Solo

Paul did not know the perfect human being of Mark who did everything right (and only good) and was killed for it. But Paul was no stranger to the paradox of human existence. He was a good Jew, a proud, and upright Pharisee. He too did eveything right. Well, except maybe getting upset about a group of lunatics proclaiming the end of the world (as Paul knew it) in the name of some unknown Galilean peasant prodigy who (Paul was told) God sent to challenge the established law and order.

But then - as Earl Doherty says - God knocked Paul off his donkey. We do not know exactly what happened; but the way it looks to me Paul received a commission from God in the form of an onset of acute bipolarity with destabilized temporal lobe function. That made him go through periods when he was greatly excited and periods of being grossly depressed. Of course, Paul did not know that. What Paul knew related to the experience of acute bi-polarity with destabilized temporal lobe function : euphoric highs in which felt like he was in heaven, and hugely crushing melancholy with nasty physical effects. While on the high beam, he was receiving a revelatory stream of ideas, offering themselves as coming from an oracular source. It was through this material that Paul (or God, who made Paul look like a common psycho) started to announce visions and experiences of the risen Jesus Christ.

Now, my psychohistory assumes a common process in which an obssessive theme radically converts during a psychoactive episode. Paul's understanding of Jesus whom he despised as an Pharisee expert in Judaism, transformed through the first hypermanic episode (2 Cr 12:2). Paul does not tell us what happened immediately after his conversion trip - which unlike the Acts account, was very pleasurable. But Paul's understanding of his depressive lows as consequential to his highs (2 Cr 12:7-10) is all-important. It establishes the bi-polarity of his vision of Christ: the glory and heavenly ascent of the risen Lord contrasted by the harrowing experience of his death on the cross. Experientially, Christ was revealed to Paul in that order.

The second element to be grasped when decoding the above Corinthians passage is Paul's likely internal struggles immediately after his first first revelatory episode. He was doubtless a pious man and conservative in his theo-politics. He also had robust intellect and practical grasp of things. Paul also belonged to a class that psychologists describe as a 'high dominance' male. He did not like to play second fiddle to no-one - and I mean no-one.

So, it is very likely that after Paul's initial epiphany, a deep crisis set in. He would have reflected on what people (his support circle of friends and family) told him and at some he would have come to the conclusion (if he was not told directly) that he was mad: ensnared by Satan, and made believe the nonsense the phantasists were preaching about their executed former leader. He would naturally have been afraid for his sanity. It was perhaps in this period of deep uncertainty that Paul hit on the Christ paradox: The Pharisees (like him before his revelation) were offended by Jesus and considered him a madman for saying and doing the things imputed to him. But God`s hand was in that, surely.
For if the departed idol of the Nazarenes was mad, then God gave Paul the proof in making him mad, that Jesus (as a man of flesh) could do nothing about it. If God made Jesus come in God's name and refer to him as "Father", and proclaim his kingdom on earth, the man must have been either what he appeared to be, a crazy charlatan. or,................... or God made him seem mad and for a reason. To exalt his name after what he had to suffer for ideas from which no (conventionally) sane man could hope to profit. Either that or there was no hope for those who like Paul were called as witnesses to God's strange sense of humour.

Control question: So who were the ones "called" ? Any ideas ?

Jiri

Elijah

I consider Paul’s turning point the stoning of Stephen. I think that’s what messed him up. Paul is carrying on the line of martyrs which is what was fueling Christianity’s spread. I think Stephen’s dying like that effected Paul the same way it effected the disciples when they saw Jesus do similar. I think Paul had seen a lot of so called holy men killed and how Stephen handled it was different and made him believe there was something different/true about who Stephen was dying for.

Paul thought Stephen’s faith/sacrifice was because of the belief in the resurrection of Jesus, “like now” as a way of justifying why his followers believed unto death. When I think that more than likely it was just simple imitation of an act of self sacrifice. I think this phenomenon carried itself to Rome and took off from there when the people saw the same unusual sacrifice in the coliseum.

I think the “called” he is referring to is those who have heard the message of Christ.

Solo

Thanks, Elijah. You probably know that Paul does not tell us anything about the stoning of Stephen and his role in it. The story appears in the Acts (7) and may be legendary. Paul in his letters agrees that he persecuted the church of God, but does not elaborate. Furthermore, he says in Gal 1:22 that his face was not known to the churches of Judea "by sight" which is hard to imagine if he was actively persecuting in and around Jerusalem.

On the "calling": do you see that as Paul reference to his own teachings of Christ, i.e. is he speaking to people who "received" the teachings of Jesus Christ from himself ? Or is he making reference to something else, some other "source of knowledge" about Christ, one that is not coming from "men" ?

Jiri

Elijah

Yea who knows how accurate any of the stories are, I was just going by the narrative. I don’t know where Paul is at exactly In that passage or where he was coming from or the sizes of the communities he was traveling through to guess on whether they would know him on sight.

I don’t think he is specifically speaking of teachings received from men (especially him) but more of the conviction in Christ being received and transferred through other believers. The whole sign of Jonah/conviction is contagious phenomenon. I don’t think the believers understood what was going on around them very well, they were just doing monkey see-monkey do.