Paul's Letters, Taken at Face Value, Reveal that He was not a Typical Early Christian!

[lsayre]

In circa 210 CE did Tertullian (in a rant against Marcion) question Paul's claim to legitimate status as an Apostle, in addition to wondering why a late-comer 13th Apostle was even needed when there were already 12? And if so, would this imply that as late as Tertullian's putting this to the pen the Proto-Orthodox Church was not yet fully in lock step with accepting the validity of Paul and/or his letters?

[ABuddhist]

In circa 210 CE did Tertullian (in a rant against Marcion) question Paul's claim to legitimate status as an Apostle, in addition to wondering why a late-comer 13th Apostle was even needed when there were already 12? And if so, would this imply that as late as Tertullian's putting this to the pen the Proto-Orthodox Church was not yet fully in lock step with accepting the validity of Paul and/or his letters?

I am not knowing, but if such an allegation was made, it would support the standard narrative about why Justin did not cite Paul - because Paul was too linked with Marcionitism.

[GakuseiDon]

In circa 210 CE did Tertullian (in a rant against Marcion) question Paul's claim to legitimate status as an Apostle, in addition to wondering why a late-comer 13th Apostle was even needed when there were already 12? And if so, would this imply that as late as Tertullian's putting this to the pen the Proto-Orthodox Church was not yet fully in lock step with accepting the validity of Paul and/or his letters?

I've looked through all five books by Tertullian against Marcion as well as "The Prescription against Heretics", and Tertullian only seems to have praise for Paul, at one point claiming that Genesis prophecised the coming of Paul. Perhaps it is in another book? Do you have a reference to where Tertullian questions Paul's claim to legitimate status as an Apostle, please?

[neilgodfrey]

It's not too late to actually read; Did Jesus Exist? by Dr. Bart E. Ehrman.

Pst ... I don't want to embarrass Ehrman publicly so keep this between you and me: It was plain as day to anyone who read Erhman and the books he criticized that he had not actually read them for himself. So you (and GaslightingDon, too) are in excellent company -- no need to read the mythicist works, no need to read Ehrman, no need to even read the Bible verses touted -- case closed. Facts can have no power over an argument bulwarked behind deliberate ignorance.

So, are you admitting you haven't read the book either?
Don't worry, your secret is safe here.
Ain't ignorance bliss!

I don't even know what you're talking about!

[neilgodfrey]

This is why actual Biblical scholars like Dr. Ehrman no longer debate with the likes of Carrier et. al.

In this you are wrong. Dr. Carrier has debated with the following biblical scholars:

Dennis MacDonald (in 2021!): https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/17824

Craig Evans: https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/15895

Zeba Crook (professor of New Testament studies): https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/5612

Mark Goodacre: https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/2839

The few times I've watched Richard Carrier in a debate I've noted how professionally he comes across and wish he would keep it like that in his informal writings. Though I expect Bart Ehrman would not want to face Carrier for the simple reason that it would soon become obvious that his DJE? was anything but a professional response to mythicism -- and that he really truly had not even read all the books he said he was "reviewing".

[ABuddhist]

It's not too late to actually read; Did Jesus Exist? by Dr. Bart E. Ehrman.

Pst ... I don't want to embarrass Ehrman publicly so keep this between you and me: It was plain as day to anyone who read Erhman and the books he criticized that he had not actually read them for himself. So you (and GaslightingDon, too) are in excellent company -- no need to read the mythicist works, no need to read Ehrman, no need to even read the Bible verses touted -- case closed. Facts can have no power over an argument bulwarked behind deliberate ignorance.

So, are you admitting you haven't read the book either?
Don't worry, your secret is safe here.
Ain't ignorance bliss!

Here is a better resource showing that Neil has readed the book in question: https://vridar.org/series-index/did-jes ... n-reviews/ - under the heading "My own posts".

[davidmartin]

I've looked through all five books by Tertullian against Marcion as well as "The Prescription against Heretics", and Tertullian only seems to have praise for Paul, at one point claiming that Genesis prophecised the coming of Paul. Perhaps it is in another book? Do you have a reference to where Tertullian questions Paul's claim to legitimate status as an Apostle, please?

It is from here (found on https://churchhistory101.com/feedback/t ... ionism.php but Tertullian seems to be arguing that since Marcion rejects the other apostles why does he accept Paul because he later says "I do not calumniate him whom I defend. I deny him to compel you to defend him. I deny him to convince you that he is mine....If you challenge us to your belief, tell us what things constitute its basis"

I think if you're looking for reluctance to accept Paul among the proto-orthodox Tertullian is way too late but i don't doubt it existed because Justin talks of some Christians that follow the law and he will treat them as fellow Christians but they would be ones that reject Paul and were a minority but Justin doesn't mention Paul either so something changed shortly after Justin. It's confusing I'm not sure what best explains it

I desire to hear from Marcion the origin of Paul the apostle. I am a sort of new disciple, having had instruction from no other teacher. For the moment my only belief is that nothing ought to be believed without good reason, and that is believed without good reason which is believed without knowledge of its origin: and I must with the best of reasons approach this inquiry with uneasiness when I find one affirmed to be an apostle, of whom in the list of the apostles in the gospel I find no trace. So when I am told that he [i.e., Paul] was subsequently promoted by our Lord, by now at rest in heaven, I find some lack of foresight in the fact that Christ did not know beforehand that he would have need of him, but after setting in order the office of apostleship and sending them out upon their duties, considered it necessary, on an impulse and not by deliberation, to add another, by compulsion so to speak and not by design [i.e., on the Road to Damascus]. So then, shipmaster out of Pontus [i.e., Marcion], supposing you have never accepted into your craft any smuggled or illicit merchandise, have never appropriated or adulterated any cargo, and in the things of God are even more careful and trustworthy, will you please tell us under what bill of lading you accepted Paul as apostle, who had stamped him with that mark of distinction, who commended him to you, and who put him in your charge? Only so may you with confidence disembark him [i.e., Paul]: only so can he avoid being proved to belong to him who has put in evidence all the documents that attest his apostleship. He [i.e., Paul] himself, says Marcion, claims to be an apostle, and that not from men nor through any man, but through Jesus Christ. Clearly any man can make claims for himself: but his claim is confirmed by another person's attestation. One person writes the document, another signs it, a third attests the signature, and a fourth enters it in the records. No man is for himself both claimant and witness. Besides this, you have found it written that many will come and say, I am Christ. If there is one that makes a false claim to be Christ, much more can there be one who professes that he is an apostle of Christ.... Let the apostle, belong to your other god...."Against Marcion," cir. 212AD

[lsayre]

That's it! Thank you!!!!

[John2]

I think Paul's letters reveal rather that Christians of the sort he calls "false brothers" were not "typical early Christians," or at least that their views regarding Gentile Torah observance did not prevail with Christian leaders.

At the same time, while Paul's mission to the Gentiles had the approval of Christian leaders, his letters also reveal that his views on Jewish Torah observance were too extreme for Christian leaders and he was reproved for that.

So it looks to me like Paul was a "typical early Christian" in the sense that his mission to the Gentiles had the approval of Christian leaders, and he was an atypical early Christian in the sense that his views about Jewish Torah observance were considered extreme by Christians leaders.

[neilgodfrey]

It's not too late to actually read; Did Jesus Exist? by Dr. Bart E. Ehrman.

Pst ... I don't want to embarrass Ehrman publicly so keep this between you and me: It was plain as day to anyone who read Erhman and the books he criticized that he had not actually read them for himself. So you (and GaslightingDon, too) are in excellent company -- no need to read the mythicist works, no need to read Ehrman, no need to even read the Bible verses touted -- case closed. Facts can have no power over an argument bulwarked behind deliberate ignorance.

So, are you admitting you haven't read the book either?
Don't worry, your secret is safe here.
Ain't ignorance bliss!

Here is a better resource showing that Neil has read the book in question: https://vridar.org/series-index/did-jes ... n-reviews/ - under the heading "My own posts".

I think you might be befuddling our friend John T here. Why read books you want to mock when you can just come to a forum and ask others what's in them or better still, just assume you know what's in them and start making fun of them. We've seen others on this forum claim to be addressing posts and works they clearly have not read. Even Ehrman does it and makes money out of it. So I think such persons must wonder "What's the point?" if you demonstrate someone has actually read a work they can criticize.