Paul, the lesser Christ

[Joseph D. L.]

In certain branches of Judaism that I have admittedly only a lose concept of there is the figure known as YHWH Hakatan, translated as Jehovah the Lesser. This figure (deity?) appears predominately in Enochean literature as Metatron, and may be the "Lord" that rains down brimstone from/on behalf of the "Lord out of Heaven" in Genesis 19:24.

Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah sulfur and fire from the Lord out of heaven.

This also may explain the enigmatic passage in Philippians 2 wherein Jesus is given the name above all others's:

And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

The above passage is likely inferring Jesus as this YHWH Hakatan figure.

But then let's look at Paul.

Paul's name, Paulus, itself is indicative of a similar meaning, that being "smaller", "humble", "lesser". Is Paul, by virtue of his name, calling himself the Lesser Jesus?

Consider: Paul again and again calls himself the servant, emissary, slave, prisoner, and Apostle of Christ. And observe what he says of himself in Philippians:

Yes, and I will rejoice, for I know that through your prayers and the help of the Spirit of Jesus Christ this will turn out for my deliverance, as it is my eager expectation and hope that I will not be at all ashamed, but that with full courage now as always Christ will be honored in my body, whether by life or by death.

"Christ will be honoured in my body". Paul, by his own words, literally embodies the Spirit of Christ. He is not a prisoner in that he is chained up, but that the Spirit has taken hold of him.

Paul is creating a spiritual chain from the Father, to himself. Christ is that chain.

What does this mean overall? That Paul is undoubtedly the Paraclete, which I have been saying for years now; and that, possibly, he is more so in the business of deifying himself than honouring Jesus. Which isn't too absurd to think. Peregrinus certainly did it; and Apollonius was deified by his followers. Simon Magus and Yeshu ben Stada as well.

But anyway, that's all I've got for now.

[Joseph D. L.]

This association of Paul and Christ calls to mind the figures of Ignatius Theophorus (The Fire that bears God) and Peregrinus Proteus (who infamously immolated himself). Fire and light are the de facto expressions of Logos, the Word. Well, Metatron is literally the Word/voice of God, and Enoch is described as turning into fire and flame when he is turned into Metatron in 3 Enoch (similar to Moses's face shining upon seeing God's glory).

This is to say that, not only is there apparent solar worship in Judaism, it is specifically Logos worship (an idea that goes back as far as the Egyptians, and possibly Persian as well), and that Pauline/Johannine/Marcionite sects are directly descended from this tradition. So any argument about Marcion or Paul being gentile-focused is utterly quashed, and why a certain someone's mythicist theories are completely wrong.

[Ben C. Smith]

Am I the only one who thinks that Metatron sounds like the name of a Saturday morning cartoon robot or some such?

[Secret Alias]

The idea that there are two gods is THE NATURAL READING of the Pentateuch. It's also Philo's understanding and implicitly the background of the rabbinic interpretation. No one identifies two different names with the same person in the same story. The bullshit about a multiple writers is so forced given the existence of the Philonic interpretation. Drives me crazy how influential Jewish dogma is on the field of studying Jewish literature. The holocaust aside from being a catastrophic humanitarian event also destroyed the ability of outsiders to say anything objective about Judaism, Jewish literature and its interpretation. The Jewish authorities say 'we're a monotheistic/Yahwehist tradition' and scholarship is almost hand-tied to agree. It's absolutely ridiculous.

[lsayre]

Am I the only one who thinks that Metatron sounds like the name of a Saturday morning cartoon robot or some such?

No! The first time I heard it, I thought the exact same thing.

[lsayre]

This thread intrigues me greatly. It harkens back to what might be my first (and only substantive, if one can call it that) thread initiated within this forum, back in 2015. In it I eventually revealed my thought that Paul himself was once thought of as a god in his own right and that Christ was an insertion into his letters. Soon after I made that revelation the thread died out. Here's the link to my post:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1685

[davidmartin]

Isayre I think you're noticing the same things I did. I think he wanted to be thought of as an incarnation of Christ and the one to whom people should look, not to stories about the person or teachings of Jesus, whose role was sacrificial only. He is trying to ride two horses at once and it never really worked out as people were curious about Jesus.

[Joseph D. L.]

This thread intrigues me greatly. It harkens back to what might be my first (and only substantive, if one can call it that) thread initiated within this forum, back in 2015. In it I eventually revealed my thought that Paul himself was once thought of as a god in his own right and that Christ was an insertion into his letters. Soon after I made that revelation the thread died out. Here's the link to my post:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1685

Without yet going through your original post, I have long held Paul to be the Paraclete--not just an agent of Christ, but the living embodiment of Christ.

I can't speak of the possibility that Christ was a later interpolation. Though I can agree that Paul makes much to do about himself, and may have been held as divine by later followers, with some confusing him for Jesus himself.

[Joseph D. L.]

Isayre I think you're noticing the same things I did. I think he wanted to be thought of as an incarnation of Christ and the one to whom people should look, not to stories about the person or teachings of Jesus, whose role was sacrificial only. He is trying to ride two horses at once and it never really worked out as people were curious about Jesus.

It goes back to the idea of transmigration. Paul claimed to have received the Spirit directly from Christ in Heaven. Thus the adage in John 3 about the man who hasn't descended from Heaven except the one who ascended. Note: I take the whole of the discourse with Nicodemus to be about Paul, the Paraclete.

Also, you're comment, "He is trying to ride two horses at once", jogged an idea in me. I wonder if Matthew 21:2-7 is an acknowledgement of the double role of Jesus in these traditions, and an attempt to reconcile them?

[davidmartin]

If so then his opponents might well have had a deified response. I've long suspected Paul to be the original figure behind the Gnostic demiurge, and their strange silence on Paul. Although the demiurge was not a new idea at all, he was the one that fitted into that role. Take the epithets of the demiurge 'fool', exactly what Paul's opponents called him. Also the demiurge's refrain "I am God and no-one else is beside me" - that sums up Paul's own exclusive claims to represent Christ. The demiurge's Mother would have been a person also originally.
There's also veiled oppositional references against a Paul-like figure in non-Gnostic sources, such as the infancy gospel (which I mentioned in another thread) and possibly even the gospels, in the figure of Judas Iscariot.