I just finished reading The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity by Talmudic scholar and Professor Hyam Maccoby (Centre for Jewish Studies; Visiting Professor as Scholar-Librarian; Lecturer at the Leo Baeck College, London' Emeritus Fellow) and it left me thinking ... "What would Jesus have thought of Paul, and what did the Apostles think of him?"

"... At the beginning of Christianity stand two figures: Jesus and Paul. Jesus is regarded by Christians as the founder of their religion, in that the events of his life comprise the foundation story of Christianity; but Paul is regarded as the great interpreter of Jesus' mission, who explained, in a way that Jesus himself never did, how Jesus' life and death fitted into a cosmic scheme of salvation, stretching from the creation of Adam to the end of time.

How should we understand the relationship between Jesus and Paul? We shall be approaching this question not from the standpoint of faith, but from that of historians, who regard the Gospels and the rest of the New Testament as an important source of evidence requiring careful sifting and criticism, since their authors were propagating religious beliefs rather than conveying dispassionate historical information. We shall also be taking into account all relevant evidence from other sources, such as Josephus, the Talmud, the Church historians and the Gnostic writings.

What would Jesus himself have thought of Paul? We must remember that Jesus never knew Paul; the two men never once met. The disciples who knew Jesus best, such as Peter, James and John, have left no writings behind them explaining how Jesus seemed to them or what they considered his mission to have been. Did they agree with the interpretations disseminated by Paul in his fluent, articulate writings? Or did they perhaps think that this newcomer to the scene, spinning complicated theories about the place of Jesus in the scheme of things, was getting everything wrong? Paul claimed that his interpretations were not just his own invention, but had come to him by personal inspiration; he claimed that he had personal acquaintance with the resurrected Jesus, even though he had never met him during his lifetime. Such acquaintance, he claimed, gained through visions and transports, was actually superior to acquaintance with Jesus during his lifetime, when Jesus was much more reticent about his purposes..."

READ REST HERE: The Problem of Paul
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/maccoby2.htm

The Mythmaker: Paul And the Invention Of Christianity by Hyam Maccoby
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/076070787...5Fencoding=UTF8

Sean

Many people cite the argument Paul had with some of the other apostles (Peter, or was it James? Too tired to remember right now), about whether Jesus' message was for Gentiles or for Jews. Paul claimed it was a message for everyone. WHo would know better? the critics ask! Paul, who never met Jesus, or those who walked/talked/lived with Jesus.

It's a fair question - at face value. Scratch the surface however, and it, in my opinion, shows a gross misunderstanding of the gospels (matthew, mark, luke, john).

1. The most obvious quote comes just before Jesus' ascension. Matthew 28:18 has Jesus commanding the disciples to go to ALL NATIONS (not just Israel).

2. While it is true that Jesus' earthly ministry was to the Jews, he made it clear that this was only the start. The message will start at Jerusalem (centre of Israel), then to Judah and Israel (the Jews), then to the ends of the Earth (everyone else, the Gentile's). Sorry, I'll edit this post tomorrow to include a scripture reference, I'm too tired to find it right now!

3. This argument does not show Jesus' preference. What it shows is a Jew arguing for Jews'! Being an apostle does not make the apostle's immune to cultural bias.

4. While it is true that Paul never met Jesus in his earthly ministry, what is known through the book of Acts is that Paul, a devout hater of Christians, suddenly changes his opinion, and becomes one of their most ardent supporters. I suppose one could argue that this is a case of "if you can't beat em', join em'". Though Paul claims to have met the risen Jesus on the Damascus road, and throughout the next 3 years was taught by him specifically.

These four points together, show ample and undeniable biblical support for Paul as a reliable witness to Jesus' actions.

Now, whether one chooses to take the New Testament at its word or not, that's another story. BUt to claim Pauline doctrine is anathema to Jesus' doctrine, is not supportable biblically.

I'll post more information later when I read specifics of the argument of this Jewish scholar.

Regards, PA

Um wow. I never heard this about paul.
See you learn something new everyday.
Thanks Seanph.

If were assuming jesus is real. Then who is to verify that he did see jesus and was taught by him. He coulda just been crazy. or possesed.

You're welcome!



I respectfully disagree. Jesus explicitly stated to go to the Jews only. According to the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus told his followers to avoid the Gentiles, compared non-Jews to swine and dogs (Matt. 7:6, 10:5-6, 15:24-26). Also, Acts 16:6.



Again, Matt. 7:6, 10:5-6, 15:24-26, and Acts 16:6. Also, if that had been the case, why did the original disciples--and now James, who was head of the Jesus movement by this time--remain strictly Jewish, follow the law, attend synagogue, celebrate Jewish holy days--particularly the Day of Atonement (Question: If Jesus had died for the sins of mankind, and his disciples new that,, why did they keep this holy day?!)? Why did they not immediately go out to the gentiles if Jesus had preached such a message?

As for Mark 16:15 in which Jesus extends his mission (Great Commission) to non-Jews ... Verses !6:9-20 are are not found in the earlier most reliable Greek manuscripts and are later additions.

Jesus never said such a thing.

Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why by Bart Ehrman (Chair, Department of Religious Studies, UNC at Chapel Hill)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/006073817...glance&n=283155



Oh but it does. If there was no conflict in message, then the Jerusalem movement would have had no problems with Paul. But they did. They called Paul before them multiple times to question him as to why he was preaching the abrogation of the law amongst other things.

Paul and the Jerusalem Church

While Paul was preaching what was essentially his own innovative theology about Jesus, what was going on with the apostles; the ones who knew the earthly Jesus was, and were aware of his teachings? Of course Christian mythology, primarily through the Acts of the Apostles and the forgeries known as the Petrine epistles, have presented the teachings of apostles as being essentially in harmony with Paul and his teaching. That this was not the case is what we will be showing here.

The problem can be traced to Paul's preaching to the Gentiles. After complaints by Jewish Christians from Jerusalem, Paul was summoned to Jerusalem to meet the church there headed by James, Peter and John. In this so-called "Jerusalem Council" an uneasy truce was agreed upon by both parties. It was a truce that did not last. For immediately following the council meeting, an incident occurred at Antioch which, in retrospect, severed forever the ties between Paul and the Jerusalem church.

While Paul wanted to keep some ties to the Jerusalem Church, it was obvious that the latter did not share the same sentiments. Indeed the evidence from Paul's own epistles show that the Jerusalem church, headed by James, actively opposed Paul's missionary activities by sending out emissaries of their own to combat his gospel.

Paul's final attempt to reconcile himself to the Jerusalem Church, by delivering the collection he promised during the "Jerusalem council", met with failure. A careful reading of the evidence shows that the Paul's collection was rejected by the Jerusalem Church and that they very probably "had a hand" in Paul's arrest!

We can conclude that the Jerusalem church, which consisted of Jesus' brothers and the apostles who knew the earthly Jesus (such as Peter and John), never accepted Paul as a "fellow apostle". Indeed, their intense opposition to Paul's mission can only mean that they viewed Paul's theology as heretical.

SOURCE
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/paulor...html#paulvsjeru

Paul's Final Trip to Jerusalem: The Rejection of the Collection
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/pauljerufinal.html



Jesus never taught Paul anything. If he had, don’t you think he would have instructed his disciples of this radical new message first ...or at least informed them that he was sending Paul to them with said message?!

Paul’s message was his own creation.

Gal. 1 11I want you to know, brothers, that the gospel I preached is not something that man made up. 12I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.

Gal. 15But when God, who set me apart from birth[a] and called me by his grace, was pleased 16to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man, 17nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went immediately into Arabia and later returned to Damascus.

St. Paul Versus St. Peter: A Tale of Two Missions by Michael Goulder (Professor at University of Birmingham)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/066425561...glance&n=283155



Paul is not reliable. He was a man of extremes and a pronounced ego (“Hebrew of Hebrews”).  He was a persecutor, torturer, and murderer. He then pulls a 180 and becomes a fanatical defender of a new Jewish sect--and one who claims it's perfectly fine to lie in order to forward the faith no less (“To a Jew I became a Jew ...”)!  Finally he’s a man whose views of Jesus brought him into direct conflict with, not only the original disciples (cited above and below), but eventually with his closest ally, Barnabas! 



First, we don’t know exactly what Jesus said for his disciples (and most likely Jesus) were illiterate. It was also unnecessary to document his sayings because they [disciples] believed Jesus’ return was imminent. Second, let me play devil’s advocate here and say the Gospels are eyewitness accounts (they are not) and recorded Jesus’ words accurately ... Paul’s doctrine does contradict Jesus’ message ... that’s why the disciples had such a problem with him!

Paul vs Jesus:

1) According to the Gospel of Matthew, Jesus said he had come to save the Jews - not everyone. He told his followers to avoid the Gentiles and compared non-Jews to swine and dogs (Matt. 7:6, 10:5-6, and 15:24-26). In contrast, Paul repeatedly says that Jesus has come to save everyone and has even eliminated the distinction between Jews and Gentiles (Acts 13:47, 1 Cor. 12:13, Ephesians 3:8).

2) Jesus ardently defends the Jewish laws and commandments (Matt. 5:17-19, Luke 16:17) and says that the way to win eternal life is to obey those commandments (Matt. 19:16-19, Mark 10:17-19). Paul says that Christians have been freed from the law (Rom. 7:4, Gal. 3:13) and that people owe their salvation to divine grace (Rom. 6:14 among many other places).

3) There is nothing in the Gospels to suggest that Jesus was uncircumcised or rejected the practice. Genesis 17:9-14 makes it clear that circumcision was intended by God to be practiced forever and that those Jews who abandon the practice shall be cut off. Paul dismisses all this (despite the protests of the disciples who actually knew Jesus) and declares circumcision unnecessary (Romans 2:25-29).

4) Jesus indicates that every believer will be rewarded equally regardless of what we think they deserve and that we don't have any right to complain (Matt. 20). Paul says that people will be rewarded according to their deeds (Romans 2:6 - which echoes Psalm 62 and Proverbs 24:12).


5) Jesus appears to have believed in the concept of "once saved, always saved" (John 10:27-29). Paul says that those who sin after becoming Christians have thrown away their salvation and are beyond hope (Heb. 6:4-6, 10:26-27).

6) Jesus says all judgement has been delegated to him by God (John 5:22). Paul says God alone judges all men (Heb. 12:23). Elsewhere, Paul says that the saints will judge the world - and even the angels (1 Cor. 6:2-3).

7) Jesus apparently thought that whoever calls someone a fool is acting immorally and risking hellfire. Paul - apparently unaware of this - seems to have called people "fools" with some regularity (Rom. 1:22, 1 Cor. 15:36, Gal. 3:1). At times he even seems to have thought it a fine thing to be a fool (1 Cor. 3:18, 1 Cor. 4:10).

8) Jesus told people to pray in their closets, out of sight of others (Matt. 6:5-6). Paul apparently wants men to pray everywhere (1 Tim. 2:8).

9) Jesus said that God was greater than he was (John 14:28). Paul says that Jesus and God are equal (Phil. 2:6, Col. 2:9).

10) Jesus says that everything is possible with God (Matt. 19:26). Paul says that it's impossible for God to lie (Heb. 6:18). Given that Amos 3:6, Isaiah 45:7, 1 Sam 16:14, and Judges 9:23 all indicate that God is capable of evil, and that Ezekiel 20:25 credits God with creating bad laws, and that Jesus himself says he purposely spoke in parables to mislead people (Mark 4:11-12), it would seem that Paul's position here is extremely shaky.

There are several more ... including response[s] to important questions in which Paul explicitly states that the answer[s] come not "from the Lord", but ... "from me [Paul]"!

Respectfully,

Sean