MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
St Paul the conman (NEW CONCEPTS)
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Grant



View user's profile
Reply with quote

Suppose that:

- someone in Alexandria establishes a Jewish version of a mystery religion (like Osiris/Mithras etc)

- this starts to become popular so Paul is sent to deal with it

- whilst in Alexandria he is initiated into the rites and undergoes a conversion

Who knows, maybe the central rite of this mystery religion involved an imagined journey on a horse?
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Grant wrote:
Suppose that:
- someone in Alexandria establishes a Jewish version of a mystery religion (like Osiris/Mithras etc)
- this starts to become popular so Paul is sent to deal with it


Interesting.

I put an argument together a couple years back that "Damascus" is simply a code word for Alexandria. It has nothing to do with the place of that name now in Syria.

Again. Hatty should feel free to repost that material.
Send private message
Chad


In: Ramsbottom
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Ishmael wrote:
Chad wrote:
The name 'tent stitcher' is clearly some kind of allusion. But to what?

Sound to me he was some sort of facilitator, in the employ of the Romans, to keep the local bigwigs on side. A 'tent stitcher' in the literal sense certainly wouldn't have been in any position to "violently persecute" early Christians. - - But a metaphorical tent would be a good place to conduct business.

Chad. With all due respect (and we have a lot of respect for ignorance around here), you should familiarize yourself with the source material before offering an explanation for it (note that I did not suggest you familiarize yourself with the scholarship). Just get the data first hand and do your best with it.

A simple 'Nah -- bollocks' would probably have sufficed.

But let's take a closer look, using Ishmael's own hypothesis as source material.

Ish wrote:
Here, entire Jewish communities of tens of thousands had been granted Roman citizenship by Julius C'esar as reward for their services in his war against Ptolemy.

He also wrote:
(Paul)...a member of a powerful and respected Alexandrian family. Someone who had the local credibility to enforce the will of the central authorities.

So we have a central (Jewish / Hebrew) authority that has a desire to 'violently persecute' what they see as a heretic splinter group and a Roman authority which presumably isn't too keen on the idea of this splinter group upsetting the Status Quo.

Then we have Paul, a (proud?) Roman citizen who also happens to be a Hebrew "bigwig" and part of the religious intelligentsia. - - Who better to act as a go-between to ensure both authorities work together towards a common end?

Now to this 'tent stitcher' issue:

Ish wrote:
Problem is, now I've looked into it, the only support for this seems to come from Acts -- and I think the whole of that book is utter fiction. Paul makes no statement anywhere concerning making his living this way.

If you seek an esoteric meaning....look no further than Paul's own words:'The only "tent" that Paul ever refers to is the human body'.

So are we to take it Paul was a surgeon (or mortician)? - - Or is there some other esoteric meaning?

I'm not claiming my ideas weren't complete bollocks. - - Just that they weren't conceived in total ignorance (not that there is anything wrong with that) or in complete contradiction to the source data.

And maybe Paul's conversion was political rather than religious. How many of today's religious intelligentsia are just closet atheists, in it for the power?

As before -- probably complete bollocks.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

If people are actually going to bother defending themselves against Ishmael we'll be here all night.
Send private message
Chad


In: Ramsbottom
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Believe me, I'm not in a sulk over this. I merely put it up there for re-consideration (in the light of new evidence) - with the full and certain knowledge that I could never hope to win an argument against Ishmael.

Indeed, I absolutely welcome his criticism (as should we all). - - He keeps us on our toes and helps guard against laziness in the thought process. - - Long may he continue to do so.

Nah -- bollocks.
Send private message
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

I put an argument together a couple years back that "Damascus" is simply a code word for Alexandria. It has nothing to do with the place of that name now in Syria.

Again. Hatty should feel free to repost that material.

It was reposted a couple of days ago (see previous page) before I was rudely cut off from t'internet.

whilst in Alexandria he is initiated into the rites and undergoes a conversion

Who knows, maybe the central rite of this mystery religion involved an imagined journey on a horse?

There's been (radical) speculation that Simon the Magus, the Gnostic held responsible for corrupting Christianity, was conflated with Paul and that Paul was subsequently rehabilitated due to forged gospels. Simon was supposed to be able to levitate at will but, in his zeal to prove his powers, fell to his death mid-air.
Send private message
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Then we have Paul: a (proud?) Roman citizen who also happens to be a Hebrew "bigwig" and part of the religious intelligentsia. - - Who better to act as a go between to ensure both authorities work together towards a common end?

Philo of Alexandria was the ambassador chosen to represent Alexandrian Jews in Rome.
Send private message
Chad


In: Ramsbottom
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Philo of Alexandria was the ambassador chosen to represent Alexandrian Jews in Rome.

No doubt he was.

But on this specific issue (the violent persecution of a heretic splinter group) Paul seems to have had all the right connections to ensure the job was expedited with the full cooperation - and to the full satisfaction of - all vested interests (including Rome).
Send private message
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Paul seems to have had all the right connections to ensure the job was expedited with the full cooperation - and to the full satisfaction of - all vested interests (including Rome).

Yes, almost too much of a good thing; not only a Pharisee, the law-givers and upholders of tradition, but a Roman citizen to boot, Rome being synonymous with lex and order (we went into this with Wireloop at length, the law was equated with 'childish things' incompatible with the Word of God).

Paul being blinded by a great light and then having his eyes opened is clearly a direct reference to coming out of the shadows of a Plato-style cave and seeing reality. Maybe the whole of his life is an allegory.
Send private message
Mick Harper
Site Admin

In: London
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Chad's view of St Paul's job, insofar as I understand it, is similar to Hitler's job in 1919. He was told by the powers-that-be (the German Army) to join the German Workers' Party and report back as to whether they were dangerous or not.

And like Paul, Gustavus Adolphus (as I like to think of Him) decided to stay and ride the tiger to world domination (including of course complete mastery of the German Army!). Just so Paul's version of Christianity eventually got to control his old paymasters, the Roman Empire. Truly, God moves in mysterious ways. His blunders to perform.
Send private message
Chad


In: Ramsbottom
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Interesting thought.

I don't see Paul as having gone 'under cover' at anybody's behest. More likely he saw the potential in this new religion and decided a man of his calibre could eventually gain control of the operation.

He may well have sold his initial conversion (to the Romans at least) as a way of keeping tabs on this dangerous group. Somebody must have been looking out for him, otherwise surely the powers that unleashed him on the Christians would have devoted all their efforts to the eradication of such a high profile traitor (I can't see running off to Arabia or wherever saving him).

(I thoroughly expect to be reprimanded for not doing my homework, but last time I went near a bible I was almost struck down by lightning).
Send private message
Hatty
Site Admin

In: Berkshire
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Somebody must have been looking out for him, otherwise surely the powers that unleashed him on the Christians would have devoted all their efforts to the eradication of such a high profile traitor (I can't see running off to Arabia or wherever saving him).

Roman policy with troublesome tribes as in Germany was to let one lot fight the other unless there happened to be a leader of the calibre of Arminius (Hermann) who might become a popular hero. In Palestine the Jews were just as quarrelsome amongst themselves but kept in check by the law-abiding, law-giving Pharisees; it's tempting to extend the Hitler/Paul analogy and see the Pharisees as the equivalent of camp capos, sacrificing integrity for the sake of order.

If the biblical accounts are to be believed, the sheer numbers of people gathering in their thousands to listen to the Christian message would've caused concern to the authorities. It was however a movement that didn't foster revolt against the Roman rulers, it seems more of an in-house struggle with Jewish leaders.
Send private message
Chad


In: Ramsbottom
View user's profile
Reply with quote

It was however a movement that didn't foster revolt against the Roman rulers, it seems more of an in-house struggle with Jewish leaders.

If the Romans regarded Paul as 'their man', they would have warned the Pharisees off him, whilst watching how events unfolded.
Send private message
Ishmael


In: Toronto
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Chad wrote:
He may well have sold his initial conversion (to the Romans at least) as a way of keeping tabs on this dangerous group. Somebody must have been looking out for him, otherwise surely the powers that unleashed him on the Christians would have devoted all their efforts to the eradication of such a high profile traitor (I can't see running off to Arabia or wherever saving him).

There are two St. Pauls. The "real" Paul of the letters and the fictional Paul of the Book of Acts.

The real St. Paul is known only by his authorship of a number of letters in which are outlined principles of Christianity. We don't know much at all about this man, not when he lived nor the context in which he was writing. We only have documents of unknown origin and date which bear a stylistic similarity suggesting a common author.

These are the key biographical statements within those letters:

You have heard, no doubt, of my earlier life in Judaism. I was violently persecuting the church of God and was trying to destroy it. I advanced in Judaism beyond many among my people of the same age, for I was far more zealous for the traditions of my ancestors.
Paul's Letter to the Galatians 1:13-14

I suspect the excerpt above is an interpolation. Others agree.

If anyone else has reason to be confident in the flesh, I have more: circumcised on the eighth day, a member of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew born of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless.
-- Paul's Letter to the Philippians 3:4-6

And even this passage is not safely attributed to the common author of the Pauline corpus.

Indeed... I wonder if "Peter" and "Paul" were not always archetypal and that all of these letters are merely representative of a body of polemical literature in which are outlined arguments for and against the principles of "Law" and "Grace".

Unquestionably fictional is the St. Paul whose life and adventures are detailed in the book of Acts. We know a tremendous amount of information about this man but, as his life is unlikely to be even based on real events, there's little point in discussing his historical significance (though of course the impact of the story has historical significance).

As for discussing the motives and imagined hidden agenda of this fictional Paul, by all means do so -- but you are engaged only in literary criticism and reinterpretation. It's got nothing to do with history.
Send private message
Chad


In: Ramsbottom
View user's profile
Reply with quote

Ish wrote:
As for discussing the motives and imagined hidden agenda of this fictional Paul, by all means do so -- but you are engaged only in literary criticism and reinterpretation. It's got nothing to do with history.

You know, I think you are probably correct. - - But wouldn't it make a wonderful film script!
Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Jump to:  
Page 2 of 8

MemberlistThe Library Index  FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group