The Admiral

Is there any more historical evidence for the existence of Paul than there is for the existence of Jesus of Nazareth?

The Admiral

Afghan

Well there are some extant writings that someone called Paul is known to have written. Whether or not the events described by 'Luke' actually befell the apostle of the epistles is, naturally, open to contention. But, so far as I know, the academics are fairly agreeable about the common authorship and dating of the Pauline letters.

Toto

You will find some threads in BCH on this.

There are some letters written by "Paul" but expert opinion is far from unanimous on their authenticity.

jbernier

Certainly most scholars would agree that several of the epistles attributed to Paul were not actually written by Paul. Nonetheless, there is a pretty solid consensus that a historical figure called Paul wrote at least Romans, Galatians, both letters to the Corinthians, Philippians and Philemon. There is an equally solid consensus, I think, that this figure did not write either letter to Timothy, Titus or Ephesus. Colossians and the Thessalonians are hotly debated, I think. However I don't think I've read any scholar who would argue that none of them were written by a historical figure called Paul; this simply does not seem to either be or have been a matter of debate among scholars, even those who have absolutely no religious committments that would incline them towards a conservative understanding of the Pauline corpus (if someone knows of such a scholar who is arguing thus I would be happy to stand corrected). For my own part I'm quite happy to take someone at their word when they say "Hi, my name is Paul and I exist"; which is to say that, given the existence of 13 letters which claim to be have written by Paul, I think that the burden of proof is certainly upon the person who wants to argue that this figure did not exist.

Cynthia of Syracuse

I think this thread will get more response in BC&H.

Toto

The Dutch Radicals believed that the letters attributed to Paul are all 2nd century forgeries. (I am not sure if they assumed that there was a historical Paul or not - the forgeries would probably have been made in the name of a historical church leader.) Hermann Detering is carrying on the tradition.

I think that Robert Price thinks that all of Paul's letters are forgeries, but I have not heard or read of him say anything definitive, although there are hints in his article The Formation of the Pauline Canon

Some previous threads:

The Search for the Historical Paul

The search for the historical Paul: was he ever in Damascus?

Questions on Paul