aa5874

Which century did the writer called Paul live?

I hope your Humanities textbook reflect that Scholars have deduced that there was more than one person using the name Paul.

My position is that the writer Paul was as fraud and a liar and did not really exist in the time zone as given by Eusebius, Acts of the Apostles and the writer himself.

The writer Paul is from some time after the writings of Justin Martyr, or no earlier than the second century, since Justin did not mention in his writings any sacred scriptures called Acts of the Apostles or the letters of a writer called Paul.

And further the writer Paul appears to have been aware of gLuke and Acts of the Apostles which appear, oddly, to have been written when "Paul" was already dead.

IamJoseph

Paul's veracity as a historical figure comes not from the Gospels but by non-chrstian writings. Paul, according to the Gospels version, has no connection with history or reality. Every coherence says what was encumbent was not done: proof of what the Gospels says - outside the Gospels sources.

IamJoseph

Paul was in a Ceaseare prison for 2 years, and released in 68 CE. It took two years for him to reach Rome by boat. He never returned to Judea again. None of Paul's writings were written by him or anywhere near his life time. It is aso obvious none could write or advocate anything negative of Rome - not even the Roman appointed Scribe Flavius Josephus. The Gospels reflect this - it demonises the Roman and Greek pet hate, the Jews - hyping up to kingdom come one Jew's death, and omitting the mass murder of 1.2 million Jews in their midst. It defies truth and common sense.

Johnny Skeptic

Isaiah 53 has been discussed many times at this forum, and many good reasons have been given regarding why Isaiah 53 does not refer to Jesus.

A Jews for Judaism website at http://jewsforjudaism.org/index.php?...=48&Itemid=353 gives lots of good reasons why Isaiah 53 does not refer to Jesus.

If Isaiah 53 mentions Jesus, why do you suppose that historically, the vast majority of Jews have rejected Christianity?

aa5874

Can you quote a passage from a non-christian writing about the real Paul?

IamJoseph

Isaiah does not mention Jesus - or a virgin.

IamJoseph

Josephus. His imprisonment in Ceasarea, the release via Queen Berenice, and his expulsion from Jerusalem is mentioned there.

grog225

I don't know what we can really say about Paul. I see there are many advocating Detering's view that Paul is a fabrication. Maybe. I do think we can accept Detering's view that the "bedrock" or whatever of Paul is related to gnosticism:

1 Cor 2:6We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature, but not the wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age, who are coming to nothing. 7No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glory before time began. 8None of the rulers of this age understood it, for if they had, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. 9However, as it is written:
"No eye has seen,
no ear has heard,
no mind has conceived
what God has prepared for those who love him"— 10but God has revealed it to us by his Spirit.

This is a perfect expression of gnosticism.

However, we also get just the opposite. I think we can salvage an actual Paul (why would we? Well maybe he was real. Can we just rule that out? What a difference from my usual forum CARM! I don't think so)

I think we can accept an historical Paul as a possibility. But then the question is, what did he write, if anything? I think the most "authentic" of Paul would be the gnostic Paul, the Paul of 1 Cor2. The Paul Thessalonians who talks about Jews killing Christ is clearly not "Paul" but a later "orthodox" Christian fixing Paul up, possibly in response to Marcionism.

There are reasons why I think Paul was real and that we can find authentic fragments of Paul in the Pauline corpus. One is that there are ideas that are neither Marcionite nor "orthodox." For example, Paul does not refer to an earthly ministry of Jesus but Marcion did believe that Jesus came to earth, just that he descended directly into Capernaum. To Paul, Jesus was "revealed by the Spirit", he is the heavenly Christ who will come, not the Christ who did come. My thinking is that Paul represents a very early Jesus belief that does not include a person on earth.

Still, there are a lot of caveats. We don't know the occasion for these letters. I do accept that there is something fishy about Galatians and it clearly has undergone a tug of war between Marcionites and Catholics. But I don't rule out the possibility that something of Galatians is authentic.

I don't think we know at all when paul wrote (if he did). We have no reference point. Acts is fiction, assumptions that date Paul from the crucifixion are groundless. From Paul, we can only date his letters from his conversion (and that is in Galatians!) and we don't know when that could have been.

On the other hand, Marcion claimed Paul as his mentor (not directly, though) so there must have been something about this "Paul" heretofore unknown.

aa5874

There is no credible non-apologetic source that can place the letter writer Paul in the 1st century or before the writings of Justin Martyr.


Now, in the NT, the writer Paul did write that it was revealed to him that Jesus was betrayed some time in the night and did have his Last Supper with his disciples.

The letter writer did write that Jesus was crucified, died and rose from the dead. He even claimed over 500 people saw Jesus in a resurrected state and some of those who saw the resurrected dead were still alive as he was writing his letter.



The letter writer Paul did write about an earthly Jesus who had apostles.

The church writers, the authors of the NT, and even the letter writer Paul placed himself LAST. "Paul" wrote that he SAW Jesus last.


1Cor 15:8 - The writer Paul needed a dead and resurrected Jesus, just like a psychic needs the dead to talk to..

IamJoseph

Better, if christians believed in Mohammed their sins would be forgiven. Because when we compare the sins and crimes of European christianity - Jews come up as angelic beings in comparison. Even the previous Pope admitted [finally!] that Jews have their own covenant and do not need assistence from the Gospels. If Jews sinned - and they most certainly have - it is only related to their Mosaic laws - not in a name of a messenger who had no message.

'WHAT IS HATEFUL TO YOU - DO NOT UNTO OTHERS'


Jews did not crucify anyone. But Rome crucified over a million Jews [unpardonably omitted in the Gospels, constituting a lie-by-omission], and the medevial church broke all Rome's records.


'THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS'


No JC can save from the above violations. Trust me - I'm not a lawyer.