|
Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Aside from Luke, did the gospel writers know of Paul? | |||
| Yes: the evidence ranges from good to bad. |
   
|
6 | 37.50% |
| No: good or bad, the evidence clearly points to 'no'. |
  
|
2 | 12.50% |
| Uncertain: the evidence is too ambiguous/scant to interpret one way or the other. |
  
|
8 | 50.00% |
| Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll | |||
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
06-30-2011, 03:57 AM
|
#21 | |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 2,579
|
Quote:
Jiri |
|
|
|
06-30-2011, 07:17 AM
|
#22 |
|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: On the path of knowledge
Posts: 8,889
|
The problem is many verses, and large portions of the writings of 'Paul', were not really penned by 'Paul'. His theological adversaries had a long field day with his writings, editing and rewriting them extensively to reflect their much latter religious views.
The real problem with 'Paul' is that after they got done with him, he was no longer a first century Jew, but a second/third century Christian. They so overcooked the books, they made an anachronistic and unbelievable character out of the real individual. |
|
|
|
06-30-2011, 08:13 AM
|
#23 | |
|
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
It is most remarkable that people here can argue that the Pauline writings were manipulated by the Church and still use passages from the very Pauline writings and claim simultaneously that they are authentic and without corruption. It should be obvious by now that the Pauline writings are historically corrupted. In the NT, Jesus was NOT even known to be Christ and was NOT called Christ by the Jews when he was supposedly alive so how come "Paul" called Jesus the Christ AFTER Jesus was Already dead and was UNKNOWN as Christ? The Pauline writings are historically corrupt. |
|
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
