St. Paul

I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself. (1 Corinthians 4:3)

>>2903174
Yes
Even the 12 disciples got annoyed with Paul for his claims
When they weren't being flayed alive, that is.

File: arch-of-titus1.jpg (295KB, 1200x801px) Image search: [Google]

295KB, 1200x801px

>>2903174
Yes. Never even met Jesus and had often antagonistic relationships with the people who actually knew the guy, and half his epistles are confirmed pseudepigraphic forgeries. He only came to prominence because James and most likely other disciples were executed during the years leading up to the Jewish Great Revolt, and the brutal Roman crackdowns instituted after that and subsequent revolts failed slaughtered most of the original Jewish Christian communities founded and led by the disciples. The Hellenized Jewish Christians that were outside of Roman Palestine escaped the worst of the crackdowns, and thus Paul's teachings became more prominent than the originals.

The Ebionites were most likely the remnants of Jesus of Nazareth's original movement, though we know very little about them other than that they embraced poverty, followed traditional Jewish laws, and viewed Jesus as the messiah in the traditional Jewish sense but not as a deity like YHWH.

File: WANTED.jpg (101KB, 430x528px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 430x528px

For me the good message as expressed in the one attributed to the apostle Marc and possibly that of Matay also is the standard that all other beliefs need to be held to. Any other developments stemming from patriarch fighting are extraneous.

>>2903174
Looks like the consensus is that Paul is out.

>>2903174

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtgfS40f0w4

File: image.jpg (28KB, 600x405px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 600x405px

>>2903183
>judge nobody not even urself

File: Schlomo.png (10KB, 236x214px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 236x214px

>>2903174
He started the gentiles can be saved too meme

File: 1435467314110-2.jpg (39KB, 338x468px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 338x468px

No. Contrary to outlandish claims like >>2903239, the other apostles affirmed Paul's Gospel. There was some tension at times, but this was resolved at the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15.

>>2904172
that is if the acts are trustworthy and you ignore that they even contradict what Paul said about himself

>>2904186
cute conspiracy theory

>>2903174
So, I've seen this one guy (at least I think it's one guy) on /his/ talking about how Paul's claim to be a Pharisee is dubious and that his grasp of contemporary Jewish theology is very weak. Is this just someone bullshitting, or is there something to back it up? Does anyone have any reading recommendations on the subject?

>>2904172
"Acts" is confirmed pseupigraphica. Stick with the Pauline epistles that are actually accepted as legitimate.

>>2903174
Paul was a based j00 and the kikes hate him so he was definitely beloved by God.

>>2904498
>"Acts" is confirmed pseupigraphica
and you use that word again >>2903245
yet you havent provided any scholarly citation

I guess Luke is pseupigraphica too since every biblical scholar alive agrees it shares the same author as Acts

>>2904548
Not that guy, but do you know anything about biblical scholarship (academic scholarship, not apologetics)? Those are the standard academic positions on those works. And yes, Luke is psuedepigrapha, as are the rest of the gospels. None of them were written by the traditionally-ascribed authors, and no one seriously argues that they were.

>>2904548

This person >>2904601 covered the most salient points while I was gone, please bone up on your biblical criticism. The gospels are anonymously written; they lack any claims of authorship or even statements that the authors bore witness to the events in question. The names of disciples tacked onto them are 2nd c. additions, and claims that these attributed authors are accurate are not taken seriously in academia even by Christian scholars.

Seven of the thirteen Pauline epistles are almost universally regarded as actually having been written by Paul, while other epistles like Ephesians, Titus, etc were written by other authors.

Do you have JSTOR access?

>>2904741
Don't forget how several of them, especially Mark and John, make glaring errors about local culture, language, and politics that would be very, very odd for a native 1st century Judean to make.

>>2903174
>guy believes so much in the cause that is fine with getting crucified for his beliefs
>people still doubt his faith

>>2904765
A stroll through a lunatic asylum will show you that faith proves nothing.

Whatever Paul's reasons for getting on board the Christian religion most of the traditional claims about him, including those in Actss are almost certainly false or altered to show him in a better light.

>>2904762
There are no glaring errors, only your misunderstanding of the text.

>b-but they call Aramaic words Hebrew!

Hebrew and Aramaic are so similar that many lexicons include them both in the same volume and it isn't surprising that the Gospel authors conflated the two since they were writing to a foreign audience.

>b-b-but their geography is bad!

No it isn't, you just misunderstand the text. Here is a more in depth explanation:

http://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Menj/geo-errors1.htm

File: Fig. 6.jpg (12KB, 411x283px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 411x283px

>>2904838
>most of the traditional claims about him, including those in Actss are almost certainly false or altered to show him in a better light.

>>2905115
That's Christian apologetics. Try posting some actual academic biblical scholarship.

>>2907292
>implying christian apologetics arent biblical

Paul was legit, dang. Intellectuals b liek, nu uh, we know stuff.

Paul b liek, 'knowledge puffs a man up and love edifies'

Show Paul sum luv. Be edified, believe all things endure all things, so what if you *think* you know it all, it wont help a dang thing if you know not love.

Haterz guna hate.

>>2905150

>"uh-oh it da joos"

>>2908737
They aren't academic. That's the whole point. They're starting from the position of trying to defend their interpretation of the text from any critical assessment rather than engaging in scholarly criticism (which doesn't mean what you think it means, look it up)

>>2908737

that's about as academic as a mormon pamphlet

>>2903174
>>2903239
>>2903245
>>2904498

Fuck off Ahmed.

>>2908805
>>2908814
Just because someone has a bias doesn't mean they can't be academic. Frankly everyone is biased and like everyone else you prefer academics who reinforce your biases.

>>2903174

He grossly distorted the message of Jesus and founded a religion in Jesus' name on the basis of his distortions, that's pretty god-damned heretical, but since he didn't claim divine revelation (beyond God telling him to become Christian), he's not a prophet and so can't be a false prophet.

>>2903245

Without Paul, Christianity remains a tiny Jewish sect that would certainly be long extinct by now. Paul is the one who re-invented a failed Messiah into a Greek-style Cosmic savior deity, for better or worse Christianity IS the religion Paul created, it has precious little to do with the actual teachings of Jesus.

>>2908805
Christian apologetics were the literal cause of the beginning of Western academia.

>>2909090
>it's a "Pauline theology doesn't agree with Jesus' teachings" episode

>>2904172

According to Paul, the Apostles liked him and agreed with him. According to every other source, they hated him and anathematized him.

>>2904280

This guy talks about it: >>2904162
>Paul claims to be a scholar of Judaism
>he couldn't read Hebrew and studied translations of what few Jewish texts he actually knew about

>>2904548
>I guess Luke is pseupigraphica too

Yes, obviously. Luke didn't write the gospel of Luke, because he was long dead by the time it was written.

>>2905115

You dumb cunt.

>>2909076
>Just because someone has a bias doesn't mean they can't be academic.

It's one thing to have a bias, but when your bias fully informs your "academia", then you're not a scholar, your just an apologist.

>>2909102

It doesn't. In b4 you pathetically try to cite gospels at me: Paul's letters came BEFORE the gospels, they agree with Paul's theology, NOT with that of Jesus.

>>2909141
Says you as a result of your biases.

>>2909143
The Gospels are the primary sources we have about Jesus and His teachings, if you don't believe them how do you know what Jesus' theology was?

>>2909136
למה אתה כועס

ITT: buttblasted evangelicals who don't understand the difference between academic studies and apologetics

File: Who could it be?.gif (2MB, 360x202px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 360x202px

>>2909199

>>2909143
>lol guise my 19th century german liberal highar criticism is so grate guise what if jesus wasn't god but what if he was also the gay but also bangd mary magdalene he was just like us lol but totally not god

>>2909199
stop samefagging

>>2909262
A Christian who won't use arguments or citations and resorts to ad-hominems.
What else is new.

>>2904601
>do you know anything about biblical scholarship
Yes, i actually have a degree in religious studies unlike 99% of people ITT

>>2904741
conjecture
>>2909129
pure conjecture

>>2910275
*tips*
This whole thread is full of fedoras that want to believe they are right rather than know what is right which at this point is impossible unless someone digs up a manuscript in lebanon or turkey.

John is the best Gospel. Prove me wrong.

PRO-TIP: Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot.

File: Remove Them.jpg (178KB, 469x600px) Image search: [Google]

178KB, 469x600px

>>2910693
> 37 I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. Yet you are looking for a way to kill me, because you have no room for my word. 38 I am telling you what I have seen in the Father’s presence, and you are doing what you have heard from your father.”

>39 “Abraham is our father,” they answered.

>“If you were Abraham’s children,” said Jesus, “then you would do what Abraham did.

John confirmed for best Gospel.

>>2910565
ok guys, he has a meme degree. guess that overturns his apparent lack of basic knowledge on the subject and we're wrong.

File: Oy vey.jpg (503KB, 768x896px) Image search: [Google]

503KB, 768x896px

>>2910726

File: image.jpg (26KB, 307x499px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 307x499px

>>2910565
pic related is itself an instance of pure human conjecture

prove me wrong

>>2910731
Not the guy you quoted, but he's not wrong. I minored in religious studies (at a Christian school nonetheless) and mostly took classes in early church history and second temple Judaism. That anon clearly doesn't know what he's talking about and seriously lacks knowledge about scholarship of the period and academic consensus regarding authorship of the New Testament. People in this thread keep posting memes about Jews and heresies, but nothing negative about Paul (or the authorship of Biblical texts) that has been posted is outside of mainstream academia. If you're not familiar with that, re unwilling to do the research, or just want to shitpost about Jews, that's not our problem.

File: 1442812872040.png (65KB, 400x549px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 400x549px

>>2910746
He isn't wrong though, everything we believe about history is conjecture.

>>2910754
He as in
>>2910565

>>2910726
>a meme degree
>hahaha i dont accept your scholastic accreditation because i dont want to be revealed as an ignoramus