LIES THAT PAUL MADE
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-01-2014, 06:30 PM (This post was last modified: 19-01-2014 06:35 PM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: LIES THAT PAUL MADE
(19-01-2014 05:47 PM)alpha male Wrote:  
(19-01-2014 04:00 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  You haven't looked deeply enough into the history. Paul was quite clearly a Roman government employee.

Thijs Voskuilen and Rose Mary Sheldon co-wrote “Operation Messiah.” They postulate that Paul was
“…supporting the imperial structure, benefiting from it, cooperating with it, often saved by it. The end product for Rome was exactly what it wanted - a loyal, other –worldly, spiritual movement that was completely divorced from Palestinian revolutionary movements, from Jewish nationalism and from any challenge to Roman imperial authority. Its followers were supposed to pay taxes and be loyal citizens of the emperor.”
Holy cow...you call this looking deeply into the history?
http://thijsvoskuilen.blogspot.com/2008/...ateur.html

And people call me a troll... Rolleyes

Have you read the book? Are you aware it was part of a phD thesis? What do you know of Paul, his motivations and his contacts? What do you know of the social, political and economic situation in Palestine in the 50s and 60s? For your information I have spent many years studying the history, and I am no troll. I'll share with you some of my conclusions, and, as you have implied you are a history buff, I will eagerly await your learned reply. (Apologies to those who've read this before.)

There’s a fascinating angle to consider; that the Roman government was the driving force behind Paul’s pagan propaganda. Paul taught that the Jewish messiah was the Christ, and he’d already been and gone, I think because he didn’t want Jews rallying under a yet to arrive militaristic messiah who would challenge Roman rule. I strongly suspect the government employed Paul, because they wanted to mar the power of messianic Judaism, and particularly Nazarenism. They were trying to stop a war.

Rome knew a revolt was brewing in Palestine in the 50’s and 60’s. The government sent many different procurators to Palestine to control the unrest, yet many of them were corrupt, which only made matters worse. All Jews in the Diaspora felt a connection with Jerusalem and the temple; they even sent money as an annual gift to the priests in the temple. The government was aware that many Jews didn’t assimilate well in a political and social sense, and that made them suspicious of their Palestinian connections. Jewish extremists throughout the empire (such as Yeshua) promoted the subversive idea that their own Jewish king should govern the world on behalf of God and in place of Caesar. If the government couldn’t pacify these Jews, it would set a dangerous precedent for other races to revolt. They needed to keep control over the trade routes to Asia and Egypt. They were frustrated at having to repeatedly use force to suppress Jewish extremists, as it was disruptive, expensive, and taxing on morale. They thought that if they could undermine Jewish extremism using propaganda it would prevent a whole world of hassle.

There might have been many “Pauls” working as government agents. One of the reasons I suspect this is that he wrote to a community in Rome to introduce himself, and it’s obvious from his letter that this group already had some beliefs about a Christ. The government was worried that Judaism was attracting converts from Gentiles. Paul’s role was to stop the spread of the subversive religion. He tried to infiltrate the Nazarenes to undermine them and their messianic message. I suspect (but can’t prove) he passed information about them on to Roman authorities. His “conversion,” in which “God’s” new ideas were revealed only to him, and by which he became the founding member of his own Christ fan club, was his modus operandi. This explains why he wrote with such passion; he was desperate to sell his watered down, non-militaristic version of Judaism, one that downplayed the importance of the temple and all the ethnocentric antisocial practices. His aim was to counter Jewish messianic fervor, which was building in momentum and needed to be quelled. He failed, because Jews in Palestine revolted in the war of 66 -70 CE.

This theory fits with the fact Paul was a Roman citizen, and that he had little genuine respect for Pharisaic Judaism. It could be why he didn’t publically reveal he was Roman until he was about to be physically assaulted by Roman soldiers. It would explain how he managed to support himself financially. It might also be why he hoped a financial gift to the Nazarenes in Jerusalem would be accepted; he was trying to endear himself to the Nazarenes using bribery. It explains why he often insisted that the Torah was obsolete, and why he was like a dog gnawing at a bone promoting his own theology instead. It makes clear why he wrote this to a Roman community:
“Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.” (Romans 13:1-7 KJV.) A government agent wrote this, not a Jesus fan who had seen the light!

It explains the way he finished off his letter to the Philippians:
“All the saints salute you, chiefly they that are of Caesar's household” (Phil. 4:22, KJV.) This confirms that he had contact with the Emperor Nero’s family.

It fits with the fact the book of Acts states:
“Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul” (Acts 13:1, KJV.) So the earliest Christian community at Antioch boasted a member of Herod Antipas’ family, the pro-Roman Tetrarch who had murdered John the Baptist, and Paul (Saul) was associated with him.

It clarifies the real reason why, in the book of Acts, he was repetitively roughed up by traditional Jews nearly everywhere he went, yet was never attacked by Gentiles. It explains why once the local Roman authorities knew who he was and what he was up to, he was treated so well, despite the fact he so regularly disturbed the peace. Paul’s so called “arrest” by Roman troops in Jerusalem doesn’t mean he wasn’t in league with them. Things had got a little out of control and he ended up being a source of civil unrest. He’d become a diehard dogmatist causing trouble wherever he went. Instead of undermining Judaism, he incited Jews to the point of violence, something Rome didn’t want. The “arrest” was, in fact, for his own safety. Reading between the lines, he was never treated like a prisoner. Rather, there were remarkable Roman resources used to protect him. He had to be moved to Rome, as it was the best place his safety could be guaranteed.

We don’t hear from Paul after the early 60s. The anti-Jewish propaganda project hadn’t worked, and the time for talk was over; the military had to be bought in. He had become redundant. There is a Christian “tradition” he was executed in Rome, but no valid reason why that would have happened, and no good evidence to say it did. (http://archives.politicususa.com/2011/12...ink.html).

If this theory is true, Paul was a spy and a charlatan; a cog in the wheel of a cunning government plan. I’m not suggesting that he didn’t wholeheartedly believe in the value of what he was doing. If the project had been successful the first (66-70CE) and second (132-5 CE) Jewish wars would have been averted. I think he knew he was promoting manufactured dogma as a means to an end.

This means Rome, via Paul, created the Christ, a benign pacifist messiah.

I suspect Jewish and Gentile intellectuals working for the Roman government also, a little later, after the first Jewish war, wrote the Gospels. The fact that belief in the divinity of Jesus arose in many diverse areas of the empire a number of decades after Jesus’ death suggests to me that it came from a central (and Gentile) source, and it wasn’t the real Jesus’ Jewish friends in Jerusalem. The spin-doctors knew ideas could be as effective as force. I think they tried to weaken Judaism by infiltrating and diluting it with Gentiles, just like Paul tried to do with his Christ story. They too told a tale that the Jewish messiah had already been and gone, and wasn’t a political activist, but a benign religious preacher who was a spiritual intermediary between God and man. If the idea caught on, there’d be no more messiahs and no more revolts.

“Blessed are the peacemakers,” “turn the other cheek,” “love your enemies” and “pay your taxes” meant you didn’t cause trouble and you obeyed your Roman superiors. To promote this patronizing prattle would have been a lot easier than having to use the army again. This explains why the true identities of all four Gospel authors are unknown. In those times it was easier to promote propaganda than it is today, because the public was less informed and less able to check out the facts. These publicists twisted the knife to wound Judaism by blaming Jesus’ death on the Jews and making Romans look like the innocent good guys. It was made out that Jesus’ own people had effectively killed their own messiah.

The government hoped the story of the new idol would convince people that true spirituality and the promise of eternal life were synonymous with getting along with them. It was the winners that wrote the history.

Ever since ancient times, people in power have always tried to control popular opinion, and haven’t hesitated to flagrantly manipulate the facts, and I think this was one such example. It’s ironic that the Gospels, said to be so truthful, became one of the most successful literary enterprises ever undertaken in the history of the world, yet were so manufactured. Yet the Gospel authors too never achieved their original intention, as they didn’t prevent the second major war with the Jews in 132-6 CE.

In modern times, this is called propaganda, disinformation or psychological warfare. It’s fascinating to imagine these subversive tactics as part of the first-century Roman Empire and jaw-dropping to realize the dogma has survived without being exposed for what it probably is, and is still coloring the way people, and in particular trusting Christians, look at the world. Today, most Christians misunderstand what the actual (Jewish) Messianic movement was. This misunderstanding was Rome’s doing.
Peter Cresswell, Joseph Atwill, and no doubt many other authors have reached similar conclusions.

The reader may be wondering why, if this is true, it’s often claimed the government persecuted Christians, particularly as there is a “tradition” that Domitian did just that, but the evidence for this is so weak I’m sure it didn’t happen (http://bibleworld.com/domper.pdf). The fact is persecution of Christians wasn’t a policy of the state until over a century later, when it did occur in isolated areas, and only for relatively short periods. (http://www.salon.com/2013/02/24/the_myth...secuted/). Generally speaking, Rome was tolerant of all religions, including Christianity. In those days the ideas of one government (as controlled by one emperor) were often completely different to the next emperor. After the Flavian dynasty (the rule of Vespasian, Titus and then Domitian) ended with Domitian’s assassination in 96 CE, there was a brand new emperor. Persecution happened sporadically many years later, but usually only if Christians refused to worship the state’s gods. By this time the militaristic ambitions of peasant Jews had been finally and definitively crushed in the second Jewish war of 132-6 CE, and there were different agendas on the government’s mind. (see http://www.religionfacts.com/christianit...tion.htm). What’s more, some stories of persecutions of Christians by the Roman government are now recognized as exaggerations and fabrications.

I hope the reader understands the significance of this. If this is true, Christianity has been the most monumental fraud ever inflicted on humankind.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2014, 06:46 PM
RE: LIES THAT PAUL MADE
(19-01-2014 05:05 PM)truthBtold Wrote:  
(19-01-2014 02:39 PM)Chas Wrote:  It's about communication. You apparently don't understand that. Drinking Beverage

You apparently still dont understand. And need a special explanation: so I will try again for special people.... if u send a rude comment about the way the thread is written, a rude response is in order.

That does not address the issue. The issue is communication.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
19-01-2014, 06:47 PM
RE: LIES THAT PAUL MADE
(19-01-2014 05:34 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(18-01-2014 05:08 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  You're making this up. Paul was a liar. He wrote different things to different groups of people, and made out what he wrote to suit the different groups.
That's what good writers/speakers do. I give presentations to professionals and write a blog for general consumption. The speech to professionals is a lot different than a blog post on the same topic, but I'm not lying in either.
Quote:He would've had no idea some of his letters would much later be compared with each other.
Speaking of making things up and being a liar. Paul actually instructed that letters be circulated and compared:
Col 4
16 Now when this epistle is read among you, see that it is read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and that you likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.
Quote:He even admitted he was a liar. He wrote,
“For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?” (Rom. 3:7, KJB.)
Except that was a rhetorical statement. Are you lying or just ignorant? In context:
5 But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unjust who inflicts wrath? (I speak as a man.) 6 Certainly not! For then how will God judge the world?

7 For if the truth of God has increased through my lie to His glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? 8 And why not say, “Let us do evil that good may come”?—as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just.

Re
"Speaking of making things up and being a liar. Paul actually instructed that letters be circulated and compared:
Col 4
16 Now when this epistle is read among you, see that it is read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and that you likewise read the epistle from Laodicea."

Colossians wasn't written by Paul. but by an anonymous evangelical writing in his name. Look it up.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2014, 06:57 PM
RE: LIES THAT PAUL MADE
(19-01-2014 05:34 AM)alpha male Wrote:  
(18-01-2014 05:08 PM)Mark Fulton Wrote:  You're making this up. Paul was a liar. He wrote different things to different groups of people, and made out what he wrote to suit the different groups.
That's what good writers/speakers do. I give presentations to professionals and write a blog for general consumption. The speech to professionals is a lot different than a blog post on the same topic, but I'm not lying in either.
Quote:He would've had no idea some of his letters would much later be compared with each other.
Speaking of making things up and being a liar. Paul actually instructed that letters be circulated and compared:
Col 4
16 Now when this epistle is read among you, see that it is read also in the church of the Laodiceans, and that you likewise read the epistle from Laodicea.
Quote:He even admitted he was a liar. He wrote,
“For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?” (Rom. 3:7, KJB.)
Except that was a rhetorical statement. Are you lying or just ignorant? In context:
5 But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unjust who inflicts wrath? (I speak as a man.) 6 Certainly not! For then how will God judge the world?

7 For if the truth of God has increased through my lie to His glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? 8 And why not say, “Let us do evil that good may come”?—as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just.

Re

"Except that was a rhetorical statement. Are you lying or just ignorant? In context:
5 But if our unrighteousness demonstrates the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unjust who inflicts wrath? (I speak as a man.) 6 Certainly not! For then how will God judge the world?

7 For if the truth of God has increased through my lie to His glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner? 8 And why not say, “Let us do evil that good may come”?—as we are slanderously reported and as some affirm that we say. Their condemnation is just."

Paul asks a rhetorical question in which he admits that he has lied, but tries to justify himself by claiming he is spreading the "truth of God."

I am not lying, and I don't think I'm ignorant. Please explain your assertions.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2014, 08:39 PM
RE: LIES THAT PAUL MADE
I would recommend people read Paul, by biblical scholar, E.P. Sanders.

It's a very thin book, but can be quite technical in places; still an insightful look into the mind of 1st Century Jewish apocalypticism.

Manifest Insanity @ Amazon
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2014, 10:47 PM
RE: LIES THAT PAUL MADE
(19-01-2014 08:39 PM)Diogenes of Mayberry Wrote:  I would recommend people read Paul, by biblical scholar, E.P. Sanders.

It's a very thin book, but can be quite technical in places; still an insightful look into the mind of 1st Century Jewish apocalypticism.

Thanks! I haven't read it, but it is highly regarded.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-01-2014, 10:58 PM
RE: LIES THAT PAUL MADE
(19-01-2014 05:05 PM)truthBtold Wrote:  if u send a rude comment about the way the thread is written, a rude response is in order.


LMAO

Good luck with that.Laughat You may get more than you bargain for.Thumbsup

Pro Tip:
It is written NO WHERE that internet forums must be nicey-nice and fluffy soft. Rule of thumb - the more you complain the worse it gets.Yes

BuwwwahaaaahaaaCool

When I want your opinion I'll read your entrails.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WitchSabrina's post
20-01-2014, 12:32 AM
RE: LIES THAT PAUL MADE
(19-01-2014 05:05 PM)truthBtold Wrote:  You apparently still dont understand. And need a special explanation: so I will try again for special people.... if u send a rude comment about the way the thread is written, a rude response is in order.

Why not Zoidberg? Consider

[Image: Have%2Bsome%2Bcream%2B_33b32b25e3e579547...bfaec2.jpg]

[Image: GrumpyCat_01.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: