Radcliffe Emerson

Historical opinions on Paul:


Carl Sagan (Scientist; Author)

"My long-time view about Christianity is that it represents an amalgam of two seemingly immiscible parts--the religion of Jesus and the religion of Paul. Thomas Jefferson attempted to excise the Pauline parts of the New Testament. There wasn't much left when he was done, but it was an inspiring document." (Letter to Ken Schei [author of Christianity Betrayed])


Thomas Jefferson

"Paul was the first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus." (All references not listed here, can be found in Christianity Betrayed)


Albert Schweitzer

"Where possible Paul avoids quoting the teaching of Jesus, in fact even mentioning it. If we had to rely on Paul, we should not know that Jesus taught in parables, had delivered the sermon on the mount, and had taught His disciples the 'Our Father.' Even where they are specially relevant, Paul passes over the words of the Lord."


Wil Durant (Philospher)

"Paul created a theology of which none but the vaguest warrants can be found in the words of Christ."

"Fundamentalism is the triumph of Paul over Christ."


Walter Kaufmann (Professor of Philosophy, Princeton)

"Paul substituted faith in Christ for the Christlike life."


George Bernard Shaw

"No sooner had Jesus knocked over the dragon of superstition than Paul boldly set it on its legs again in the name of Jesus."


Thomas Hardy

"The new testament was less a Christiad than a Pauliad."


Hyam Maccoby (Talmudic Scholar)

"As we have seen, the purposes of the book of Acts is to minimize the conflict between Paul and the leaders of the Jerusalem Church, James and Peter. Peter and Paul, in later Christian tradition, became twin saints, brothers in faith, and the idea that they were historically bitter opponents standing for irreconcilable religious standpoints would have been repudiated with horror. The work of the author of Acts was well done; he rescued Christianity from the imputation of being the individual creation of Paul, and instead gave it a respectable pedigree, as a doctrine with the authority of the so-called Jerusalem Church, conceived as continuous in spirit with the Pauline Gentile Church of Rome. Yet, for all his efforts, the truth of the matter is not hard to recover, if we examine the New Testament evidence with an eye to tell-tale inconsistencies and confusions, rather than with the determination to gloss over and harmonize all difficulties in the interests of an orthodox interpretation." (The Mythmaker, p. 139, Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, 1986)


Jeremy Bentham (English Philosopher)

"If Christianity needed an Anti-Christ, they needed look no farther than Paul." (Paraphrased. Looking for a copy of "Not Paul, but Jesus" in order to retrieve the exact quote.)


Carl Jung (Psychologist)

"Paul hardly ever allows the real Jesus of Nazareth to get a word in." (U.S. News and World Report, April 22, 1991, p. 55)


Bishop John S. Spong (Episcopal Bishop of Newark)

"Paul's words are not the Words of God. They are the words of Paul- a vast difference." (Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, p. 104, Harper San Francisco, 1991)

Toto

Do you have any more proof than your assertion? Paul uses the same word in Greek translated "appeared" for the appearances to the 500 as he uses for Jesus' appearance to himself - but everyone assumes that the "appearance" to Paul was a spiritual phenomenon. Why not to the 500?

FunkyRes

Then from those arguements, it seems the skeptics even argue that Paul could not have authored the gospels, as they claim Paul's theology is in contradiction to what Jesus taught.

So those that reject the gospels as true seem to indicate that they would also reject Pauline authorship of the gospels.

Pauls differences with Jesus are not true, btw- and I dare anyone to point out a contradiction between Pauline theology and what Jesus taught.

Careful what you read, lies abound.

FunkyRes

I do not assume that Paul meant the Appearance of Jesus to him was a spiritual one, so "everyone" is a bit of a stretch.

I think you mean everyone who thinks Paul didn't believe in the physical resurrection of Christ

Skeptical

So let me get this straight. You are claiming that the "appearance" to Paul was a _physical_ appearance? In other words, are you claiming the appearance to Paul is exactly the same type as the appearances described in Matthew and Luke?

[ July 16, 2002: Message edited by: Skeptical ]</p>

Radcliffe Emerson

How true that is, especially the lies that became Christianity.

FunkyRes

which can be demonstrated as lies?

The claim that Paul's theology contradicted that of Jesus can be looked at and tested for it's validity.

Can you prove Christianity is based on lies?

FunkyRes

Unless there is documentation that Paul thought otherwise that I haven't noticed (a possibility- I don't have the new testament memorized) that is the way I've always viewed it.

I can't prove that it had to be- but I don't know of any proof that it couldn't be either.

Do you have any?

CX

Or Paul is simply passing on some earlier tradition/legend. In either case I don't think it implies that Paul had a strictly spiritual view of the resurrection. I think it makes a strong case that Paul is referring to an historical Jesus. That he knows little about the details and that he distances himself from the HJ is not surprising to me given his obvious opposition from the Jerusalem camp on the basis that he is not a real apostle, one supposes, because he had not known Jesus.

Atticus_Finch

Here is the account of Paul's encounter with Christ on the road to Damascus

9:3 As he was going along, approaching Damascus, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 9:4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” 9:5 So he said, “Who are you, Lord?” He replied, “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting. 9:6 But stand up and enter the city and you will be told what you must do.” 9:7 (Now the men who were traveling with him stood there speechless, because they heard the voice but saw no one.) 9:8 So Saul got up from the ground, but although his eyes were open, he could see nothing. Leading him by the hand, his companions brought him into Damascus. 9:9 For three days he could not see, and he neither ate nor drank anything.

(New English Translation)

Sounds like a physical experience to me. His companions heard the voice.

Regards,

Finch