It is currently Thu Aug 16, 2018 6:14 am

All times are [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Did St. Paul exist?
PostPosted: Thu Feb 19, 2015 3:58 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 4:09 pm
Posts: 2142
That's an interesting study. Of course, it's a sort of "Hero with a Thousand faces" archetypal adventure tale, but I'm not seeing a deliberate usage necessarily of the Moses myth by the Pauline mythographers. They could have drawn from many others, including Apollonius and Saul in the Bible and Josephus - these seem to be more specifically related.

_________________
Why suffer from Egyptoparallelophobia, when you can read Christ in Egypt? Try it - you'll like it:

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:29 pm 
Offline
Jesus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 12:10 am
Posts: 12
Location: Southeast Asia
Richard Carrier: The Historicity of Paul the Apostle

Hermann Detering: Paulus, Markus und andere Verwechslungen Make sure to use Google Translate


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did St. Paul exist?
PostPosted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 11:48 am 
Offline
Thor

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 12:12 pm
Posts: 31
I think Carrier has lost the plot here. It seems counter intuitive to imagine a historical Paul (i.e. Paul the Apostle) simply on the grounds of the internal workings of the letters. Now there was a historical Paul -- his name was Marcion -- but he lived and was active in the second century; not the first. The reason for placing Paul, and subsequently his letters, in the first century had to do with Acts of the Apostles, which itself was not started until the first half of the second century, and not completed until Tertullian's time. However, thinking that A-Apostles is a first century text (or that it's accounts are even truthful), has lead to a misappropriation of dates, particularly where the Pauline corpus is concerned.

One major point Carrier brings up is this:

"That third point is important, because the letters explicitly present themselves internally as having been written in the 50s A.D. So the congruence of that fact with their content totally ignoring later existing doctrinal and tradition battles in the Church is very likely if the 50s is indeed when they were written. It is very unlikely otherwise: not impossible, but very unlikely, and that produces a strong Bayes factor favoring authenticity."

This is simply baseless conjecture, nor is it "very unlikely." The fact of the matter is the Pauline letters never indicate they were written prior to the Temple destruction, but instead refer to the Temple as Hebrews does: as a metaphoric and celestial structure. This would give a strong indication that Paul is after the Temple destruction, when all that remained was a heavenly Temple. (Granted, I think Philo also had this dual-Temple philosophy, but Paul is close to Hebrews and R-John's ideal of the Temple.)

Another thing to consider is that the Temple destruction of 70ce. was not absolute. A wall and few towers were left standing, and bar Kochba had plans to refortify it. (As you can see on coins minted during his rule). The question 'which Temple are we talking about' must be asked.

But that is internal evidence. As for external evidence our earliest knowledge of Paul comes from Marcion. (1 Clement and Polycarp are also mid-second century, possibly post-bar Kochba). Justine Martyr never mentions Paul, but he does mention Simon Magus and Marcion (I'll cut to the chase: Paul, Marcion, and Simon Magus were the same person). Irenaeus accepts Paul, but filtered through the Pastorals written by his teacher, Polycarp; and Tertullian dismissed the epistles entirely and accepts only the Paul of Acts. Neither man accepted the Pauline epistles as genuine, or without major revisions by Marcion. This also shows that in the early days of the orthodoxy there were doubts as to the validity of the epistles.

Anyone interested in this should check Vinzent's book on Marcion. It shows without a doubt that Marcion is the template for which the synoptics are based.

_________________
Y GWIR YN ERBYN BYD


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did St. Paul exist?
PostPosted: Tue Sep 20, 2016 8:48 pm 
Offline
Jesus
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 12:10 am
Posts: 12
Location: Southeast Asia
D wrote:
But that is internal evidence. As for external evidence our earliest knowledge of Paul comes from Marcion. (1 Clement and Polycarp are also mid-second century, possibly post-bar Kochba). Justine Martyr never mentions Paul, but he does mention Simon Magus and Marcion (I'll cut to the chase: Paul, Marcion, and Simon Magus were the same person). Irenaeus accepts Paul, but filtered through the Pastorals written by his teacher, Polycarp; and Tertullian dismissed the epistles entirely and accepts only the Paul of Acts. Neither man accepted the Pauline epistles as genuine, or without major revisions by Marcion. This also shows that in the early days of the orthodoxy there were doubts as to the validity of the epistles.

Anyone interested in this should check Vinzent's book on Marcion. It shows without a doubt that Marcion is the template for which the synoptics are based.


Bob Price made a good case that Paul is Simon Magus. The writings of the so-called 1st century Apostolic fathers are rank and file forgeries as demonstrated by Joseph Wheless in his book Forgery in Christianity. They bear no cognizance of the canonical gospels other than some quotes that probably came from common source texts. If you follow Mythicist Milwaukee on Facebook, you may have seen a blog where he posts a lot about Jesus Mythicism. There are some instances that I disagree but he's quite polite unlike Richard Carrier. He and I do agree that the four canonical gospels are written in the second century and that the New Testament narratives are just Old Testament midrash.

The Curious Case of the Gnostic Mandaeans
Marcion of Sinope
Cerinthus: The Most Important Heretic You’ve Never Heard Of


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Did St. Paul exist?
PostPosted: Wed Sep 28, 2016 5:42 pm 
Offline
Thor

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 12:12 pm
Posts: 31
The Clementine literature really exposes how the proto-orthodox church regarded Paul, along with the first half of A-Apostles and A-Peter. Anything regarding Simon Magus should be understood as Paul and Marcion. I'm under the persuasion that the Pauline epistles are in fact Marcion's own sermons, for reasons I don't want to discuss here as I'm still trying to see if it pans out.

One claim that antagonists like to lay bear is that Paul writes before the Temple destruction and knew of the Apostles personally. In my opinion this is just putting the cart before the horse, and working backyards to reach a conclusions. Paul clearly has a post-Temple ideal of Judaism, to the point of being anti-Jewish. His statements of going "up to Jerusalem" in Galatians 1:18 to meet Cephas and James should be understood as visionary. Just as in the Apocalypse of Paul, where a child commands Paul to go up to Jerusalem, and what happens is nothing short of a vision, wherein he sees the twelve Apostles. This indicates that the Jerusalem Paul is envisioning is a heavenly Jerusalem and the Apostles are there, which fits a post-70ce. composition of Paul. After all, Jerusalem was destroyed and no longer useful, and the Apostles were dead.

Also the reasoning behind appointing Paul an Apostle by Jesus posthumously never made sense to me. I understand it was for him to preach to the Gentile nations -- and Marcion was popular with Gentiles -- but why not let the disciples do that when they didn't have a problem converting Gentiles? (Like Cornelius). Everything about A-Apostles reads like damage control by the proto-orthodoxy trying to mitigate Marcion's control over the Gentile churches.

_________________
Y GWIR YN ERBYN BYD


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 65 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

All times are [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Truth Be Known | Stellar House Publishing
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Live Support