Littlejohn

Some years ago, when I started writing in this interesting forum (because visited, mostly, by people very familiar with the topics covered), I wrote several times that the Paul of Tarsus who we know through the writings of the New Testament, is a ficticious character, as literary constructed by merging together, so in a syncretic way, TWO real historical persons: namely the 'true' Paul of Tarsus and Paul/Saul: a Herodian scoundrel, responsible, among other things, of the murder of James the Just, beloved stepbrother of Jesus of Nazareth.

The murder, commissioned by the high priest Ananias (see Josephus, Recognitiones and Eusebius of Caesarea, where this last quotes Hegesippus) took place inside the Essene temple of Jerusalem, and Paul/Saul performed it together with his gang of miscreants killers.

Neither of the two characters that were used to 'build' the current Paul of Tarsus, was called 'Paul', since this Latin pseudo name is derived by the 'paulus' attribute, meaning 'of small stature' (at least when applied to a man). Also, NONE of them was from Tarsus (both came from Palestine of the time), although Paul of Tarsus (and NOT Paul / Saul!) was really a Roman citizen.

Littlejohn

.

aa5874

The chronology of the Pauline letters are rather simple to unravel.

The Pauline letters were written AFTER the Jesus story was known and circulated in the Roman Empire.

Paul claimed he PERSECUTED the Faith and that he was LAST to be Visited by the resurrected Jesus.

Up to the mid 2nd century Apologetic sources that knew of Jesus stories were NOT aware of the Pauline letters.

The Pauline writer was supposedly HIGH PROFILE and should have been known around the Roman Empire in person and also WELL-ESTABLISHED in the Church with his Documented Revealed Gospel from the Resurrected Jesus.

There is NO other Canonized writer that was more recognized than the supposed Pauline writer even the author of Acts claims to have Documented his Expeditions or Tours of Evangelical Crusades around the Roman Empire.

However, most unprecedented, Justin Martyr, in defense of his Belief in Jesus did NOT use a single sentence from the supposed LEADING EVANGELIST called Paul.

NOTHING at all from Paul.

How is it even possible that a 2nd century Christian writer does NOT know the History of the Jesus cult???

How is it possible that Justin Martyr could have written about Simon Magus the Magician and NOT write about Paul and Acts of the Apostles???

How is it possible that Justin Martyr wrote about Menader, the disciple of Simon Magus, and did NOT write about Paul and the Acts of the Apostles??

How is it possible that Justin Martyr mentioned Marcion and forgot Paul???

Paul was supposed to be the PIONEER of EVANGELISM in the Gentile world and should have been EMULATED by Justin.

The answer to those questions is quite obvious.

Justin Martyr did NOT know of any letters of a Pauline writer and neither did the mysterious OLD MAN.

The Pauline letters were composed AFTER Justin Martyr met the OLD MAN.

See Dialogue with Trypho III

Justin Martyr appeared to have been familiar with many sources of antiquity but did NOT know of the Canon's most prolific author called Paul nor was familiar at with his Revealed Gospel of the Resurrected Jesus.

But, Justin KNEW of the supposed REVELATIONS of John.

"Dialogue with Trypho" LXXXI The Pauline letters were composed AFTER the mid 2nd century.

Bernard Muller

to aa,
The author of 1Clement knew about Paul and him writing letters.

From my website:

Bernard Muller

to aa,
How do you explain these letters did not address post-150 pressing issues such as, the necessity to set up and obey orthodox bishops, Gnosticism, Docetism, heresies and the Kingdom to come being very late?

Why the author of these letters ask the Christians not to marry (1Cor7), because "time is short" and "For this world in its present form is passing away".

Why would Paul promised some of his Christians will not die before the Great Day of salvation:
1Cr 15:51 Lo! I tell you a mystery. We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
1Cr 15:52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we shall be changed.

Trick question:
When did the so-called Pauline writers put Paul (as their creation): around 40-60 or sometimes after 150?

Chili

Neat, I especially like the Herodain killing inside the Essene temple of Jerusalem. Was that with stones they threw at each other?

aa5874

It is remarkable that you would use 1 Clement as evidence for the time period of the Pauline composition.

Did I not warn you that all sources that mention Paul were either fiction, fraud or forgeries???

Let us slowly go through some writings of antiquity that mentioned Clement of Rome and you will see that the Church did NOT know when he was Bishop of Rome.

You MUST bear in mind that there supposedly was a Great Dissension in Corinth and that it is claimed Clement of Rome did dispatch a letter now called 1 st Clement.
Against Heresies 3.3.3
In "Against Heresies"3.3 First The Apostles--Linus--Anacletus--Clement.

"Prescription Against the Heretics"--Peter--Clement

Please tell me when did the Great Dissension REALLY occur if Peter died in the 60's and Clement was made Bishop when Peter died??? And when was Clement Bishop??

Irenaeus and Tertullian do NOT AGREE.

In Prescription Against the Heretics--- Clement was Bishop sometime around the death of Peter c 68 CE.

Prescription Against Heretics Again, we see that Clement of Rome is a fabricated character and just like Paul the very Church writers does NOT know when Clement of Rome really lived.

All writings that mention Paul as a letter writer are fraudulent, forgeries or fiction.

Bernard Muller

aa,
A convenient circular argument. I shall say no more!!!

First, the author of the letter does not say he is Clement.
I do not care what later the "Church" wrote about that Clement, bishop or no bishop: that was after the letter was done, and the author had no control about what will be written some 100 years later.
And didn't you imply that 'Against Heresies' was heavily interpolated by dishonest writers? So why are you using that crap to make a point!!!
You are drawing a blank here. Try harder.

aa5874

I present sources of antiquity not unsubstantiated imagination.

Against Heresies 3.3.3Prescription Against Heretics
You knew in advance that the letter is anonymous and still have the audacity to claim you know when it was written when you very well know it could be a forgery have no idea who the author was.

You have ZERO evidence to show when the ANONYMOUS letter attributed to Clement of Rome was written. You have PRESUMED your own date because you have NOTHING but your imagination.

It is has been shown to you that an author who is familiar with gLuke, gJohn, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings could NOT have argued that Jesus was crucified at about 50 years old and under Claudius Caesar.


Clement of Alexandria used gLuke to show that Jesus was crucified at 30 years old.

The original author of Against Heresies 2.22 could NOT have known of the Four Gospels, Acts of the Apostles and the Pauline writings when he argued that John and the Other Apostles told people in Asia that Jesus was crucified at the age of about 50 years old.

By the way, It was Irenaeus who claimed Clement wrote a letter to the Church of Corinth during the GREAT DISSENSION.

mountainman

That's trivial. The "Kingdom" came later, and with it came orthodox bishops, Gnosticism, Docetism and massive heresies and controversies.

"Then would my servants fight"

Bernard Muller

to aa,
Clement, no Clement, you still would object either way. When approximately it was written come from multiple bits of internal evidence as shown already. Yes we can claim when something is written even if we do not know the author for sure. I do not see the relationship. One can claim gMark was written soon after 70 without knowing who is the author.

For the rest, I rebuked you over and over again. NO, you haven't show me anything convincing. And you make a point not to answer my questions.