The Problems of Paul

Chapter 6 The Problems of Paul Paul of Tarsus graces us with the earliest Christian sources, with 1 Thessalo- nians usually dated to 49 ce, and his later works appearing around the early 60s ce.1 Nevertheless, like the others writers, Paul is not an eyewitness, so none of his letters are primary sources about Jesus’ allegedly earthly life. He also gives us plenty of reasons to doubt his claims, so that we really can’t be sure if we should trust what he has to say about a historical Jesus.2 For example, Paul indicates that the end justifies the (deceitful) means and seems to outright admit how guileful he is.3 However, Paul has virtually nothing to say about the Historical Jesus anyway. Furthermore, what he does say about Christ could be the key to unlocking the mysteries of Christianity’s origins. There are hints throughout Paul’s writings, and other epistles like the pseudo-Pauline book of Hebrews,4 that the earliest Christians believed not in an Earthly Jesus, but in a purely Celestial Jesus. But first, we shall take a look at how various early Christians had vastly different views about Jesus. 1 The Docetic/Marcionite Jesus It already seems obvious that the state of the sources gives us sufficient reason to doubt Jesus’ historical existence. But certain interpretations of Paul’s writings indicate that a more aggressive case against Jesus’ history can be ad- vanced. It is interesting to speculate on the possibility that early Christians (such as Paul) did not see Jesus in the literal, fleshly, Earth-visiting way that 1 Ehrman (dje), pp. 117–118. 2 One reason I do not stress is the possibility that Paul did not exist, which several scholars and amateurs have raised. I am not particularly convinced by such claims, and also don’t find them entirely relevant, particularly since the content of the Pauline epistles is what is most important. It doesn’t seem to matter whether the author of the letters was Paul or Faul. And, forged or not, the biblical books are filled with untruths. Nevertheless, it isn’t always crankery to wonder if a purported author existed. The Greek poet Homer’s existence has routinely been questioned by scholars. See Martin West, “The Homeric Question Today,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 155, no. 4 (2011): 383. 3 See Romans 3:7, 2 Corinthians 12:16, and also 1 Corinthians 9:20–21. Cf. God’s deceitful ways in 1 Kings 22:21–23. Even Jesus was portrayed as a liar, as seen in John 7:8–10. 4 A book that is similarly scanty on historical facts and which seems to ‘quote’ Jesus by invok- ing the Old Testament. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ��9 | doi:�0.��63/9789004408784_008 <UN> The PROBLEMS of Paul 263 modern, orthodox Christians do. Without conclusive evidence, it remains an interesting theory. Recent studies in the origins of early Christianity however, are revealing that the very early days of the Christian faith were plagued with schism; there were many and varied types of Christianity,5 with radically di- vergent views on doctrine, and even on the very nature of Jesus.6 The writings of the earliest Christian authors themselves reveal the incredible diversity of early Christianity.7 One ancient group that had very different ideas of Jesus, which could open the door for even more ‘non-historical’ views, was the Docetists.8 Much like Gnosticism, Docetism is a term that can be used for more groups and ideas than is intended.9 Of interest to this project are the Docetists who essentially denied the reality of Jesus Christ’s suffering (and his ultimate sacrifice), and thus became labelled as heretical by proto-orthodox Christians (the precur- sors to the Roman Catholics).10 To these Docetists, Jesus Christ was not human; he was a spirit, completely divine.11 This Jesus then only appeared to be human, much like a phantom. Such alternative Christianities were criticised by Irenaeus, who even knew of Christians that “allege that the Word and Christ never came into this world”.12 Bart Ehrman notes that there are instances in the New Testament where a docetic-type of Jesus may be hinted at,13 particularly among the writings of Paul: For what the law was powerless to do because it was weakened by the flesh, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh to be a sin offering. And so he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the 5 Karen L. King, “Factions, Variety, Diversity, Multiplicity: Representing Early Christian Dif- ferences for the 21st Century,” Method and Theory in the Study of Religion 23, no. 3–4 (2011): 216–237. 6 Ehrman (LC). 7 For example, see 2 Corinthians 11 and Christopher W. Skinner and Kelly R. Iverson, eds., Unity and Diversity in the Gospels and Paul: Essays in Honor of Frank J. Matera (Atlanta, GA: Society of Biblical Literature, 2012). 8 Ehrman (LC), p. 15. 9 Cf. Karen L. King, What is Gnosticism? (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005), p. 7. 10 Einar Thomassen, “‘Forgery’ in the New Testament,” in The Invention of Sacred Tradition, ed. Lewis and Hammer (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), pp. 145–146. 11 Ehrman (LC), p. 15.; King (wig), p. 98. 12 Irenaeus, Against Heresies 3.11.3. 13 Ehrman (LC), pp. 42, 105. Curiously, Ehrman seems to have nothing to say about Doce- tism, or even Marcion, in Did Jesus Exist? Perhaps, along with the relatively monolithic view of Judaism portrayed therein, Ehrman wishes not to alert readers of that book to the great diversity in Jewish and early Christian thought. <UN>.

Load more