Posted: May 06, 2016 4:45 pm
Christians' writings are evidence of their own bogus history of the character called Paul.
Examine versions of the NT.
In versions of the Greek New Testament there are as much as 13 letters attributed to a writer called Paul.
It would appear at first glance that Paul was a contemporary of King Aretas who preached and documented his Gospel long before the Fall of the Jewish Temple c 70 CE.
However once the NT is thoroughly examined it will be realised that the supposed Pauline letters were unknown and had no influence on other writings in the same NT.
In fact, it is easily shown that it was the version of the Jesus story in the so-called gMark or its source that had influence on the NT writings.
There is virtually no mention of a single verse from the Pauline Corpus in all the Gospels and non-Pauline writings.
It is the Synoptics Gospels [gMark, gMatthew and gLuke] which show that the authors were influenced by either by gMark or its sources.
The authors of the Synoptics in versions of the Greek NT show no influence by Paul or the Pauline Gospel.
In effect, the Pauline Jesus is unknown by the Synoptic writers.
Even the author of Acts who mentioned Saul/Paul over a hundred time knew nothing and wrote nothing about letters from the supposed writer.
There are no witnesses--no corroboration--no influence of the supposed Pauline letters within the NT itself.
Amazingly, 2 Peter mentions that Paul wrote to some unidentified persons but Christian writings of antiquity have already admitted 2 Peter is a forgery. See Church History attributed to Eusebius.
2 Peter 3:15
Church History 3. 3.1
The character called Paul is associated with fiction, forgery and false attribution in the very NT.
Examine versions of the NT.
In versions of the Greek New Testament there are as much as 13 letters attributed to a writer called Paul.
It would appear at first glance that Paul was a contemporary of King Aretas who preached and documented his Gospel long before the Fall of the Jewish Temple c 70 CE.
However once the NT is thoroughly examined it will be realised that the supposed Pauline letters were unknown and had no influence on other writings in the same NT.
In fact, it is easily shown that it was the version of the Jesus story in the so-called gMark or its source that had influence on the NT writings.
There is virtually no mention of a single verse from the Pauline Corpus in all the Gospels and non-Pauline writings.
It is the Synoptics Gospels [gMark, gMatthew and gLuke] which show that the authors were influenced by either by gMark or its sources.
The authors of the Synoptics in versions of the Greek NT show no influence by Paul or the Pauline Gospel.
In effect, the Pauline Jesus is unknown by the Synoptic writers.
Even the author of Acts who mentioned Saul/Paul over a hundred time knew nothing and wrote nothing about letters from the supposed writer.
There are no witnesses--no corroboration--no influence of the supposed Pauline letters within the NT itself.
Amazingly, 2 Peter mentions that Paul wrote to some unidentified persons but Christian writings of antiquity have already admitted 2 Peter is a forgery. See Church History attributed to Eusebius.
2 Peter 3:15
And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you
Church History 3. 3.1
.... we have learned that his extant second Epistle does not belong to the canon.
The character called Paul is associated with fiction, forgery and false attribution in the very NT.