A Flawed Man --- Like All Men Are

[robert j]

In order to understand Paul, IMO, some background certainly helps --- a study of early 1st C. Jewish thought and the cultures of Celtic Anatolia, Ephesus, Macedonia, and Greece --- and recognizing how the final compiler left the extant 2 Corinthians as a compilation of more than one letter with parts out of proper sequence and chronological order.

But more importantly, IMO, is a basic understanding of human nature. And most important of all --- trying to forget everything one ever learned about Christianity, forget everything in the rest of the NT, and in the writings of the relatively late apologists (i.e. Church Fathers) --- and read Paul’s 5 letters with a fresh eye.

Don’t look for the Great Saint Paul. Look for a flawed man --- like all men are. Look for the evangelizing entrepreneur --- trying to carve out a niche in a world rife with competition among those promoting spiritual gifts of all stripes.

And read Paul’s letters as the first, the earliest, and the oldest extant writings of a promoter and believer in a lord Jesus Christ.

robert j. --- signing off from forum participation, at least for now


The five authentic letters of Paul are, IMO, those addressed to his congregations and in rough chronological order of composition --- 1 Thessalonians, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, and 2 Corinthians.

[Stephan Huller]

You haven't even proven this nonsense about only 'five authentic letters' yet. Why not finish making the tomato sauce before you start boiling the noodles?

[Sheshbazzar]

There are five 'authentic' letters'? One might be inclined to wonder, Just how authentic IS this 'authentic' ?
Is every word, phase, verse, and argument in these "authentic" letters straight from the pen or lips of one 'Apostle Paul'???
Not so much as a name, word, sentence, or paragraph added, omitted, or latter editorially 'adjusted' to better fit to dogma and doctrines of latter 'Pauline communities' and 'orthodox' church editors???
Preserved absolutely faithfully pristinely authentic after centuries in the hands of doctrinally warring Christian sects???

Tomato sauce made with rotten tomatoes makes for sick men.


Sheshbazzar

[robert j]

Authentic is not the best term, and one I’ve used out of habit. As I have discussed in other threads, IMO these 5 letters are relatively intact, certainly not pristine, but not hopelessly compromised either.

Just my opinion of course. “Proof” is a term I have studiously tried to avoid in discussions of early Christian origins.

I’m stepping back from participation in this form for now, so no rudeness intended if I don’t respond further.

[robert j]

One more parting note --- for those interested in Paul, the man. Studying these passages are what first led me to see the human behind the letters ----

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=857