In writing my forthcoming book on the Resurrection of Jesus, it has been important to look at Jesus’ earliest source, Paul. Paul is famous for not actually telling us much at all about Jesus at all.
There are some genuinely quite problematic Pauline verses that should raise some eyebrows concerning his agenda and methodology for converting others and evangelising:
7 But if through my lie the truth of God abounded to His glory, why am I also still being judged as a sinner? 8 And why not say (as we are slanderously reported and as some claim that we say), “Let us do evil that good may come”? Their condemnation is just.
18 What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed; and in this I rejoice. Yes, and I will rejoice…
1 Corinthians 9:21-23
21 to those who are without the Law, I became as one without the Law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might gain those who are without the Law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might gain the weak; I have become all things to all people, so that I may by all means save some. 23 I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.
There seem to be various instances of Paul justifying any means to get across the “truth” of Jesus, that he could be justifying lying for Jesus. There is a divergence of historical, veridical truth of events, and theological truth. But as I mention in this and my Nativity book, with reference to the Nativity of Jesus and the work of Catholic exegete Raymond Brown, if there are no historical foundations, then what is the Christian hanging their theological truth on?
So not only is there a silence from Paul, as I discuss in the book, but what there is could be, by his own admission, “fake news” to serve a religious purpose.
Stay in touch! Like A Tippling Philosopher on Facebook: