Corpus-Paul

["Rick Frommich" <eugor3 AT hotmail.com>]

I want to through my hat in the ring here for just a moment and say that 
twenty years of personal research has convinced me that the tradtionally 
understood Jesus does Not exist. The Jesus of Paul was actually John the 
Baptist, whom Paul believed to have been raised from the dead. The Jesus of 
the pre-Gospel writings was John the Baptist that is why in Acts 18 Apollos 
can preach Jesus while "only knowing the Baptism of John". In the early 
stages of the movement "Jesus" was a title not a personal name. The People 
of the Way were followers of John. Our four canonical Gospels seek to 
re-direct the belief that John was messiah by presenting one of his 
disciples as Christ. That disciple was Paul the Apostle, who was in constant 
conflict with the more traditional Jewish believers. Until Scholarship 
recognizes that the Jesus of Paul is John it will simply not go forward in 
the attempt to understand the first century Jesus movement. The following 
points make the strongest of cases for the theory I believe to be correct:

There is no mention of John the Baptist in any of the letters acribed to 
Paul. Why not?

My answer is that Paul is talking about the resurrected John every time he 
mentions Jesus.

The title Jesus is not used by Paul in the way he uses personal names, ever. 
Most often. the title appears after the Greek title "Christ". No other title 
preceeds the personal name in Pauline Literature.

All four Gospels seek to correct the notion that John was the Christ.

Who was it that held this view so prevelant among the Gospel communities 
that it needed to be addressed in every area? My answer is that all of these 
communities once believed that John was Christ.

What was it that motivated four groups of messianic believers to tell the 
Jesus story so late after the events?

My answer is: Another, a greater than John had come on the scene and 
recently been executed for his role in the movement and was believed to have 
been raised from the dead. That person was none other the Paul the Apostle 
whom none of the Gospels call by name but rather -as was the custom with the 
people of the way - was called "Jesus" the salvation of God.

The Gospel of John says that it was Jesus who gave the name Cephas to Peter. 
In the entire New Testament material only one person ever calls Peter, 
"Cephas". If the writer of John is correct,(I am convinced he is) the Jesus 
he is talking about is that person, Paul the Apostle. Paul is the only one 
to use the name Cephas.

We simply have to see this if we want to stop "straining at nats and 
swallowing camels".



> From: Zeba Crook <zeba.crook AT utoronto.ca>
> Reply-To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
> Subject: [corpus-paul] Re: Doherty Debate
> Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 00:27:25 -0400
>
> Eric Zuesse wrote:
>
> > RE: Zeba Crook's assumption that Jesus did not exist:
>
> Maybe you should re-read the very first sentence of my original post.  That 
> would be a
> helpful start.
>
> "I'm not sure I agree either that Jesus did not actually exist. . . "
>
> In plain English:  I don't find the arguments convincing either.
>
>
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to corpus-paul as: eugor3 AT hotmail.com
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to 
> $subst('Email.Unsub')




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com