Saul/Paul? Hmmm...

 

It must be remembered that whereas modern people – influenced by modern psychology and modern times - generally discount the veracity of dreams as a reliable method of assessing daily life or foretelling the future, ancient humans took greater stock in dreams. For example, throughout Herodotus’ ‘The History’, oracles and dreams play an important role and were recorded as historical.

Dreams are recounted and considered for vital information amongst most early and primitive cultures. Sages, oracles and shamans were sought out to bring meaning to febrile dreams. 

 

On the other hand, there are a considerable number of modern people who still put warrant in the nature of their dreams. Numerous websites, books and blogs are devoted to assisting dreamers in deciphering the hidden messages of their dreams. Tweezing architypes from dreams about the mundane is one thing; like astrology or dowsing, it might be considered a harmless pass-time. However, hidden, secret messages in dreams in dreams regarding career choices or sex partners cannot and must not be considered tantamount to receiving vital missives from celestial entities which govern religious creeds and tenets. 

 

In line with this tangent on dreams, the Book of Daniel is a massive dump of dream interpretation; Chapter Two was done at the behest of the ruler of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar II who was troubled by an elaborate dream he’d had. More relative to the discussion of Paul’s revelations, the Book of Revelations, itself, is a months-long acid trip of bizarre images and visions which are variously interpreted as having a plethora of disparate meanings, prophesy and import. 

 

(Incidentally, the Book of Revelations was nearly left out of the authorized version of the Christian Bible as too fantastical which might serve to reflect the Church’s disallowance of private revelation by its contemporary congregants as mentioned before.) 

 

However, in its earlier, more sectarian existence, Christianity seemed to be heavily reliant on the revelations, visions and dreams of not only its congregants but of the Scriptural accounts of revelations, dreams and visions; Joseph, Abram, Jacob, Solomon, etc. 

 

Yahweh was all over people’s dreams back in the day.

 

As it is evident that the early Christian church was fragmented into numerous sects of competing mystery cults, based on an infamous miracle-working man/god that nobody apparently ever heard of outside of a handful of people for which there is little to no supporting evidence, it could be confidently asserted that the whole magilla of Christianity can be written off as a very bad dream; an historically huge “folie à millions” – a shared madness of millions.

 

How was the Christian church so successful? It was by a fortuitous combination of factors; the disintegration of society along with the out-lawing of all pagan religions when the Roman Emperor, Theodosius, compelled non-believers to accept the Christian faith under pain of death, expulsion and loss of property.

 

Paul, as the prime mover of the Christian/Gentile sect, was aware that there were other ‘gospels’ being taught. Marcionism was exceedingly popular in Asia Minor; the letters to Galacians in central Anatolia bear that out as Paul railed against ‘new gospels’. Only what Paul/Saul taught was the ‘word of god’ all else was to anathemized. Later the Roman church would declare Marcionism a heresy and destroy the sect with the help of the Roman Empire. Until that time – the early third century – heavy-lifting proselytizers, like Saul/Paul - had to battle for market-share by claiming their Christ product™ was not only superior, but was the one and only one to clean your souls and promise resurrection and eternal life but make your glassware shine!

Ironically, Marcion of Sinope, the leader of the Marcionites, thought himself a follower of Saul/Paul. 

 

Check the section ‘Various Heresies’ for more on Marcionism or practice your ‘Google-fu’.

 

As might be deduced, Christians were not encouraged to examine facts. ‘Back from the Dead? Sure! Why not?’ They were told to read the scriptures and find the answers there. Early Christian communities (churches) were formed from the lower, working classes and the marginalized people of the time (e.g. slaves, ex-slaves, women, etc.)  - people of no appreciable education who had little time to research ancient texts, even if they were literate. Ordering them to research and confirm prophesy in the Old Testament was like ordering a cactus to walk across the desert. 

 

Miracles are alluded to in Acts; miracles from the Holy Spirit and performed by the apostles and disciples to sway the yet-to-be converted. Water to wine? Mana from heaven? Withering a fig tree? Healing a leper? What determined them to be miracles? Who determined them to be miracles? 

('The Bobble tells us so...')

 

What must be considered is that Paul/Saul had an agenda; an agenda which may or may not have been initiated by this conversation by revelation. As has been stated elsewhere, Paul/Saul’s Damascus Road experience may not have actually happened at all and was not witnessed by any of his companions. The aforementioned schizotypal episode might explain this reported revelatory experience. However, it may in some likelihood not be the source of Paul/Saul/s fervency and if not, then there must be an explanation for why Paul/Saul undertook such a herculean task; converting the Roman world. 

 

Of course, the agenda usually attributed to Paul/Saul was straightforward; proselytizing the ‘Good News’ and by doing so, convert the Roman world with the messianic message. That agenda seems incomplete and far too romanticized to be accepted outright. Traveling the ancient world to initiate the founding of Christian communities and bolster those communities involved great hardship, deprivation and danger. The personal revelation he experienced on the road to Damascus seems to fall far short of the incentive necessary to propel and sustain such an aggressive agenda. 

 

What might be proposed is that Paul/Saul had a separate agenda than one which might be substantiated by the Road to Damascus experience. That agenda might not have been solely based on the fervent drive to spread the Good News of salvation nor compelled solely by the personal revelation of the celestial entity of Jesus of Nazareth. Might Paul/Saul of Tarsus had a separate more mundane agenda of attaining a higher social position than he could attain as a member of the Sanhedrin? Whether Paul/Saul was a member of the Sanhedrin and whether or not he was a Pharisee is in dispute. It must be noted that he was not a member of the Sadducees, the high priests who controlled the Temple and, as such, controlled the Hebrew people through the domination of the Temple. Might it be that Paul/Saul saw the spread of the new sect of Judaism – not yet called Christianity – as a means by which the power of the Temple could be over-ridden?