Saint Paul

[Charlatan]

Saint Paul had a different view of Jesus to the other apostels, and how could this be so? He must surely have misled the people, or, maybe the other apostels got together and agreed that CHrist was a certain way. In a way either they were misleading the masses, by not being individuals, meaning they were wrong, or he was wrong for disagreeing that Jesus should be portrayed in this or that way and not in the way that everyone agrees He is. So any way you look at it, you have some misleading from one or another apostel somewhere along the line, but seeing as how this is about Saint Paul, let's say he was speaking his mind - it is true they were all together when collecting the texts into the new testament, right? SO they might have agreed to disagree, but you can't help but wonder.

[ItsDarts]

Quote by: Charlatan Saint Paul had a different view of Jesus to the other apostels, and how could this be so? He must surely have misled the people, or, maybe the other apostels got together and agreed that CHrist was a certain way. In a way either they were misleading the masses, by not being individuals, meaning they were wrong, or he was wrong for disagreeing that Jesus should be portrayed in this or that way and not in the way that everyone agrees He is. So any way you look at it, you have some misleading from one or another apostel somewhere along the line, but seeing as how this is about Saint Paul, let's say he was speaking his mind - it is true they were all together when collecting the texts into the new testament, right? SO they might have agreed to disagree, but you can't help but wonder.

Paul never met Jesus in person and only saw him in a "vision" on the road to Damascus. The apostles were not together when "collecting" the NT text. The NT texts were written long after Pauls epistles. The first NT text was Mark, and depending on what scholars you choose to believe, Mark was written either just before the fall of the temple or just after, between 65 and 75 CE. Conservative Scholars say it was before the fall and that the fall of the temple was a prophecy, and liberal scholars think it was written after the fall of the temple in 70CE since Mark mentions this in his text. Another odd thing to note is that none of the gospels are said to be written by the names attributed to them but this is a subject for another debate.

What I can't help wondering is why all these texts were written during the supposed life of Christ. You have this guy wondering from town to town performing these supposed miracles and nobody is writing about them until decades after his death, where no one can confirm or deny the miracles, how convenient.