(April 23, 2016 at 9:45 am)Drich Wrote:(April 22, 2016 at 10:31 pm)Jehanne Wrote: Great lectures here:What are you talking about Luke (of the book of Luke and Acts) is Paul's understudy. (we know this because Luke Himself places himself as a disciple of Paul in the book of Acts.) Luke knew nothing of Christ, as he was a servant to a man many think lived in Rome at the time of Christ. to write a gospel of Jesus means Luke studied under someone who knew Jesus was God. That would be Paul. In essence Luke's Gospel is the Gospel of Paul.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IPAKsGbqcg
Be sure to watch all three!
"Simply amazing!" is all that I can say. Makes sense to me now that Paul never believed that Jesus was god; instead, he saw Jesus as probably some type of angel who came to earth to become man, a divine being, perhaps, but not "god". Most likely Jesus was an apocalyptic preacher, common to his day, who started off in Galileo only to end-up getting executed after starting trouble in Jerusalem.
For this thread, contrast the views of the synoptic Gospels with that of John and compare against Paul. The Gospel of John, for me, is completely unbelievable; it is, rather, ancient storytelling at its best, which is why one sees all of these highly developed stories about Jesus with dialogue that the authors of John could not have possibly known about.
Most scholars do not hold to this view:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_...p_and_date
