Saul/Paul of Tarsus was a grifter who saw that by opening the nascent Jewish sect of G-zus worship to a Gentile market, he could benefit himself. Chances are that he was, as I inferred, schizotypal (at best) or just a liar and a con-man.
Why would this interpretation of Saul/Paul’s actions be untrue? Scholars such as Dr Robyn Faith Walsh and others assume that Saul/Paul’s actions were benign or innocently befuddled. Why not see that Saul/Paul was a grifter using the new Jewish sect just as more modern grifters of religion such as Mega-church pastors, Creflo Dollar, Rick Warren, Joel Scott Osteen, etc. (ad nauseam) use Christianity? Such grifters are not a modern invention. Charles MacCay references scads of such charlatans in his book ‘Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds’(i.e. alchemists who promised eternal live as well as untold riches) were but one of the categories of grifters and frauds that have existed throughout history. Christianity promises eternal life (much as the alchemists did), however, Christianity promised eternal life only after death and in the presence of the Divine. (Or eternal torture for non-believers) That promise of eternal life is at the heart of the Christian cult. Saul/Paul spent a considerable amount of energy selling the notion that, after death, believers would be assigned new, improved bodies in the after-life. Malarkey, all of it.
Saul/Paul also spent considerable effort selling the idea that he hadn’t learned of the teachings of new Jewish cult of Jesus of Nazareth from anyone on this earth. He hadn’t learned of the Jesus story from any of the apostles; not from Peter/Cephas. Not from James. Not from John. Not from anyone. He adamantly claimed that he had learned of the new teachings directly from the Jesus himself. This teaching came in the form of ‘revelations’ (i.e. hallucinations). Saul/Paul distanced himself from Simon/Peter/Cephas and any of the other ‘earthly’ Apostles and followers of the Galilean at every opportunity. Galatians 1: 11-12 is an example of that adamantine claim of divine instruction. (I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.) Yet, we know that Saul/Paul never met Jesus; never spoke to a living Jesus. His claim to have received the teachings of the Nazarene rest solely on his own claim to have had revelation; had had a divine ‘hallucination’ by which the tenets of the new Jewish sect were transmitted.
This, to me, smacks of the con-man’s claim that ‘only I can do what I say I can do’ and ‘only I can fix it’. Saul/Paul is claiming that his is the conduit to eternal salvation.
Was this all malarkey that had a conscious, self-serving, ulterior motive? I contend that perhaps it did, in the case of Saul/Paul. It is a key component of a con-game to sell what does not actually exist to the gullible. Why would Saul/Paul’s fraudulent game be different- at its core - from any of the other fraudulent cults, cons and grifts which litter both the ancient and the modern world? Is it so unimaginable that Saul/Paul saw the growth of the new Jewish cult as an opportunity to rise above his own station? Perhaps he actually had ‘visions’; perhaps not. Perhaps he was schizotypal, delusional, schizophrenic, or had some other mental malady which might explain his hallucinations. Perhaps he was only faking the visions. All that we have are reports of his ‘revelations’ and nothing more. Do we simply take him at his word? Are we to assume that Saul/Paul had no nefarious intent.
Why? Why would we do that?
Paul was not shy about asking for financial support. He was not shy in taking it. He actually complained vociferously when a congregation balked at supporting his assistant and their female traveling companions. He had others write his epistles – those writers and scribes surely expected to be compensated. Saul/Paul sought sponsorship for his ministry. Much as Creflo Dollar seeks sponsorship for a new private jet plane. Saul/Paul capitalized on the ‘Christ-cult’ which he had previously been employed to persecute.
Saul/Paul also spent considerable effort selling the idea that he hadn’t learned of the teachings of new Jewish cult of Jesus of Nazareth from anyone on this earth. He hadn’t learned of the Jesus story from any of the apostles; not from Peter/Cephas. Not from James. Not from John. Not from anyone. He adamantly claimed that he had learned of the new teachings directly from the Jesus himself. This teaching came in the form of ‘revelations’ (i.e. hallucinations). Saul/Paul distanced himself from Simon/Peter/Cephas and any of the other ‘earthly’ Apostles and followers of the Galilean at every opportunity. Galatians 1: 11-12 is an example of that adamantine claim of divine instruction. (I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel I preached is not of human origin. I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it; rather, I received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.) Yet, we know that Saul/Paul never met Jesus; never spoke to a living Jesus. His claim to have received the teachings of the Nazarene rest solely on his own claim to have had revelation; had had a divine ‘hallucination’ by which the tenets of the new Jewish sect were transmitted.
This, to me, smacks of the con-man’s claim that ‘only I can do what I say I can do’ and ‘only I can fix it’. Saul/Paul is claiming that his is the conduit to eternal salvation.
Was this all malarkey that had a conscious, self-serving, ulterior motive? I contend that perhaps it did, in the case of Saul/Paul. It is a key component of a con-game to sell what does not actually exist to the gullible. Why would Saul/Paul’s fraudulent game be different- at its core - from any of the other fraudulent cults, cons and grifts which litter both the ancient and the modern world? Is it so unimaginable that Saul/Paul saw the growth of the new Jewish cult as an opportunity to rise above his own station? Perhaps he actually had ‘visions’; perhaps not. Perhaps he was schizotypal, delusional, schizophrenic, or had some other mental malady which might explain his hallucinations. Perhaps he was only faking the visions. All that we have are reports of his ‘revelations’ and nothing more. Do we simply take him at his word? Are we to assume that Saul/Paul had no nefarious intent.
Why? Why would we do that?
Paul was not shy about asking for financial support. He was not shy in taking it. He actually complained vociferously when a congregation balked at supporting his assistant and their female traveling companions. He had others write his epistles – those writers and scribes surely expected to be compensated. Saul/Paul sought sponsorship for his ministry. Much as Creflo Dollar seeks sponsorship for a new private jet plane. Saul/Paul capitalized on the ‘Christ-cult’ which he had previously been employed to persecute.
Consider: Saul was a Pharisee; he was associated with the Temple in Jerusalem and thus knew how corrupt the Temple was by reputation.
Saul had good education and was an interpreter of the Septuagint (the Greek version of the Hebrew Bible). He was a native Greek speaker but more than likely knew Aramaic as his family came from Galilee.
By dint of his schizotypal personality, he perhaps thought himself a ‘prophet’ ordained by ‘god’; a new version of John the Baptist.
Moreover, he saw Christianity as a Jewish movement with a Hebrew god, but with a new Messianic/Apocalyptic mission; to destroy the ‘archons’ which ruled the world. These ‘archons’ are generally thought to be Satan and his fellow fallen angels or demons.
Saul/Paul took himself to be the Jewish prophet for the Gentiles for the end times. That was why he fought with Peter (Cephas) and James to extend the new ‘faith’ to the Gentiles by removing the restrictions of circumcision and the dietary laws
One push-back to the notion that Saul/Paul used the new sect of Judaism to promote himself is that he – as a Pharisee – was enjoined to ‘persecute’ members of the new sect. (How this persecution was accomplished and to what degree is open to much speculation; did Saul/Paul have warrant to break up meetings? Did he like Agent 007 have a license to kill? Was he just a taker of names; a list maker?)
Whatever the case, that Saul/Paul was charged with ‘persecuting’ members of the new sect is lodged as evidence that his conversion is righteous, true and veracious.
A similar method to bolster one’s case is utilized by Christian apologists such as Ray Comfort and Lee Strobel; both claim to have been atheists who were converted to a righteous faith in Jesus of Nazareth. It is the assertion of having been non-believers which lends emotional credence to the fervency of their conversion and the honesty of their faith. The emotional weight of the claim tends to disallow a closer examination of their conversion story.
In Saul/Paul’s case, it is the emotionally charged flip-flop from prosecutor to proselytizer coupled with the claim of revelatory visions and celestial visitations which bolsters the conversion story for Saul/Paul. However, there is not much indication that Saul was charged with anything more than impinging on gatherings of the new sect; ‘Christians’. The proto-orthodox church has proliferated stories about martyrdom and mayhem but there seems to be little indication that such brutal suppression of the new sect was factual.
No comments:
Post a Comment