Deep into the editing process of my film, "A Polite Bribe," the story of how Paul became the Founder of Christianity, through his "Collection," James Tabor sent me his latest Book, "Paul and Jesus."
Tabor is Chair of the UNC Charlotte, Religious Studies department, and well known for books and documentaries on the archeology of Jesus, namely "The Lost Tomb of Jesus," with executive producer, James Cameron.
"Paul and Jesus" is a series of arguments offered as strong evidence to why Paul can rightly be called the "Founder of Christianity," something my seven years of research would have benefited from.
When I started work in 2005 on my own book (that became the film), only Gerd Ludemann confronted this topic head on with in his penetrating book "Paul, The Founder of Christianity" (2002).
There was also A.N. Wilson's "Paul The Mind of the Apostle" (1998) along with Hyam Maccoby's overstated "The Mythmaker, Paul and The Invention of Christianity," in 1987.
The "Paul as Founder" theme has existed since Marcion in the second century, if not earlier, but it was F.C. Baur's monumental work, "Paul the Apostle of Jesus Christ" (1873), that exposed him as outsider.
"In the more liberal atmosphere of Pauline Christianity they thought the very ground of their existence would be cut from under them, if Judaism was no longer to have its absolute power."
Most modern scholars reject this position on "ecclesiastical" grounds claiming Paul -- though in conflict with others -- was only expanding Jesus' original message in an ongoing, revelatory progression.
N. T. Wright, Pauline Scholar and known apologist, suggests in his book "What Paul Really Said" (1997), "When Paul preached the gospel, he was consciously implementing the achievement of Jesus, not founding a separate religion."
A second group more open to the real differences between Jesus and Paul disagrees with the title "Founder" and substitutes labels as: "Second Founder," "Great Innovator" or "Greatest Apostle."
Tabor's "Paul and Jesus" will have none of that, challenging any "interim" positions to galvanize the otherwise fragmented ideas into an unabashed whole, placing Paul as the Founder.
He begins with two perspectives determined by what Germans call "Weltanschauung" (assumptions) and presents Paul's views on resurrection, kingdom, sacraments, apocalypse, rejection of Torah and conflict with fellow Apostles, as litmus tests for his break with Messianic roots.
As Baur did earlier, Tabor also exposes the wedge between Paul and the others of Jewish Christianity, as the proof of his unaccepted Gospel message, what the others found "utterly reprehensible."
Jewish understanding of General Resurrection was reinvented by Paul, due to his post Resurrection "appearances," those he later claimed to supersede or escape the original Apostles' "historical scrutiny."
He reminds the reader how our accepted Gospel accounts of Jesus Tomb followed Paul's Vision (Resurrection) in Corinthians 15, where he fixed himself in the lineage of Apostolic visitations.
And goes on to point out that though Gospels come first in the Bible, it is actually Paul's Christ that influenced the "anonymous productions of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John."
Paul is the "shadow behind all four of the Gospels" and the key light illuminating the Empty Tomb stories, a main source of revelation when there was no core understanding of Jesus.
Like Paul "the Founder," scholars also tend to shy away from referring to Paul as a "Second Christ" though Tabor makes clear that "Paul understood the mission of Christ" as a "two stage" plan.
Stage one fulfilled by Jesus, and continued by his brother James, "to the Jews," but "stage two had been laid at the feet of Paul," who said, "I bear on my body the marks (stigmata) of Jesus" (Galatians 6:17).
His cause, Tabor continues, is motivated by a "literal" belief in the coming of the end, resulting in a "heavenly Kingdom," and "mystical union" with Christ at "any moment."
This kingdom mystery, to be revealed, meant a new epoch for all mankind, and the end of loyalty to the Torah, claiming a "Jew without Christ" was not a "real Jew."
Across this divide stood Temple centered Apostles like James, Jesus' brother and Peter. Tabor adds, "Though Paul calls himself an Apostle there is no indication that the Jerusalem leadership had ever given him that status."
He concludes with Baur that the clashes with false brethren and pseudo apostles were Paul's "repudiation by the Jerusalem Apostles and his determination to operate in the future independently."
"Paul and Jesus" is overdue, and stands as one of the few books, willing to push back "assumptions" that only make for acceptable, academic parlance, and instead, makes for a rude entry.
Digging beneath the acceptable, scholars like Tabor, Ludemann and few others, break through assumptions -- even the sacred ones -- and give rise to new perspectives and stories.
When I completed my book "A Polite Bribe" (out November 2012) used as the basis for the documentary, it was impossible to find a scholar that would imply what Tabor makes explicit in His book.
As I gaze over from my own quest I see not only a fellow traveler, but also a kindred spirit, unafraid to explore the unfamiliar inlets or channels, and follow the current where it leads, regardless of cost.
Those who read Tabor's work with open assumptions will conclude that "tools of critical historical research, are in a better position than the Christians of the second and third centuries to recover a more authentic Paul."
You can pre order 'Paul and Jesus,' Simon and Schuster or 'A Polite Bribe' through our website at www.apolitebribe.com.
Follow Robert Orlando on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Robomantix
Greg Carey: Elaine Pagels on Revelation -- and Revelations
Aaron Taylor: The Apostle Paul Was Not a Misogynist Homophobe
Robert Orlando: Alan Segal, A Polite Tribute
Robert Orlando: Who Was the Apostle Paul's Thorn?
I, too, have new perspectives and facts, facts that have been suppressed for at least a millennium and a half: the Jewish followers of Jesus did not disappear in the early fifth century as church historians maintain (those who even acknowledge their existence) but survived until at least the fourteenth century and possibly later. I detail all this in my newly published book, “Cover-Up: How the Church Silenced Jesus’s True Heirs,” documenting everything from original sources. I can also date when Paul (not Jesus) celebrated the first Last Supper using of an obscure passage in Epiphanius’s Panarion. I believe you would find my book very interesting and informative and I would be very happy to send you a review copy.
Yours sincerely,
Lawrence Goudge.
the "Urantia Book." This book, claimed to have been revealed by celestial beings, is a better source of the story of Jesus and his teachings than from the writings of these academics whose work, in the final analysis, are nothing but hypothesis.
I S. Alcordo
Too many view themselves as 'scholars' and are enthralled with their supposed education. From my perspective it is much a-do about nothing.
FOCUS people! Use the Bible and avoid what a 'man' sumises.
Jesus’ teachings emphasized purity of heart, singleness of outlook and intent, freedom from hypocrisy—all these being qualities that characterize integrity.- Mt 5:8; 6:1-6, 16-18, 22, 23; Lu 11:34-36
The apostle Paul showed the same concern as had David and earlier servants of God for proving blameless and faultless. He was free from any charge of corruption or deviousness in his ministry and in all his dealings with others.—2Co 4:1, 2; 6:3-10; 8:20, 21; 1Th 1:3-6.
Perseverance in a God-given commission in the face of opposition, and endurance of privations, persecution, and suffering for adhering to a course of godly devotion, also marked Paul and other early Christians as persons of integrity.—Ac 5:27-41; 2Co 11:23-27.
Paul was a fine example for Christians today. Jesus selected a great leader for his early followers.
Stop....stop with the inane doubts. Read the Bible for yourselves.
Those who cast doubt as to who God selected to represent him and encourage his sheep-like ones are challenging the Word of God. If you do that you are lacking holy spirit. Do not over complicate things. Satan is the Master at confusion is he not? So wouldn't it be from a satanic view point to doubt God's Word?
I'll keep it simple for my own spiritual wellbeing. Tip: Listen to God's thoughts not those of sinful men.
Jesus never 'meant' to start a new religion? Hummm? Jesus came to fulfill the law that was a Tudor' leading to the Christ. Matthew 5:17.. “Do not think I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I came, not to destroy, but to fulfill"
Many Hebrew Christians of the first century were still “zealous for the [Mosaic] Law.” (Acts 21:20) Paul reminded them: “Jesus is a mediator of a new covenant, in order that, because a death has occurred for their release by ransom from the transgressions under the former covenant, the ones who have been called might receive the promise of the everlasting inheritance.” Hebrews 9:15.
The end of the Law covenant and the coming in of the new covenant, the superiority of Christ’s priesthood over the Aaronic priesthood, the real value of Christ’s sacrifice compared with the offerings of bulls and goats, the entry of Christ into the very presence of Jehovah in the heavens rather than into a mere earthly tent—all these strikingly new teachings, hateful in the extreme to the unbelieving Jews, were here presented to the Hebrew Christians with such abundant evidence from the Hebrew Scriptures that no reasonable Jew could fail to be convinced.
Jesus is a Messiah to some, but it appears that Paul is the Messiah to most.
The historical conflict between James the Just (who was not an Apostle by the way, different James), Peter and Paul is a testament to ego of man. The Christian movement was almost entirely Jewish in 1st century Israel. Paul wanted to convert people, he had no other goal than to convert as many people as possible but when you approach a 50 year old pagan man and say "to join our religion you have to be circumcised" that man would walk away, or run. The conflict went deeper than circumcision, and the conflict certainly influenced Paul's private instruction to the Churches of Asia Minor, private instruction being his letters. His public preaching adhered to the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven, the evidence being Luke's Gospel, which is a record of Paul's Gospel preaching. The gentiles in the 3rd and 4th centuries wanted an entirely gentile Church so Paul's letters were worth their weight in gold, because they are entirely gentile. The deception of the early Church is evident just as long as you adhere to one of Yeshua's commands "Be wise as serpents and harmless as doves." Yeshua WANTED us to question so-called Church authorities because he said Christians should not exercise authority over their brethren. So if you have an authoritative Church it technically violates Christ's own teachings.
Acts 9: 1-6 & 15 - proof that Paul was assigned by Jesus Christ to be apostle to the nations
But Saul (Paul), still breathing threat and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest 2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues in Damascus, in order that he might bring bound to Jerusalem any whom he found who belonged to The Way, both men and women.
3 Now as he was traveling he approached Damascus, when suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him, 4 and he fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him: “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” 5 He said: “Who are you, Lord?” He said: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. 6 Nevertheless, rise and enter into the city, and what you must do will be told you.
15.But the Lord said to him: “Be on your way, because this man (paul) is a chosen vessel to me to bear my name to the nations as well as to kings and the sons of Israel. 16 For I shall show him plainly how many things he must suffer for my name.”