocal utterances may be read as conveying whatever message one most wants to hear. Like the infamous “historical Jesus,” Paul has become a reflection of the scholars studying him.

Part of the reason for this state of affairs is that Jesus has recently been unavailable for these uses. As scholars have become more skeptical about recovering the goods on the historical Jesus (as witness the Jesus Seminar’s claim that only 18 percent of the sayings database was reliable), the less plausible it has seemed to make him the poster boy for green politics, feminism, whatever. Granted, this hasn’t stopped a number of scholars who still write books manufacturing and manicuring Jesus to look like them, since the less evidence there is, the more room is left for speculation; but some have retreated to Paul instead. Perhaps he can be the bulwark theologians once thought they had in Jesus. But great ironies lie this way.

First, the closer scrutiny the Pauline texts receive, the clearer it becomes (and by now it seems mighty clear indeed) that the epistles present us with many of the same challenges the Gospels did. They appear to be filled with the same variety of redactional seams, non-sequiturs, and double-audience rhetorical tricks we find in the Gospels. In short, the historical Jesus problem replicates itself in the case of Paul. The epistles reveal themselves to the discerning reader to have exactly the same sort of limitations as the Gospels do: both are collections of fragments and pericopae contributed and fabricated by authors and communities of very different theological leanings. Both present barriers to the access of the individuals under whose names they appear, not open doors.

maryhelena · 03-11-2013, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul (or via: amazon.co.uk) seems to be available now at a more affordable price.

Excerpt - the Perils of Pauline Studies

Quote:

At the dawn of the twenty-first century, it is a strange time for Pauline studies. After seemingly having run out of other ideas to beat to death, the academy has ventured into new territory. One might even say that, on analogy with the intrepid Netherlanders of old, Pauline scholars have created new territory to settle. A visit to the seminary book store or the religion aisle at Barnes & Noble will acquaint the reader with books arguing that Paul was a culture critic of Hellenistic Judaism, that he was a Jew and remained a Jew, that he wrote against U.S. foreign policy, and so on. Indeed, more than ever, he seems like a new Oracle of Delphi whose equivocal utterances may be read as conveying whatever message one most wants to hear. Like the infamous “historical Jesus,” Paul has become a reflection of the scholars studying him.

Part of the reason for this state of affairs is that Jesus has recently been unavailable for these uses. As scholars have become more skeptical about recovering the goods on the historical Jesus (as witness the Jesus Seminar’s claim that only 18 percent of the sayings database was reliable), the less plausible it has seemed to make him the poster boy for green politics, feminism, whatever. Granted, this hasn’t stopped a number of scholars who still write books manufacturing and manicuring Jesus to look like them, since the less evidence there is, the more room is left for speculation; but some have retreated to Paul instead. Perhaps he can be the bulwark theologians once thought they had in Jesus. But great ironies lie this way.

First, the closer scrutiny the Pauline texts receive, the clearer it becomes (and by now it seems mighty clear indeed) that the epistles present us with many of the same challenges the Gospels did. They appear to be filled with the same variety of redactional seams, non-sequiturs, and double-audience rhetorical tricks we find in the Gospels. In short, the historical Jesus problem replicates itself in the case of Paul. The epistles reveal themselves to the discerning reader to have exactly the same sort of limitations as the Gospels do: both are collections of fragments and pericopae contributed and fabricated by authors and communities of very different theological leanings. Both present barriers to the access of the individuals under whose names they appear, not open doors.

Toto, the amazon link does not get to Price's book. The number in your link,
ISBN-10: 0567090574, takes one to this book:The Use and Abuse of the Bible: A Brief History of Biblical Interpretation.

Amazon US don't seem to have Price's book in stock. It's available on amazon UK. (I'm only interested in ebooks these days as mailing takes forever....)

The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul (or via: amazon.co.uk)

For those who have read Price's book - is he arguing for an ahistorical Paul?

aa5874 · 03-12-2013, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Toto, the amazon link does not get to Price's book. The number in your link,
ISBN-10: 0567090574, takes one to this book:The Use and Abuse of the Bible: A Brief History of Biblical Interpretation.

Amazon US don't seem to have Price's book in stock. It's available on amazon UK. (I'm only interested in ebooks these days as mailing takes forever....)

The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul (or via: amazon.co.uk)

For those who have read Price's book - is he arguing for an ahistorical Paul?

Do we have to wait for a book when the evidence that the Pauline letters were NOT composed before the death of Nero was given to us on a Platter??

This is like Christians waiting for the Pope to tell them what is written in the Bible as if they cannot understand it.

We do not need experts to tells us Romulus was Myth.

The Pauline letters were NOT composed in the 1st century and before c 68 CE whether or not Saul/Paul is a figure of history.

And this is clearly shown in Acts of the Apostles where it is seen that the Jesus cult of Christians, the Churches of God, were fully DEVELOPED WITHOUT any letters from Saul/Paul.

Read the Entire Acts of Apostles.

Read the evidence from antiquity.

It may even be a little cheaper.

maryhelena · 03-12-2013, 12:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Toto, the amazon link does not get to Price's book. The number in your link,
ISBN-10: 0567090574, takes one to this book:The Use and Abuse of the Bible: A Brief History of Biblical Interpretation.

Amazon US don't seem to have Price's book in stock. It's available on amazon UK. (I'm only interested in ebooks these days as mailing takes forever....)

The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul (or via: amazon.co.uk)

For those who have read Price's book - is he arguing for an ahistorical Paul?

Do we have to wait for a book when the evidence that the Pauline letters were NOT composed before the death of Nero was given to us on a Platter??

This is like Christians waiting for the Pope to tell them what is written in the Bible as if they cannot understand it.

We do not need experts to tells us Romulus was Myth.

The Pauline letters were NOT composed in the 1st century and before c 68 CE whether or not Saul/Paul is a figure of history.

And this is clearly shown in Acts of the Apostles where it is seen that the Jesus cult of Christians, the Churches of God, were fully DEVELOPED WITHOUT any letters from Saul/Paul.

Read the Entire Acts of Apostles.

Read the evidence from antiquity.

It may even be a little cheaper.

aa - I'm asking for Price's opinion on Paul....

Yes, yes - the Pauline epistles are late - post 70 ce.

Yes, yes - "the Jesus cult of Christians......were fully DEVELOPED WITHOUT any letters from Saul/Paul". (maybe send Earl a memo on that......)

I'm interested if Price has put forth any arguments against a historical Paul. Is Price simply moving the Pauline epistles to a post 70 c.e. dating but keeping a historical Paul pre 70 c.e. ?? i.e the Pauline epistles were published after the pre 70 c.e. death of Paul. I don't know what Price is saying - so am asking......just for the sake of interest......I have my own ideas regardless of what Price is saying..........

Toto · 03-12-2013, 12:59 AM

Thanks for catching that. I had two Amazon pages open at the same time.

Amazon doesn't carry the book directly, but they now have several resellers who do.

I suspect that the answer depends on how you phrase the question. Price believes that the Saul/Paul of the Book of Acts is a fictional character, and that the epistles were written in the second century. But I think he identifies the historical Paul with Simon Magus. I haven't read the book yet.

Toto · 03-12-2013, 01:11 AM

From the sample chapter linked above:

Quote:

Chapter 7 approaches the identity of the historical Paul from a different angle to propose, with Hermann Detering,10 that Paul was actually the same man remembered as Simon Magus, which may be why both men are said to have been the father of all heresy. There were other historical Pauls, namely the writers of the epistles. Marcion was one of these, having authored at least portions of Galatians and Ephesians and perhaps more. He must have used extant Simonian writings or at least teachings, modifying them in his own more socially conservative direction.

jakejonesiv · 03-12-2013, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul (or via: amazon.co.uk) seems to be available now at a more affordable price.

Excerpt - the Perils of Pauline Studies

Quote:

... Like the infamous “historical Jesus,” Paul has become a reflection of the scholars studying him.

...
First, the closer scrutiny the Pauline texts receive, the clearer it becomes (and by now it seems mighty clear indeed) that the epistles present us with many of the same challenges the Gospels did. They appear to be filled with the same variety of redactional seams, non-sequiturs, and double-audience rhetorical tricks we find in the Gospels. In short, the historical Jesus problem replicates itself in the case of Paul. The epistles reveal themselves to the discerning reader to have exactly the same sort of limitations as the Gospels do: both are collections of fragments and pericopae contributed and fabricated by authors and communities of very different theological leanings. Both present barriers to the access of the individuals under whose names they appear, not open doors.

Yes, I have the book, of course.

Price takes the reader on gentle journey into the figure of the Great Apostle. The reader can get off at any time, and the observations made before will still be valid. R.Price does not offer the reader a harsh "my way or the highway" argument. But no one who reads this bokk will see Paul in quite the same way afterwards.

R.Price suprisingly unites the scholarship of the Dutch Radicals (Hermann Detering) and Prof. Robert Eisenman.

Price surveys the figure of the historical Paul from all angles, and concludes that all of the Pauline epistles should be viewed as pseudepigraphical works.

In chapter 7, R.Price and builds with H.Detering that Paul was actually the same man remembered as Simon Magus, of which Price also sees a reflection in Josephus, Antiquities 20.7.2.

R.Eisenmann has discovered the connection of Agabus forecasting famine, setting up the need for Paul to travel from Antioch to Jerusalm with relief with Josephus Ant. 2.2.1-4. (James, the Brother of Jesus, 883-992).

Price takes Eisenman's identification of the teacher of Ananias with Paul, and extends it to Simon Magus. "It is I who am making the connection with Simon, tying Eisenamn's work together, as it seems inevitable to me, with that of Detering, who shows the identity of Saul and Simon." ibid, page 209.

Best Regards,
Jake Jones IV

maryhelena · 03-12-2013, 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jakejonesiv

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul (or via: amazon.co.uk) seems to be available now at a more affordable price.

Excerpt - the Perils of Pauline Studies

Quote:

... Like the infamous “historical Jesus,” Paul has become a reflection of the scholars studying him.

...
First, the closer scrutiny the Pauline texts receive, the clearer it becomes (and by now it seems mighty clear indeed) that the epistles present us with many of the same challenges the Gospels did. They appear to be filled with the same variety of redactional seams, non-sequiturs, and double-audience rhetorical tricks we find in the Gospels. In short, the historical Jesus problem replicates itself in the case of Paul. The epistles reveal themselves to the discerning reader to have exactly the same sort of limitations as the Gospels do: both are collections of fragments and pericopae contributed and fabricated by authors and communities of very different theological leanings. Both present barriers to the access of the individuals under whose names they appear, not open doors.

Yes, I have the book, of course.

Price takes the reader on gentle journey into the figure of the Great Apostle. The reader can get off at any time, and the observations made before will still be valid. R.Price does not offer the reader a harsh "my way or the highway" argument. But no one who reads this bokk will see Paul in quite the same way afterwards.

R.Price suprisingly unites the scholarship of the Dutch Radicals (Hermann Detering) and Prof. Robert Eisenman.

Price surveys the figure of the historical Paul from all angles, and concludes that all of the Pauline epistles should be viewed as pseudepigraphical works.

In chapter 7, R.Price and builds with H.Detering that Paul was actually the same man remembered as Simon Magus, of which Price also sees a reflection in Josephus, Antiquities 20.7.2.

R.Eisenmann has discovered the connection of Agabus forecasting famine, setting up the need for Paul to travel from Antioch to Jerusalm with relief with Josephus Ant. 2.2.1-4. (James, the Brother of Jesus, 883-992).

Price takes Eisenman's identification of the teacher of Ananias with Paul, and extends it to Simon Magus. "It is I who am making the connection with Simon, tying Eisenamn's work together, as it seems inevitable to me, with that of Detering, who shows the identity of Saul and Simon." ibid, page 209.

Best Regards,
Jake Jones IV

Back to Josephus!

If Price is maintaining a Paul/Simon Magus connection with the Simon of Antiquities 20.7.2, that puts his Paul figure in the time of Felix (procurator 52 - 60 c.e.) i.e. prior to 70 c.e.

Price says, in the excerpt from his book, (link above)

Quote:

"In short, we should not look optimistically at Acts as a source for reconstructing the historical Paul.

....the quest for the historical Paul becomes more difficult: neither Acts nor the epistles will be much help to us".

Why then use the Simon Magus story in Acts? What evidence is there that such a figure was historical? NT stories can easily develop into traditions of their own....Why link the NT Paul - already a figure without historical validation to another such figure?

The Josephan writer is not offering historical support/evidence for the Simon that was involved with Felix. That is a story until it can be historically evidenced.

Yes, someone, some people, wrote the Pauline epistles. The NT story places Paul prior to 70 c.e. Yet the Pauline writings do not show up in the early christian sources until much later. That presents the possibility that the NT figure of Paul is a composite figure. An early and a late Paul. "Paul" being a pseudonym.

Price:

Quote:

Scholars are agreed that there was at least a hiatus during most of the second century when the Pauline epistles were ignored or suppressed by the early Catholic Church because of their appeal to heretics or because they were actually heretical in character.

And that indicates that the early christian communities got along without the Paul of the epistles. The NT Paul story tells of a Paul who persecuted the followers of JC. Whether one wants to argue for a pre 70 c.e. JC sect or a post 70 c.e. JC sect - the "hiatus" remains between the early followers of JC (historical or gospel based) and the Pauline epistles. Thus, the possibility presents itself that there were two historically relevant "Paul" figures in the development of early christianity

A little while back there was a thread on "The case for interpolation in 1 Cor 15". DC Hindley and PhilosopherJay demonstrated the two 'voices' in that chapter. Presenting, to my mind, a compelling argument for the NT figure of Paul to be a composite figure. The 'voices' of two different Paul figures being fused together. An early and a late 'Paul'. Link to one of the posts from that thread here

Who was the late 'Paul' figure? I'd put my money on the Josephan writer. A prophetic historian according to modern scholarship. Without that writer the NT story had no historical 'legs' upon which to run.

maryhelena · 03-12-2013, 06:58 AM

Two charts detailing similarities between the NT Paul and Josephus:

Apostle Paul	Titus Flavius Josephus
Roman citizen	Roman citizen
Shipwreck on way to Rome	Shipwreck on way to Rome
Time in Rome	Time in Rome
Trade: tent maker	Trade: soldier and writer
An educated man	An educated man
thorn in the flesh' of own people	thorn in the flesh' of own people
A Pharisee	A Pharisee
Not an original apostle	Born after crucifixion of gospel JC
Original Name is Saul of Tarsus	Original Name is Joseph ben Matityahu
Tribe of Benjamin. The tribe designated to stay with the Aaronic Priesthood and the tribe of David after the nation split in two.	Decended from priests and royal Hasmonean blood.
A former persecutor of Christians	Josephus had been an enemy of Rome
Circumcision not required of gentiles.	Maintains circumcision not required of gentiles to stay among Jews.
Caught away to the third heaven.	Josephus has prophetic dreams.
Made a defense of Christianity before Agrippa II	Appeals to Agrippa II to attest the truth of what he had written in his history of the Roman/Jewish wars
Imprisoned for about 2 years	Imprisoned 67 c.e. to 69 c.e.
Has a friend named Epaphroditus.	Has a friend named Epaphroditus.

No specific date possible for the conversion of Paul. The timeline similarities in the chart below are drawn from the timeline given in the Life of Josephus. i.e. the first 30 years of the life of Josephus are set against the various dating possible for the NT Paul.

The Pauline Timeline: Galations: 1:17,18, 2:1, Acts 24, Acts. 25, Acts 28:30.	The Josephan Timeline: Josephus: Life
JC crucifixion story possible from 15th year of Tiberius to end of Pilate's rule of 36 c.e. Dating of Paul's conversion between 30 - 37 c.e.	Birth date is 37 c.e. (1st year of Caius Caesar)
Using the 37 c.e. date: Visits Arabia. Visits Jerusalem after 3 years. 40/41 c.e. Preaching in Corinth dated to Gallio around 52 c.e.	51 c.e. (14 years old and high priests and leading men from Jerusalem visit Josephus for his opinion.)
Visits Jerusalem again after 14 years. (17 years after conversion). 55 c.e.	53-56 c.e. (3 years study of Jewish sects and stays in the desert with Banus. 16 years to 19 years old).
Paul a prisoner for 2 years under Felix. Paul before Festus (60-62 c.e.) Shipwreck on way to Rome: If this was Paul's 26th year of preaching - his conversion is then dated to 34 c.e.	63 c.e. (26 years old. Shipwreck on way to Rome.)
Roman prisoner for 2 years under house arrest. About a 30 year ministry to this point if conversion at 32 c.e.	67 c.e. (30 years old taken prisoner at Jotapata - released in 69 c.e. Taken to Rome after 70 c.e. and becomes a Roman citizen.)

Yes, all the above can be written off by pure coincidence. OK. Anybody prepared to so something similar with Simon Magus or Marcion?

Yes, one column in the second chart is dealing with a birth date. The other is dealing with a conversion, re-birth, date. The NT writer of the late Pauline epistles has been, in NT chronology, backdated to the time of Pilate. (or shortly thereafter). By so doing, the timeline story of writer of the Pauline epistles has been synchronized with the life of Josephus. Not just prior to 70 c.e. - but more importantly the 30 years post 70 c.e. to around 100 c.e.

That's how it looks to me .....

aa5874 · 03-12-2013, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maryhelena

Yes, all the above can be written off by pure coincidence. OK. Anybody prepared to so something similar with Simon Magus or Marcion?

Yes, one column in the second chart is dealing with a birth date. The other is dealing with a conversion, re-birth, date. The NT writer of the late Pauline epistles has been, in NT chronology, backdated to the time of Pilate. (or shortly thereafter). By so doing, the timeline story of writer of the Pauline epistles has been synchronized with the life of Josephus. Not just prior to 70 c.e. - but more importantly the 30 years post 70 c.e. to around 100 c.e.

That's how it looks to me .....

This is precisely how we know the Pauline letters were composed AFTER 100 CE.

The author of Acts used the writings of Josephus to INVENT accounts of Paul and still had NO knowledge of the Epistles.

There is no mention at all that Paul wrote letters to Churches in Acts in fact the author of Acts claimed that it was the Jerusalem Church who gave letters to Paul.

ALL Pauline letters were UNKNOWN up to at least c 100 CE.

See Acts 15.22-23

The Jerusalem Church GAVE Letters to Paul in Acts.

Paul wrote NOTHING to Churches in Acts.

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

03-12-2013, 12:59 AM	#5
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	Thanks for catching that. I had two Amazon pages open at the same time. Amazon doesn't carry the book directly, but they now have several resellers who do. I suspect that the answer depends on how you phrase the question. Price believes that the Saul/Paul of the Book of Acts is a fictional character, and that the epistles were written in the second century. But I think he identifies the historical Paul with Simon Magus. I haven't read the book yet.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.