Thomas Jefferson at one point called Paul, formerly Saul of Tarsus, "The first corrupter of the teachings of Jesus," for a reason. Paul was an interesting Character in the Bible who's letters created a sad cornerstone for our current modern-day Christianity. "Sad" mainly because Paul actually concentrates more on his own opinions of what should be a spiritual life under supposed-God, and not in conveying what Jesus actually said to the people hardly or barely even one single time. Paul was an untrustworthy character who wrote several authentic letters, and whom the organized religion of a later day forged several inauthentic letters in his name. Paul is also as difficult a character in history (almost no unbiased historical information whatsoever) as Jesus himself.
Historian and author Donald Akenson puts forth the authentic Paul letters as one each to the Thessalonians, Romans, Galatians, Philippians, Philemon, and two to Corinth. He cites Hebrws, Titus and the two Timothy letters are listed as certain forgeries and a second letter to the Thessalonians as well as Ephesians and Colossians as likely forgeries. But even in Paul's own handwriting, his letters consist of a lot of opinions.. and very little fact. We get almost no picture of the historical Jesus, and very limited information of the true spiritual one.
Paul does a lot of promising of Jesus' return and makes a few significant remarks to deify Jesus; however, he suggests very little of the original teachings (attributed in Jesus' name) and becomes far more concerned with setting the stage of the messages with his own voice, and not that of the apparent Messiah. On a side note, Pauls' first letter to the Thessalonians is considered to be history's earliest reference to Jesus as "messiah" (Kyroi Iesous Christos), despite the fact that early Jewish followers of Jesus had absolutely no interest in considering Jesus as such. They saw him as a teacher, philospher, and at most: A prophet. But not the so-called Messiah.
Paul also does a lot of "Defending himself" in letters here and there. He has to go out of his way to attempt to defend his character as being upstanding, he goes out of his way int rying to convince people he can be trusted with money, and all along the way he's always the central figure in conflict and strife. No one ever seems to stick by his side, and even his closest friend Barnabas eventually parts ways with him over something that, for closest spiritual friends, should have been easily managed to salvage the partnership.
Touching back on the message of Jesus for a moment, we know that Jesus considered giving of ourselves to others at great sacrifice to be a central concept in a lot of ways, and the only time Jesus ever touched money was once; and he did it in complete disgust for it. However, we now have Paul who comes along and makes an incredibly selfish statement to the Corinthians: "Whoever threshes should thresh in hope of a share in the crop."
This is not.. I repeat, NOT... a Jesus concept. This is a Paul concept, and he is more than happy to push this concept quite likely to cover his tracks (be them already made, or forthcoming in the future) because dear Paul was taking his "share" of the returns in the name of Jesus. It explains why he later goes out of his way in an attempt to uphold himself as righteous with money (I will send any whom you approve with lettesr to take you gift to Jerusalem. If it seems advisable that I should go also, they will accompany me" -- an innocent and trusted man of God would have no issues from the community in simply handing over the communal donations to the Disciple to return to Jerusalem), and it is also suspicious in considering the lack of documentation for Paul actually hanging over the cash. But these are simply hypothesis which point out things to consider.
In a further example, Jesus has often compared true followers, true disciples, to children. This occurs in both "Biblical" (current-day Bible) and other gospels (as there were most likely several hundred spiritual "gospels" before the Council of Nicea, only a fragment of which we have access today such as the findings at Nag Hammadi and the Dead Sea Scrolls). He has on more than one occasion said we are to be as children, and has asked that the children be brought to him. These passages are not ambiguous in meaning... we are indeed children, and we must learn and grow before we have become spiritually mature. At no point are we told that we shall ever reach this apex in our current lives, and rightly so considering the vast nature of God, the universe, and everything. We are to be as children and humble ourselves to a path of learning and seeking wisdom..
However, Paul is quick to squash this entirely when he states pointedly, "I put away childish things" and "Do not be children in your thinking... be adults". It is a statement that is completely out of character for the message of Jesus at all and honestly has nothing to do with Jesus in any way. This is the message of Paul, not Jesus. Instead of writing a message that was intended to carry the weight of the teachings of Jesus, Paul has written a clear indication that Paul is more interested in what Paul thinks. His writing continues to displace instead of support the message of Jesus.
Paul continuously has to go out of his way not only to defend his own character, but to defend himself as an apostle. He reminds those who do not consider him an apostle, that he has seen Jesus.. but this is simply an indication that enough people were in doubt of him in the first place to need such a statement to be uttered.
Putting his character aside, we move on to Paul's message to the general populations. One would consider a great disciple of Jesus and one who wanted to continue the message of a great teacher (or messiah) to quote his master on multiple occasions, in full, leaving nothing out. However, Paul spends every last letter he wrote paraphrasing Jesus at best. There is only ONE recorded instance of Paul ever quoting Jesus. This is suspicious, at best, and actually reflects back to the idea of "character" in that Paul was more interested in conveying what Paul had to say, as a priority. Rather than quote his supposed messiah, Paul takes some of Jesus' ideas and creates a mishmash of thoughts with his own, regurgetating them as original with no bibliography and no citations whatsoever of any other source. It a way, Paul has in fact created one of the greatest insults to Jesus that perhaps has ever been put on paper.
Other points of interest include in his writings to the Corinthians for them to take into consideration his description of a spiritual life, free from fornication, impurity, licentiousnessm idolatry, sorcer, quarrels, dissensions, factions, drunkenness, carousing, and so on and so on. Funny thing is, that Jesus' life in and of itself contradicts a portion of these demands, considering that Jesus was to have caroused with others (*note: Carouse is a type of merry-making, typically loud and drunken merry-making -- think first-century party), and sinners at that! For just one example.
Paul truly goes out of his way to lay down the "rules" which end up in many cases contradicting the very message he was supposed to be citing, and are far more concerned with how Paul thought Jesus once was, how Paul thought people should live, and these letters are eternally silent on any version of a historical and accurate Jesus.
The fact is, time and time again, the real Jesus stands up against the rule of the day. Jesus was in fact not meek and mild as many a modern day Christian would have him painted, but he was a radical in the face of the Roman rule at the time. And yet Paul goes out of his way to leap from loving one's enemies (in the infamous "Love is patient, love is kind" speech, possibly the height of Paul's writings and the closest we will ever come to a true message from Jesus through Paul), to promoting Roman rule and authority in the letter Romans! ("Let every person be subject to the governing authorities...those authorities have been instituted by God...those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad."
This was absolutely not the Jesus of history who stood against the once-modern-day-culture of the time. This.. was the work of a man who wanted to twist a message in dire.
So, how would a message of the true historical and accurate Jesus become so twisted out of shape? Well, they say history is written by the victors, but at the time of Jesus this would have had a few further additions: History is written by the literate, and the powerful. At the time, historians estimate the literacy rate in Rome to be about 15 percent at maximum (more likely closer to 10%, less than 5 percent in the more rural communities of poorer folk, and as little as a few percent in the countryside. If you add women to this calculation, you would get only a tiny fraction of the entire literate population at best.
Paul was literate and Paul was capable of making these writings.. and truly who would or could argue? In fact, people had very little ability to distinguish the fact that some of the letters attributed to Paul were actually forgeries until the modern day, let alone in the days throughout the developing churchy. With no means to stand up and record otherwise, with no means to preserve the thoughts of the majority of people at the time, and with no ability to analyze the information at the critical level we can today: Passing off Paul's information as authentic to the character, history, and message of Jesus, even in forgeries but let alone in Paul's own writing which reeks of Paul's own personal purposes, it is any wonder we have ended up with false teachings as the basis of common-day Christianity.
And this above is really only a tiny beginning in what was a long, long history of corruption process away from the true message of Jesus.
Saul of Tarsus was a shady, untrustworthy character who was doubted by the population for his entire life and who stated ideas that were his own and at best melded them together with some ideas that came before him from a man named Jesus. He issued these dictates to the general population in the form of Godly authority and in the process created a malfunctioning cornerstone for a religion that now considers it best to throw figurative stones at people who fornicate or women who attempt to participate in the church... all edicts of a simple man (Paul) with next to zero spiritual authority over others other than in his own self-interested state of mind.
And when the cornerstones are corrupt... the building laid upon them will be shaky, at best.
History is a cruel mistress to those who have skirted her pages through the delicate passage of time.
Historian and author Donald Akenson puts forth the authentic Paul letters as one each to the Thessalonians, Romans, Galatians, Philippians, Philemon, and two to Corinth. He cites Hebrws, Titus and the two Timothy letters are listed as certain forgeries and a second letter to the Thessalonians as well as Ephesians and Colossians as likely forgeries. But even in Paul's own handwriting, his letters consist of a lot of opinions.. and very little fact. We get almost no picture of the historical Jesus, and very limited information of the true spiritual one.
Paul does a lot of promising of Jesus' return and makes a few significant remarks to deify Jesus; however, he suggests very little of the original teachings (attributed in Jesus' name) and becomes far more concerned with setting the stage of the messages with his own voice, and not that of the apparent Messiah. On a side note, Pauls' first letter to the Thessalonians is considered to be history's earliest reference to Jesus as "messiah" (Kyroi Iesous Christos), despite the fact that early Jewish followers of Jesus had absolutely no interest in considering Jesus as such. They saw him as a teacher, philospher, and at most: A prophet. But not the so-called Messiah.
Paul also does a lot of "Defending himself" in letters here and there. He has to go out of his way to attempt to defend his character as being upstanding, he goes out of his way int rying to convince people he can be trusted with money, and all along the way he's always the central figure in conflict and strife. No one ever seems to stick by his side, and even his closest friend Barnabas eventually parts ways with him over something that, for closest spiritual friends, should have been easily managed to salvage the partnership.
Touching back on the message of Jesus for a moment, we know that Jesus considered giving of ourselves to others at great sacrifice to be a central concept in a lot of ways, and the only time Jesus ever touched money was once; and he did it in complete disgust for it. However, we now have Paul who comes along and makes an incredibly selfish statement to the Corinthians: "Whoever threshes should thresh in hope of a share in the crop."
This is not.. I repeat, NOT... a Jesus concept. This is a Paul concept, and he is more than happy to push this concept quite likely to cover his tracks (be them already made, or forthcoming in the future) because dear Paul was taking his "share" of the returns in the name of Jesus. It explains why he later goes out of his way in an attempt to uphold himself as righteous with money (I will send any whom you approve with lettesr to take you gift to Jerusalem. If it seems advisable that I should go also, they will accompany me" -- an innocent and trusted man of God would have no issues from the community in simply handing over the communal donations to the Disciple to return to Jerusalem), and it is also suspicious in considering the lack of documentation for Paul actually hanging over the cash. But these are simply hypothesis which point out things to consider.
In a further example, Jesus has often compared true followers, true disciples, to children. This occurs in both "Biblical" (current-day Bible) and other gospels (as there were most likely several hundred spiritual "gospels" before the Council of Nicea, only a fragment of which we have access today such as the findings at Nag Hammadi and the Dead Sea Scrolls). He has on more than one occasion said we are to be as children, and has asked that the children be brought to him. These passages are not ambiguous in meaning... we are indeed children, and we must learn and grow before we have become spiritually mature. At no point are we told that we shall ever reach this apex in our current lives, and rightly so considering the vast nature of God, the universe, and everything. We are to be as children and humble ourselves to a path of learning and seeking wisdom..
However, Paul is quick to squash this entirely when he states pointedly, "I put away childish things" and "Do not be children in your thinking... be adults". It is a statement that is completely out of character for the message of Jesus at all and honestly has nothing to do with Jesus in any way. This is the message of Paul, not Jesus. Instead of writing a message that was intended to carry the weight of the teachings of Jesus, Paul has written a clear indication that Paul is more interested in what Paul thinks. His writing continues to displace instead of support the message of Jesus.
Paul continuously has to go out of his way not only to defend his own character, but to defend himself as an apostle. He reminds those who do not consider him an apostle, that he has seen Jesus.. but this is simply an indication that enough people were in doubt of him in the first place to need such a statement to be uttered.
Putting his character aside, we move on to Paul's message to the general populations. One would consider a great disciple of Jesus and one who wanted to continue the message of a great teacher (or messiah) to quote his master on multiple occasions, in full, leaving nothing out. However, Paul spends every last letter he wrote paraphrasing Jesus at best. There is only ONE recorded instance of Paul ever quoting Jesus. This is suspicious, at best, and actually reflects back to the idea of "character" in that Paul was more interested in conveying what Paul had to say, as a priority. Rather than quote his supposed messiah, Paul takes some of Jesus' ideas and creates a mishmash of thoughts with his own, regurgetating them as original with no bibliography and no citations whatsoever of any other source. It a way, Paul has in fact created one of the greatest insults to Jesus that perhaps has ever been put on paper.
Other points of interest include in his writings to the Corinthians for them to take into consideration his description of a spiritual life, free from fornication, impurity, licentiousnessm idolatry, sorcer, quarrels, dissensions, factions, drunkenness, carousing, and so on and so on. Funny thing is, that Jesus' life in and of itself contradicts a portion of these demands, considering that Jesus was to have caroused with others (*note: Carouse is a type of merry-making, typically loud and drunken merry-making -- think first-century party), and sinners at that! For just one example.
Paul truly goes out of his way to lay down the "rules" which end up in many cases contradicting the very message he was supposed to be citing, and are far more concerned with how Paul thought Jesus once was, how Paul thought people should live, and these letters are eternally silent on any version of a historical and accurate Jesus.
The fact is, time and time again, the real Jesus stands up against the rule of the day. Jesus was in fact not meek and mild as many a modern day Christian would have him painted, but he was a radical in the face of the Roman rule at the time. And yet Paul goes out of his way to leap from loving one's enemies (in the infamous "Love is patient, love is kind" speech, possibly the height of Paul's writings and the closest we will ever come to a true message from Jesus through Paul), to promoting Roman rule and authority in the letter Romans! ("Let every person be subject to the governing authorities...those authorities have been instituted by God...those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad."
This was absolutely not the Jesus of history who stood against the once-modern-day-culture of the time. This.. was the work of a man who wanted to twist a message in dire.
So, how would a message of the true historical and accurate Jesus become so twisted out of shape? Well, they say history is written by the victors, but at the time of Jesus this would have had a few further additions: History is written by the literate, and the powerful. At the time, historians estimate the literacy rate in Rome to be about 15 percent at maximum (more likely closer to 10%, less than 5 percent in the more rural communities of poorer folk, and as little as a few percent in the countryside. If you add women to this calculation, you would get only a tiny fraction of the entire literate population at best.
Paul was literate and Paul was capable of making these writings.. and truly who would or could argue? In fact, people had very little ability to distinguish the fact that some of the letters attributed to Paul were actually forgeries until the modern day, let alone in the days throughout the developing churchy. With no means to stand up and record otherwise, with no means to preserve the thoughts of the majority of people at the time, and with no ability to analyze the information at the critical level we can today: Passing off Paul's information as authentic to the character, history, and message of Jesus, even in forgeries but let alone in Paul's own writing which reeks of Paul's own personal purposes, it is any wonder we have ended up with false teachings as the basis of common-day Christianity.
And this above is really only a tiny beginning in what was a long, long history of corruption process away from the true message of Jesus.
Saul of Tarsus was a shady, untrustworthy character who was doubted by the population for his entire life and who stated ideas that were his own and at best melded them together with some ideas that came before him from a man named Jesus. He issued these dictates to the general population in the form of Godly authority and in the process created a malfunctioning cornerstone for a religion that now considers it best to throw figurative stones at people who fornicate or women who attempt to participate in the church... all edicts of a simple man (Paul) with next to zero spiritual authority over others other than in his own self-interested state of mind.
And when the cornerstones are corrupt... the building laid upon them will be shaky, at best.
History is a cruel mistress to those who have skirted her pages through the delicate passage of time.
