Why Paul is Never Allowed to be an Evangelist by the Church

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Post Reply
User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 7677
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Why Paul is Never Allowed to be an Evangelist by the Church

Post by Secret Alias » Mon Apr 18, 2016 9:45 am

The Marcionite dependence on Paul necessitates that he not only wrote the Pauline epistles but the ur-gospel as well. Paul had a heavenly revelation about Jesus. All his knowledge - knowledge that was deemed 'perfect' and infallible by his followers - became the basis to the entire tradition associated with him. Paul was the second coming of Jesus, his awaited Paraclete (a designation which necessitates the gospel of the Pauline tradition being of the 'super gospel' type i.e. including statements which now appear only in John), Paul spoke 'in Christ.'

There could be no accommodation between that original paradigm for the development of Christianity and a 'college of apostles' or 'apostles' beside Paul. As a result Luke had to be introduced.

If Paul was originally saying 'in my first incarnation I was Jesus, in my second incarnation I was Paul, the Paraclete, the Christ etc' there simply was no other need for 'apostles' or 'apostolic men' of any kind. Paul was the ultimate authority for everything on his own and in fact the existence of other voices clouded the truth.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

User avatar
MrMacSon
Posts: 4713
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 3:45 pm

Re: Why Paul is Never Allowed to be an Evangelist by the Chu

Post by MrMacSon » Mon Apr 18, 2016 11:16 am

Secret Alias wrote: The Marcionite dependence on Paul necessitates that he not only wrote the Pauline epistles but the ur-gospel as well.
"he"? - Marcion?

Perhaps Paul was a member of the Marcion community? or, a member of a nearby community, yet an associate of Marcion?
Secret Alias wrote: Paul had a heavenly revelation about Jesus. All his knowledge - knowledge that was deemed 'perfect' and infallible by his followers - became the basis to the entire tradition associated with him. Paul was the second coming of Jesus, his awaited Paraclete (a designation which necessitates the gospel of the Pauline tradition being of the 'super gospel' type i.e. including statements which now appear only in John), Paul spoke 'in Christ.'
Perhaps Paul was, initially, at least, an alternate to Jesus; yet, later deemed a lesser alternative to Jesus.
Secret Alias wrote: If Paul was originally saying 'in my first incarnation I was Jesus, in my second incarnation I was Paul, the Paraclete, the Christ etc' there simply was no other need for 'apostles' or 'apostolic men' of any kind.
Apostles (in numbers) is a way for the ensuing tradition to show there was ongoing or later support for the person who started the tradition?? (or both?)

or
Secret Alias wrote: Paul was the ultimate authority for everything on his own and in fact the existence of other voices clouded the truth.

User avatar
Secret Alias
Posts: 7677
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Why Paul is Never Allowed to be an Evangelist by the Chu

Post by Secret Alias » Mon Apr 18, 2016 11:50 am

Paul wrote the first gospel just like Moses is supposed to have written the Pentateuch. That's why they are understood to be 'THE Apostle' or spokesman for God.
“Finally, from so little sleeping and so much reading, his brain dried up and he went completely out of his mind.”
― Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, Don Quixote

Clive
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 2:20 pm

Re: Why Paul is Never Allowed to be an Evangelist by the Chu

Post by Clive » Tue Apr 19, 2016 12:07 am

Do we have a duplication of Paul being Christ in Mohammed as the messenger of God? Is Islam a later echo and re-emergence of these well hidden Pauline ideas?
"We cannot slaughter each other out of the human impasse"

Clive
Posts: 1197
Joined: Sun Aug 17, 2014 2:20 pm

Re: Why Paul is Never Allowed to be an Evangelist by the Chu

Post by Clive » Tue Apr 19, 2016 12:13 am

It is quite Homeric. Instead of rewriting and editing Homer for the current generation at the Library of Alexandria over the centuries, Moses was rewritten first by Paul then by "Mohammed" (if he existed!)
"We cannot slaughter each other out of the human impasse"

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ben C. Smith, Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Kapyong, MrMacSon and 50 guests