(January 9, 2018 at 10:24 am)Grandizer Wrote:(January 9, 2018 at 10:13 am)Khemikal Wrote: Have you, by chance, read the list of things we take to be potentially historic about a historic paul, from Tabor?
"Authentic paul" contains a paul that claims to see ghosts and then performs miracles to prove his apostleship. We don;t believe he actually did them...we simply notice that he was the sort of guy who claimed them. If -that- paul is the one that wrote the authentic paul.....whose word are we taking for the other...seemingly mundane details, again?
You're being hyper-skeptical, lol. There's still someone who authored those Epistles, regardless of what they claim. It wasn't a ghost that wrote them.
Quote:The "historic paul" appears to be code for "whoever wrote this shit", and little more.
Aha, and "whoever wrote this shit" calls himself Paul. So Paul it is. Until there is evidence the whole thing is forgery or whatever.
Defending the bible. Probably what you figured you'd be spending your time doing as an atheist on an atheist forum, eh?
