Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Johnny Skeptic · 08-04-2010, 10:36 AM

Consider the following:

http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/paulthe.htm

Quote:

Originally Posted by judaismvschristianity.com

Paul

The False Apostle

Paul's view of himself as an apostle didn't stop at only claiming to be an apostle. He also did what he could to communicate to his followers that he topped them all. He even had the nerve to belittle the very apostles that Yahshua had called and trained for three and a half years to be his witnesses! Among this braggadocio's self-flattering quotes are the following.

"For I consider that I am not at all inferior to the most eminent apostles". ...."As the truth of Christ is in me, no one shall stop me from this boasting in the regions of Achaia." 2 Corinthians 11:5,10

Sometimes, as though he knew he should be ashamed of challenging the stature of Yahshua's 12, he would preface his boast with a statement of unworthiness. No doubt he hoped people would embrace him as the greatest of apostles because he was so humble.

"For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all...". 1Corinthians 15:9,10

Aside from the fact that it was a lie to suggest the ministry had been split up between Jews and Gentiles ...as though he had exclusive rights to the Gentiles and the 12 were to stay with the Jews..., Paul even had the gall to condescend specifically on Peter, James, and John when he belittled them to the Galatians.

"But from those who seemed to be something - whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man- for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles), and when James, Cephas (Peter), and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised." Galatians 2:6,7,9

This is nothing but an arrogant lie. A couple verses later, Paul takes another cheap-shot at Peter. With Peter nowhere around to defend himself, Paul brags to the Galatians how he had determined Peter was a hypocrite, and how he had put him down before the entire church of Antioch.

"But when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews played the hypocrite with him so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straight forward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, "if you being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?" Galatians 2:11-14

Earlier, in Galatians 1:8,9, Paul commanded his followers to consider "accursed" anyone who preaches a different gospel than his. There is little doubt that Paul wanted the Galatians to think this way toward Peter, if not James, and John as well. It is obvious to anyone reading the book of Galatians that Paul was demanding the Galatian church follow no one but him, not even the original apostles back in Jerusalem.

Aside from Paul's incredible arrogance, I also need to point out that Paul himself was the ultimate hypocrite for condemning Peter for accommodating Gentiles when he was around Gentiles and acting like a Jew around Jews.

Johnny Skeptic · 08-04-2010, 01:02 PM

In the opening post, I said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Although I believe that the passage is an interpolation since the resurrection of Jesus is out of the question, for purposes of this thread, I am not suggesting that the passage is probably an interpolation, only that it is plausible that it is an interpolation, and that at the very least, people should be agnostic about the passage pending the possible availability of future evidence that favors either side.

So, why shouldn't people be agnostic regarding whether or not Paul wrote the passage?

aa5874 · 08-04-2010, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

...

But there is something wrong with yours, the very Pauline writer claimed he was LEAST among the apostles.

1Co 15:9 -

But this is a very unPauline statement, based on the rest of his letters

But did not "Paul" claim he persecuted Jesus believers in another epistle?

In Galatians a Pauline writer claimed he persecuted the Faith.

There is nothing unPauline in the claim he was least among the apostles because he persecuted Jesus believers.

spamandham · 08-04-2010, 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

So, why shouldn't people be agnostic regarding whether or not Paul wrote the passage?

It's impossible to know really, but we do know that the passage conflicts with plenty of other things Paul says. So if this passage is authentically Pauline, then Paul was possibly a nut (seems like one to me anyway), changed his mind theologically over the years as he wrote (maybe because he was a nut), or the conflicting passages are not Pauline. It's also possible none of Paul is authentic.

aa5874 · 08-05-2010, 06:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

So, why shouldn't people be agnostic regarding whether or not Paul wrote the passage?

It's impossible to know really, but we do know that the passage conflicts with plenty of other things Paul says. So if this passage is authentically Pauline, then Paul was possibly a nut (seems like one to me anyway), changed his mind theologically over the years as he wrote (maybe because he was a nut), or the conflicting passages are not Pauline. It's also possible none of Paul is authentic.

1 Cor.15.3-8 does NOT conflict with "plenty other things Paul says".

Once a person has read 1 Cor 15.3-8 and the other epistles under the name of Pauline it a MOST absurd notion to even suggest that 1 Cor 15.3-8 "conflicts with plenty other things Paul says".

Let us go through 1 Cor 15.3-8 verse by verse and try and locate even ONE
that conflicts with "plenty things that Paul says.

1 Cor 15.3-8

Quote:

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures...

Look at 1 Cor 1Co 11:23 -

Quote:

For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread..

Look at Galatians 1.11-12

Quote:

..11But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

12For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

The Pauline writers did claim they received information from Jesus.

Now, look at Romans 5:8

Quote:

But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

There is ZERO that is in conflict with other Pauline writings in verse 3.

Examine the 4th verse of 1 Cor 15

Quote:

4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures..

Ro 6:4 -

Quote:

Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

Look at Ro 10:9 -

Quote:

That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

There is ZERO in the 4th verse that conflicts with other Pauline writings.

Examine the 5th verse

Quote:

5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve..

There is NO verse in the entire Pauline writings that conflicts 1 Cor 15.5. There is no other verse which states that Cephas or the twelve did NOT see the resurrected Jesus.

Examine the 6th verse.

Quote:

6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

There is [NO verse in the entire Pauline writings that conflicts with 1 Cor 15.6. No other verse states that above 500 brethren did NOT see the resurrected Jesus.

Examine the 7th verse.

Quote:

7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

There is NO verse in the Pauline writings that conflict with 1 Cor. 15.7.

No other verse in the PAULINE writings state that James or the apostles did NOT see the resurrected Jesus.

Examine the 8th verse.

Quote:

8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

Again, there is ZERO in the 8th verse that is conflicting with other Pauline writings. There is NO verse in the Pauline writings which state the Pauline writer did NOT see the resurrected Jesus.

A verse by verse examination of 1 Cor. 15.3-8 has shown that there is ZERO that is in conflict with other Pauline writings.

Johnny Skeptic · 08-05-2010, 01:15 PM

How could Paul have written the passage? If he knew the disciples, and was acquainted with the over 500 eyewitnesses in Corinth, in order to write the passage, he would had to have believed that Jesus made a number of tangible group post-resurrection appearances. How could many people have told Paul that Jesus appeared to them in groups when we know that Jesus did not make any post-resurrection appearances? How could many people in groups have all believed that they seen the same thing? Obviously, they couldn't have.

Juststeve · 08-05-2010, 01:41 PM

Paul doesn't say that he spoke to the 500 or even all of the disciples. He doesn't tell us from whom he received the information he is delivering, only that he received it. Where is the contradiction?

Steve

aa5874 · 08-05-2010, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

How could Paul have written the passage? If he knew the disciples, and was acquainted with the over 500 eyewitnesses in Corinth, in order to write the passage, he would had to have believed that Jesus made a number of tangible group post-resurrection appearances. How could many people have told Paul that Jesus appeared to them in groups when we know that Jesus did not make any post-resurrection appearances? How could many people in groups have all believed that they seen the same thing? Obviously, they couldn't have.

Do you believe that the Pauline writers MUST have spoken the truth?

How could "Paul" say Jesus was the Creator of heaven and earth and that he (Jesus) was before anything that was made?

Eph 3:9 -

Quote:

And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ..

Col 1:16 -

Quote:

For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers, all things were created by him, and for him...

It is most likely that the Pauline writings do NOT reflect history but fiction.

Johnny Skeptic · 08-06-2010, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

How could Paul have written the passage? If he knew the disciples, and was acquainted with the over 500 eyewitnesses in Corinth, in order to write the passage, he would had to have believed that Jesus made a number of tangible group post-resurrection appearances. How could many people have told Paul that Jesus appeared to them in groups when we know that Jesus did not make any post-resurrection appearances? How could many people in groups have all believed that they seen the same thing? Obviously, they couldn't have.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

Do you believe that the Pauline writers MUST have spoken the truth?

But you already know that I don't.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

How could "Paul" say Jesus was the Creator of heaven and earth and that he (Jesus) was before anything that was made?

For purposes of this thread, my main interest is reasonably establishing that it is very unlikely that Paul was convinced that Jesus made a number of post-resurrection appeareances to groups of people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

It is most likely that the Pauline writings do NOT reflect history but fiction.

Of course.

aa5874 · 08-06-2010, 07:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

...For purposes of this thread, my main interest is reasonably establishing that it is very unlikely that Paul was convinced that Jesus made a number of post-resurrection appeareances to groups of people.

What you are proposing may be extremely difficult to establish.

But, based on the information in the Epistles the Pauline writers are at least trying to convince people that some character called Jesus their Lord and Saviour was RAISED from the dead, that if Jesus was not RAISED from the dead that his preaching would be in vain and that there would be NO REMISSION of sins BEFORE the Fall of the Temple.

The Pauline writers, most incredibly, are trying to CONVINCE people that the LAWS of God was ALREADY made OBSOLETE since the reign of Aretas when he was in a basket by the wall in Damascus about 30 years BEFORE the Fall of the Temple.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

It is most likely that the Pauline writings do NOT reflect history but fiction.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Johnny Skeptic

Of course.

It must be remembered that once the Pauline writers wrote decades later, that they themselves may have been CONVINCED or DUPED into believing that Jesus did exist as claimed by Jesus believers and then became VICTIMS of their own ERROR.

The Pauline writers ATTEMPTED to "historicise" a non-historical event, the resurrection, and they became "witnesses" to the very non-historical event in order to CONVINCE or DECEIVE.

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

08-05-2010, 01:15 PM	#16
Johnny Skeptic Banned Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Florida Posts: 19,796	How could Paul have written the passage? If he knew the disciples, and was acquainted with the over 500 eyewitnesses in Corinth, in order to write the passage, he would had to have believed that Jesus made a number of tangible group post-resurrection appearances. How could many people have told Paul that Jesus appeared to them in groups when we know that Jesus did not make any post-resurrection appearances? How could many people in groups have all believed that they seen the same thing? Obviously, they couldn't have.

08-05-2010, 01:41 PM	#17
Juststeve Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Dallas Texas Posts: 758	Paul doesn't say that he spoke to the 500 or even all of the disciples. He doesn't tell us from whom he received the information he is delivering, only that he received it. Where is the contradiction? Steve

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.