(June 15, 2012 at 12:41 pm)FallentoReason Wrote: Awesome, thanks for that.

While you are absorbing that, try this.

http://www.bowness.demon.co.uk/paul.htm

Quote:The Problem

There are 13 letters attributed to Paul in the New Testament. Romans and 1 Corinthians are very long and were written to teach people about the Gospel. But in all of Paul's long letters there is almost nothing about the life of Jesus. Paul knew that Jesus had been crucified, but he never mentions any miracles, any parables, any exorcisms etc.

He never mentions the Lord's Prayer, the Transfiguration, the Sermon on the Mount, Mary, Joseph, Bethlehem, the 3 Wise Men,Herod's Slaughter of the Innocents, Galilee, Nazareth, Pontius Pilate, Judas Iscariot, Gethsemane, Calvary, the Temptation by Satan etc etc. He never refers to Jesus as the 'Son of Man', one of Jesus's favourite ways of describing himself. 1 Timothy 6:13 mentions Pilate, but 1 Timothy is not by Paul.

According to the Gospels, the Pharisees were bitter enemies of Jesus, yet Paul makes no mention of this and regards his having been a Pharisee as a sign of his having tried to lead a righteous life.

What did Paul actually know about Jesus?

Xtians hate to hear shit like this. Makes them think of excuses and they hate thinking of any kind.

Some of the letters weren't written by Paul? Who were they written by then?

(June 16, 2012 at 12:15 am)cratehorus Wrote: Some of the letters weren't written by Paul? Who were they written by then?

"Pseudo-epigraphy" and "interpolation" were common problems with holy scriptures at the time. If you were a religious leader and you wanted your ideas to take hold, you'd "discover" some writings of a prophet more reputable. Roughly half of the Pauline epistles are considered of questionable authenticity. And this is to say nothing of the problems of "interpolation", alterations whether deliberate or accidental, are known to change scriptures over time.

Mark 16 is a famous and undisputed example. Everything after verse 8 was a later addition.

(June 16, 2012 at 12:15 am)cratehorus Wrote: Some of the letters weren't written by Paul? Who were they written by then?

Some asshole pretending to be "paul."

(June 16, 2012 at 12:29 am)DeistPaladin Wrote:

(June 16, 2012 at 12:15 am)cratehorus Wrote: Some of the letters weren't written by Paul? Who were they written by then?

"Pseudo-epigraphy" and "interpolation" were common problems with holy scriptures at the time. If you were a religious leader and you wanted your ideas to take hold, you'd "discover" some writings of a prophet more reputable. Roughly half of the Pauline epistles are considered of questionable authenticity. And this is to say nothing of the problems of "interpolation", alterations whether deliberate or accidental, are known to change scriptures over time.

Mark 16 is a famous and undisputed example. Everything after verse 8 was a later addition.

What???

I think he means that there were folks trying to add credibility to their "letters" by tacking Paul's name to them.

(June 16, 2012 at 12:42 am)Annik Wrote: I think he means that there were folks trying to add credibility to their "letters" by tacking Paul's name to them.

Yeah it's reverse forgery (I think that's the informal name for it). So pretty much people that didn't have some sort of 'celebrity' status would attribute their works to someone better known so that it would hold more weight, credibility and authority.

The end result being that "paul" ends up looking like a fucking moron because his letters disagree with each other.

Only an idiot xtian can stand there and say "they are both true."

But of course, their stupidity is legendary.

(June 16, 2012 at 12:35 am)cratehorus Wrote: What???

Can you ask a more focused question? What are you asking?

Pseudoepigraphia is the name for it, or 'forgery' if you're more plain speaking.

Wikipedia Wrote:Pseudepigrapha are falsely attributed works, texts whose claimed authorship is unfounded; a work, simply, "whose real author attributed it to a figure of the past." The word "pseudepigrapha" (from the Greek: ψευδής, pseudēs,"lying" or "false" and ἐπιγραφή, epigraphē, "name" or "inscription" or "ascription"; thus when taken together it means "false superscription or title"; see the related epigraphy) is the plural of "pseudepigraphon" (sometimes Latinized as "pseudepigraphum"); the Anglicized forms "pseudepigraph" and "pseudepigraphs" are also used.