My Wildly Atheistic Conspiracy Theory Concerning Base Paul in 1 Corinthians

[lclapshaw]

Having found what I feel is a "urpaul" and a "base Paul" in 1 Corinthians

Pre-Gospel 1 Corinthians.pdf

(75.14 KiB) Downloaded 65 times

and what appears to be 1 or more writers that seem to postdate the Gospel stories and Acts in that letter

Post Gospel and Acts 1 Corinthians.pdf

(153.48 KiB) Downloaded 37 times

I would like to put forth a scenario that might account for this.

As only Greek names are found in the original source writer "urpaul" viewtopic.php?f=3&t=10490 and the content seems devoid of anything to do with Christianity, this material could have been written anytime during the Hellenistic era when a Greek or Macedonian land owner could have had land holdings in both Corinth and Macedonia, as seems implied in the letters, at least until the destruction of Corinth in 146 BCE.

In 44 BCE the Romans under Julius Caesar re-founded Corinth as a military veteran colony, with retired soldiers of both Pompey and Caesar, after the civil wars of 49-45 BCE, shortly before the assassination of Julius Caesar.

Here then is what I propose.

The original letters of "urpaul" are discovered amid the ruins of Corinth by the veterans settling the city and someone (named Paulus?) edits and adds to the letters with content of his own to create a sermon of sorts to help bring together the veterans that were at one point in opposition to each other in the recent past. The message is a simple one of people getting along and working towards a common goal. This is the "urpaul"+"base Paul" letter

Pre-Gospel 1 Corinthians.pdf

(75.14 KiB) Downloaded 65 times

The introduction of IC XC at this stage would make sense if we allow for the abbreviations IC XC to stand for "Iulios the Good" (IC=Iulios (Julius in Greek) and XC (Chrestos)=the Good). The abbreviation IC for Julius would be all that was needed as at this point no one would be confused as to who was being referred to; Julius Caesar being recently deified and the benefactor of the current residents of Corinth was immensely popular at this time.


A hundred years or more later....


With an interest in Judaism from current events, and with the histories of Josephus, as well as the Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures at hand, someone (Mark?), writes a story (play?) where 1 Corinthian's IC becomes a Jewish tragic figure. It's possible that this first Gospel writer may have had no idea who or what this IC was, it's just background material for the story.

The story is popular and acquires imitators. Someone then writes an adventure story about a messenger of God named Paulos.

Others then write letters supporting the Gospel stories and the Acts adventure under the names of the characters in the stories.

Bob's your uncle!

[mlinssen]

Crazy AF

LOL

I like the idea, and I've made it through to chapter 4 of ur-Paul.
Still way too many buzzwords like wise / wisdom, Pneuma, flesh, οἰκονόμους μυστηρίων. The planting stuff, it's all still very Pauline / bullshit bingo

I doubt that anything remains after a thorough cleansing...

[lclapshaw]

Crazy AF

LOL

Thank you! I an honored!

[Leucius Charinus]

Here then is what I propose.

The original letters of "urpaul" are discovered amid the ruins of Corinth by the veterans settling the city and someone (named Paulus?) edits and adds to the letters with content of his own to create a sermon of sorts to help bring together the veterans that were at one point in opposition to each other in the recent past. The message is a simple one of people getting along and working towards a common goal. This is the "urpaul"+"base Paul" letter Pre-Gospel 1 Corinthians.pdf

The introduction of IC XC at this stage would make sense if we allow for the abbreviations IC XC to stand for "Iulios the Good" (IC=Iulios (Julius in Greek) and XC (Chrestos)=the Good). The abbreviation IC for Julius would be all that was needed as at this point no one would be confused as to who was being referred to; Julius Caesar being recently deified and the benefactor of the current residents of Corinth was immensely popular at this time.

This explanation of the runes is attractive on the basis that every single person in the entire Roman empire at that time and long afterwards would know exactly who IS XS was. It would be greatly strengthened if you could find some coin or archeological artefact where this IS XS appeared. I haven't looked yet but I will have a look about.

A hundred years or more later....


With an interest in Judaism from current events, and with the histories of Josephus, as well as the Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures at hand, someone (Mark?), writes a story (play?) where 1 Corinthian's IC becomes a Jewish tragic figure. It's possible that this first Gospel writer may have had no idea who or what this IC was, it's just background material for the story.

The story is popular and acquires imitators. Someone then writes an adventure story about a messenger of God named Paulos.

Others then write letters supporting the Gospel stories and the Acts adventure under the names of the characters in the stories.

Bob's your uncle!

So this scenario sees the Jewish and LXX material in Paul's letter being added by that someone who writes an adventure story about "Dear Paul"?

[lclapshaw]

.

A hundred years or more later....


With an interest in Judaism from current events, and with the histories of Josephus, as well as the Greek translation of the Jewish scriptures at hand, someone (Mark?), writes a story (play?) where 1 Corinthian's IC becomes a Jewish tragic figure. It's possible that this first Gospel writer may have had no idea who or what this IC was, it's just background material for the story.

The story is popular and acquires imitators. Someone then writes an adventure story about a messenger of God named Paulos.

Others then write letters supporting the Gospel stories and the Acts adventure under the names of the characters in the stories.

Bob's your uncle!

So this scenario sees the Jewish and LXX material in Paul's letter being added by that someone who writes an adventure story about "Dear Paul"?

I wouldn't be so bold as to make that claim. The added Gospel and Acts material might not even be by the same person or around the same time. No way of knowing. All I am prepared to say is that it looks like there was a Corinthian letter that was added to by author/editor(s) unknown to make it support the Gospel(s) and Acts. Personally I suspect that some of the other letters like Philippians started out as post Gospel but were added to after Acts, and letters like 2 Corinthians are composed post Acts and Gospel(s).

Good luck with the IC XC inscription, I would love to see something like that.

[lclapshaw]

I'm sure this goes without saying but maybe also search for other declensions like upsilon, nu, and omega.

Also, I wonder how Iulius the good might be rendered in Latin abbreviations.

[Stuart]

Well, a cursory look shows that verse 1:26 is not in the Marcionite, nor were verses 3:12-15, nor verses 4:1-4. So, you are dead in the water there. Unless you can explain how these are original, then missing in the Marcionite version (which is intermediate) and reappearing magically in the Catholic version.

[lclapshaw]

Well, a cursory look shows that verse 1:26 is not in the Marcionite, nor were verses 3:12-15, nor verses 4:1-4. So, you are dead in the water there. Unless you can explain how these are original, then missing in the Marcionite version (which is intermediate) and reappearing magically in the Catholic version.

I wonder, Justin Martyr referred twice to a Marcion without saying anything about him having Pauline letters or a Gospel. Further, we don't have anything associated with Marcionism do we? Just possible reconstructions based on what is thought to be Marcionite based on pollimic rants against that sect.

[lclapshaw]

Is there any physical proof for Marcionism? Aside from the FF that is. Does anyone know?

Temples, texts, secular accounts....?

Anything?

[Stuart]

Well, a cursory look shows that verse 1:26 is not in the Marcionite, nor were verses 3:12-15, nor verses 4:1-4. So, you are dead in the water there. Unless you can explain how these are original, then missing in the Marcionite version (which is intermediate) and reappearing magically in the Catholic version.

I wonder, Justin Martyr referred twice to a Marcion without saying anything about him having Pauline letters or a Gospel. Further, we don't have anything associated with Marcionism do we? Just possible reconstructions based on what is thought to be Marcionite based on pollimic rants against that sect.

Marcion, is best thought of as the patron saint of Christian sect that traced their bishops from Paul via Mark (Marcion) for their authority. The Roman church traced their bishops by similar lore via Peter. A third Asia Minor sect traced their Bishops through John likely via Apollos, although its uncertain what of their sectarian literature survived.

Personally, I throw Justin, which is an appellation rather than a proper name in the 2nd century, in the same category as Paul and others, as a legendary figure around whom literature was written in his name. His accounts of Marcion are of one literary character fictionally describing another of the same, not an eyewitness.

We have a lot of information on Marcionism. The building consensus is that Marcionism was part of the mainstream of Christianity to the mid-2nd century, but by the late 2nd century had split off. Lore has it that they split in the mid 140s, but IMO the texts suggest a split date later by perhaps a generation. When they split off they held mostly the same collection of Paul as the main church, but it froze at that earlier state (hence many of the same textual variants and errors are found in the Marcionite milieu). The material was not at all completely Marcionite, with many elements of various sects, including some proto-orthodox already embedded. What they mostly are missing is what is sometimes called the Lukan (Catholic) editorial layer. Some of this is distinguished by unique vocabulary not found in the attested Marcionite version (e.g., in 1:24 uses Lukan τε καὶ for "both", rather than the καὶ … καὶ form found in the attested Marcionite text).

What has become clear, is not that the Marcionite Paul (texts) was "Marcionite" rather that it was not fully incompatible with Marcionism. Its inconsistencies easily enough explained away by Marcionite hermeneutics and harmonizing, in much the same way Catholic hermeneutics and harmonizing are able to smooth over inconsistencies with their teaching in the received text. But the received text we have is loaded with direct poison pills and refutations of Marcionite teachings rendering it unusable to them.

Note, I operate under the assumption that the church was relatively poor when the NT was written, so one did not rewrite the text in mass or come up with a new version of the gospel unless you could not explain your sect's positions with the existing text or your sect's positions were in direct conflict with the material. Basic human nature, why work any harder than you have to?