IS it possible that Paul was just a failed Pharisee that

by confusedandalone 56 Replies latest jw friends

  • Witness My Fury
    Witness My Fury

    It's almost a requirement that in order to stop believing the bible you have to read more of it.

  • Phizzy

    I kind of imagine Paul as a bit of a Freddie Franz type, somewhere on the Autistic Spectrum. I think he sincerely believed the voice that he "Heard" on the road to Damascus. And his subsequent brain farts, sorry visions, visits from Angels etc seemed real to him too.

    But you guys have it spot on that as a product of his upbringing the religion he started, and that has morphed in to the christian sects of today, was and is a far cry from what Jesus seemed to be advocating.

    The life that Jesus urged upon his followers was more like that of non-theistic Bhuddism, and did not in fact require a formal religion, perhaps that is why he was such a danger to the Jewish religious establishment and had to be got rid of.

    Paul on the other hand introduces not just a rule bound system, but also a complicated theology that demanded leaders and of course that led to hierarchy and a new religious Establishment.

    Sadly Jesus seems to have failed to start and keep going his movement. Paul succeeded, but only because what his movement had become suited the ends of the Roman Empire.

  • Witness My Fury
    Witness My Fury

    I saw a Joseph Atwill video the other day about Rome inventing Jesus (which I cant now find to liink to), who was modelled on Titus, intersting stuff though I wasnt buying into it just yet, I need to read a lot more and see where it goes...

    I think Paul may well have been a stooge of Rome if that is the case.

  • tim hooper
    tim hooper

    There's a novel entitled "The Mission" by Patrick Tilley that is based on the premise that Paul was actually a bad guy put in place by "Brax" ( Satan!) in order to sow discord.

    It's very good, but also very difficult to get hold of.

  • confusedandalone

    " I think Paul may well have been a stooge" - quite possible.

    It seems like after Jesus dies there would have been all these people hopeless that their GOD has died and they were looking fo r someone to fill a void or atleast explain away the pain that the void was causing. Religious zealots need something before them to worship or honor or revere. I think Paul was not as prominent in Judaism as he and others make out. He appears to be someone who just waswn't getting ahead and was always going to be a second-place finisher in the religion known as Judaism. So when he saw these hopeless people who had lost yet another Messiah he pounced like the opportunist that he was.

    He knew he would not be the top dog of Judaism so he became the Messiah of Christianity. Think about it for a second, the guy is far more prominent than PETER who Jebus himself said was supposed to be the man. The majority of the new testament is filled with Pharisaic ramblings that are often contradictory to what JEBUS himself said. However when you sound authoritative in what you say sheep will follow...

    You could actually proclaim to be a Christian and only follow what Jesus the supposed sond of god says and you would not really be doing it right beccause Paul said so.. just wonderful

  • TD

    Jesus of the Bible is far, far closer to the Pharisees than Paul.

    Paul is an enigmatic character. His claim of being a tent maker by trade is not even remotely compatible with his claim of being a Pharisee by education. What exactly his background really was is a matter of considerable speculation

    His writings scream his outright antagonism towards the Jewish flavor of Christianity at the time (i.e. Belief that Jesus was the Messiah the Pharisees were looking for added to a full observance of the Law) and the barbs aimed directly at James are easy to see.

    As one small example, Eusebius quoting Hegesippus tells us that James the Just was a life-long Nazarite that neither ate meat nor cut his hair. Paul asserts that long hair on a man is a disgrace and a man who eats only vegetables on account of his conscience is weak.

  • TD
    Jesus made things simple but Paul brings in a low level form of Judaism.... a bunch of unnecessary rules similar to what he no doubt learned at the feet of Gamaliel

    That is an interesting 'take' on things, given that Jesus never at any point preached freedom from the Law as Paul did later.

    At any rate, Gamaliel was the grandson of Hillel. Bet Hillel was a branch of Phariseeism who's approach to the Law was almost indistunguishable from Jesus of the Bible.

    Even were that not the case though, I think xJW's seem almost blind to the fact that the Law was not just a vague religious code of moral conduct; it was a civil and criminal code, administering both high and low justice.

    When real physical penalties, especially corporeal penalties are involved, things get complicated real fast. Take the crime of murder for example. Christianity (via the NT) condems murder, but does it define murder? How do you determine if a murder has occured? How do you investigate a murder? What do you do with a murderer if you catch him? If Christian writings had actually delved into those messy details instead of simply leaving them to the State, would those 'rules' seem unecessary to you? Or would you argue that when a death penalty is involved, people have both the right and need to have things spelled out in excruciating detail?

  • Stealth

    Interesting topic. Could someone provide a couple examples of how Paul contradicted the saying of Jesus?

  • TD
    Interesting topic. Could someone provide a couple examples of how Paul contradicted the saying of Jesus?

    Compare Matthew 5:17-19 with 1 Corinthians 8.

  • KateWild

    Stealth- Matt 7.12 Jesus said do unto others as you want them to do to you. Jesus' example of this how he treated the woman with the flow of blood who broke the law of Moses and Jesus healed her anyway and called her daughter

    In contrast Paul wrote in 1Cor 14.35,36, about women beoing silent at meetings, and it's a disgrce if a woman speaks at a gathering, she should shut it, and just talk about it at home to her husband. He dissmissed any notion of single women entirely.

    As a woman, what Paul wrote made me personally feel he did not treat me how I want to be treated, or how Jesus wanted me to be treated.

    I hope that answers your question Stealth

    Kate xx

Share this