The simple fact is that no xtian writer refers to any "Paul" prior to the mid 2d century.
They tell us that Marcion issued a canon which included a stripped down version of "luke" and ten epistles ( of Paul? or was that name invented later and attached?) We don't know for sure if Marcion called him "Paul" or not.
For whatever reason, the proto-orthodox saw something useful in the so-called paul writings and 'resurrected' them for their own use. Did Marcion write these up himself? Did he have a few letters written by someone which he edited? We'll probably never know.
But 2 Cor. 11 32 does describe an actual historical political reality. Unfortunately for xtians that reality takes place between 84 and 64 BC And 2 Cor. is always included in the list of "authentic" pauline epistes.
I'm leaning towards Marcion inventing him and later xtians finding the concept useful.
They tell us that Marcion issued a canon which included a stripped down version of "luke" and ten epistles ( of Paul? or was that name invented later and attached?) We don't know for sure if Marcion called him "Paul" or not.
For whatever reason, the proto-orthodox saw something useful in the so-called paul writings and 'resurrected' them for their own use. Did Marcion write these up himself? Did he have a few letters written by someone which he edited? We'll probably never know.
But 2 Cor. 11 32 does describe an actual historical political reality. Unfortunately for xtians that reality takes place between 84 and 64 BC And 2 Cor. is always included in the list of "authentic" pauline epistes.
I'm leaning towards Marcion inventing him and later xtians finding the concept useful.
