40 thoughts on “Oh, for gods’ sake. Will the Real Paul stand up?

  1. Interesting ark is it not that when we speak of this individual named Paul, we all KNOW which Paul we are referring to. No last name needed. No further validation needed. He was indeed Saul of Tarsus, of which the scriptures clearly define, and in which the point of Crossant falls miserably short. Regardless of what interpretation he writes of, we are after all, speaking of Paul the apostle, whether we like what the record says of him or not.

    It was Saul who stood idly by at the stoning of Stephen. And it was Paul who would later speak of his own shortcomings, both as a stellar lawyer, and as a person with an incomparable mind, which by the way, the world has not seen an equal intellect.

    As to the posters take on slavery, why don’t you rely on the words of Paul himself, and what HE said, regarding Onesimus; Paul was well aware of legal matters, and the FACT that in the year of Jubilee, some people would rather live as cooks, oops, I mean slaves, than a life of misery having no bed to sleep in. Why don’t we learn what scripture says of slaves, for, are you not a slave yourself???? Of course you are, as all men are slaves to something.

    You are a slave to atheism, which pays so little and leaves your stomach empty and your mind void of truthful calories. But I so love how we speak of Paul as if he was a historical ghost. I dare you or any man to find such weightier words as found in the 1st of Romans. Paul’s words, not Crossant’s.

    Like

      1. Moth eaten insult aside, most people would take the words of Saul/Paul over any modern so called interpreter. Crossant may as well be reading Taiwanese having no clue how to speak the language, as to represent Paul’s own words, and meaning of those words/

        As to the alleged ‘spin of 1067 mph, and the alleged orbit of 65,000 mph, perhaps you would like to explain to the fish in the oceans how they are part and parcel of this grand hoax above their heads. But that’s a topic for another time. Must I always be the voice of reason around here.

        Like

          1. It may surprise you to know I am a careful reader. His INTERPRETATION is suspect. Period. For all I know, he could be a self made wolf in sheep trousers. Paul would laugh in the face at the moderns who are clueless as to scripture..

            Like

          2. Not at all. The overwhelming consensus agrees that only 7 are considered authentic. And the ones that are forgeries include his changed views on slavery.
            When you can demonstrate why your interpretation is right and the scholarly world is wrong, I’ll listen to what you have to say.
            Til then ….

            Liked by 3 people

          3. Oh my ark, this is way too easy.

            Why the ‘scholarly one’ is wrong? Ha! Because it is antagonistic to scripture, and Paul says as much in his epistles. ‘The wisdom of the world is foolishness…….’ and much more.

            And oh how ‘scholarship’ pretends to be wise, eg, Crossan here.

            Like

  2. Fascinating stuff. I like this: “Christian-on-Christian slavery is back but now in kinder, gentler mode!” Completely contradicts the earlier “Paul” stuff and, to me, obviously not written by the same guy. What a glob of mess Christianity is. Oh, and BTW, Christian-on-Christian slavery is the number one category on Pornhub.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Christian-on-Christian slavery is the number one category on Pornhub.

      I’ll take your word for it …. I still rely on my subscription to Playboy and it mentions nothing like this.

      Liked by 3 people

  3. In other words, the radical Paul is being deradicalized, sanitized and Romanized.

    I’ve seen much the same in real life. The radical Martin Luther King was hated by conservatives. But now they have deracalized him, sanitized him, and consider him to have been a conservative.

    Liked by 4 people

  4. Hello Ark. Thanks for the information. I was reading on another blog how some apologist use a fake “scholarly consensus” to mislead people and misdirect things said by atheists during religious conversations or debates. The specifically mentioned William Lane Craig. That is why reading the correct information is so important to be able to counter the misinformation the religious people spout. Hugs

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Apologists? Misleading people? Deliberately? Oh, COME ON, SCOTTIE!!!! That would never, ever happen! Christians are ALL honest, decent, law-abiding, Jesus-loving, God-fearing people. They don’t lie and mislead! Get with the program, man! 🙂

      Liked by 2 people

    2. @ Scottie.

      fake “scholarly consensus”

      It probably goes both ways at times, which is why I ask CS to qualify his statement with evidence. However, as is his usual habit, he merely spouts more nonsense. He has no credibility.

      Liked by 2 people

  5. Sometimes I wonder why the lion puts so much emphasis on the words of the bible and says so little about the central figure …

    Perhaps it’s because he himself is so wordy?

    Liked by 3 people

    1. hi nan-

      Another easy one. Maybe you heard His name is called the Word of God; ie, EVERY word of scripture points to the Lord Jesus Christ. Truth has no fear of competition, easily dismisses lying wonders, and need not defend the only source material worthy of lifetime study.

      Happy now?

      Like

      1. I agree … in part … to what you wrote, i.e., TRUTH … etc., etc. Problem is, Truth is too often defined by the prejudices/conceptions/imaginations of the individual offering the explanation. 🙂

        Liked by 4 people

  6. OH SILLY ARK! Don’tcha know that all those Sauls, Pauls, scribes, editors, copyists, and interviewers of 3rd, 4th, and 5th-hand hearsayers of everything that happened the previous 40 to 110 years, what to do, what to say, what NOT to do, and NOT say… was all decided for us/you by 325 CE in Nicaea.

    No wait! By 381 CE in Constantinople.

    Grrrr, no wait! By 431 CE in Ephesus.

    No, no. One second… I meant by 451 CE.

    Oh HELLS BELLS!!!! Somewhere between 34 CE and 870 CE… or 1312 CE. Maybe.

    🤣 What a pure, insane, ridiculous circus complete with clowns and seals bouncing beach-balls, huh!?

    Liked by 3 people

    1. And one must remember that all those who were making those decisions (over the span of a few hundred years) were indubitably directed by God him? her? self.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Yes indeed Nan. And furthermore, the ONLY God-directed, God-inspired (by the one true God and dead Messiah) holy men on the entire planet during those 400 – 500 years existed strictly in the Levant and coastal Mediterranean towns and Synagogues-to-churches. The TRUE God is not capable or hates the rest of His creation in other parts of the world!

        LOL… puzzle that one out. 😆

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Ugh, sorry guys/gals, I forgot to complete my last sentence/thought up there. That’s what happens when you are constantly interrupted. 🙄 That should’ve ended:

          “The one TRUE God of Israel-Jesus-Saul-Etc is not capable of or hates the rest of His creation in other parts of the world that He and His True Messengers of Himself can’t be anywhere else in the world OR at any other time in history!”

          Now back to our regularly scheduled program. 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

  7. And Ark, Saul of Tarsus’ background, family, and theological origins are anything BUT certain.

    There is very plausible evidence that not only was Saul/Paul NOT of the tribe of Benjamin (it can’t be corroborated), but actually was from the family of Herodian Jews and this CAN BE supported from his own epistles and extraneous contemporaneous sources.

    Assuming more than 7 letters are authentically Paul’s and also assuming that every single word in those letters are strictly his… here’s the evidence:

    Salute Herodion my kinsman. Greet them that be of the household of Narcissus, which are in the Lord. — Romans 16:11

    IOW, salute “The Littlest Herod” which is a son of the Roman Governor Felix and the Herodian Princess Drusilla, both killed by the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in Pompeii. This connection is further supported by Romans 16:10 “Salute Apelles approved in Christ. Salute them which are of the Aristobulus’ household.” This is likely the Aristobulus, son of Agrippa I brother, Herod of Chalcis. Ironically, THAT is the husband of Salome who played a key (huge?) role in beheading of John the Baptist. Hence, Paul has some very serious clear familial connections to Herodians in Jerusalem! And this is further corroborated by Acts 23, assuming again that the Book of Acts is reliable and inerrant according to Christian apologists 😉 …

    Paul called one of the centurions and said, “Take this young man to the tribune, for he has something to report to him.” (v. 17)

    Then he [the Roman Tribune] summoned two of the centurions and said, “Get ready to leave by nine o’clock tonight for Caesarea with two hundred soldiers, seventy horsemen, and two hundred spearmen. Also provide mounts for Paul to ride, and take him safely to Felix the governor.” He wrote a letter to this effect:” (vv. 23-25)

    These passages are hugely revealing! Obviously at this time, Paul is very hated by Syro-Palestinian Jews for several reasons of heresy. But it is HIGHLY improbable for a Jew to have such power to command a Roman Tribune to get Paul, 200 Legionnaires, 70 cavalry-men, and 200 Hastati or Triarii (spearmen), AND demand his own horse UNLESS he had very prestigious connections… or Herodian family connections, which he obviously did have!

    Naturally, given historical events with King Herod and his family’s descendants and that of the Syro-Palestinian Jews — rebellious Jews to Herod at that — decades later New Testament authorities compiling the Canon will NOT want Paul’s Herodian lineage known. Why? Hellenistic Christology — today’s version — NEEDS Jewish Messianism and Paul’s (fake?) lineage from the tribe of Benjamin… again, a Pauline background that cannot be authenticated, verified, nor has it ever been! But IS intentionally cloudy and mysteriously ambiguous. Hmmmmmm. Things that make intelligent people who do not take everything at face-value… go Hmmmm. 🤔

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I love it/ hear Pauls own words. Who are you going to believe, his own testimony or the words of lying professors?

      ‘Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision.

      For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

      Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:

      Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;’

      – Paul to the Philippians.

      Like

        1. Tks for the honorable mention prof- just pointing out to you that according to Paul’s own words- He was of the tribe of Benjamin (son of my right hand) and no doubt named after Israel’s first king, Saul.

          I trust other readers here will accept plainly his own accounting of his verifiable history, as opposed to yours, who say the good man Paul is mistaken.

          I for one, have excellent discernment in who is telling the truth. I’m with Paul. And Paul is with the LORD of course. Peter is pretty good too. 😉

          Like

          1. Could you offer an example in the secular historical record where Saul/Paul is mentioned?

            Can you point to any Jewish record that mentions a sanctioned Christian ‘hunter” named Saul?

            Can you offer any citation/document of how Saul was able to obtain permission to travel to Damascus to pursue Christians?

            Liked by 2 people

          2. If I offer ONE example of Paul’s life outside of scripture,

            If I offer ONE record of Sauls/ Paul’s mischievous deeds,

            If I offer ONE example of his travel visas, will you THEN admit before a worldwide audience, that every word of scripture has always been true, will you admit to the great deluge, will you admit that the God of Paul is also the God of Adam, Moses, Daniel, and holds the sun and moon just as easily today as in the days of creation?

            See how this game is played?

            Like

          3. But ark, don’t make the mistake of thinking I CANNOT, as opposed to WILL NOT.

            As long as you have not defined your own parameters, the rest is pointless, yes?

            Like

      1. Just to demonstrate to Ark’s readers here, I’ll indulge this one because obviously ColorfulSprinkles, you have not done any homework on this passage’s true context. But your mind-numbing laziness is no surprise for a wanna-be apologist.

        …of the tribe of Benjamin

        Corroborate this claim with ANY other biblical or non-biblical evidence, please! The more independent source corroboration you can offer the better your case or (empty) proposition. You must provide MORE than one source CS. Take it away! 🤭

        Liked by 1 person

        1. You greatly err. I have a much better teacher and am a far more capable student to not accept your sideshows.

          You would reject the only reliable source for the topic at hand, as if Israel’s history of success and failure, and Paul’s own place in Judaism, then as a Christian, is not true? Ha!!

          The record of scripture is not subject to the lying biasas of you or anybody else.

          But your greater concern should be the lion of the tribe of Judah.

          Like

          1. Ark and your readers,

            See. Need I say anything else? Nothing. Why? Because to blind Faithers, “The record of scripture is not subject to the lying bias [the correct spelling] of you or anybody else.” and that is not a defense. It is merely peer-assimilation self-preserved in delusion. It’s also avoiding the facts and contextual evidence that is INDEPENDENT, not self-proofing… as CS is doing here.

            Case closed.

            Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s