I think time has come to take a deeper look into who this Saul/Paul guy really was. This is an important discussion where I think we have to be a little open minded. My understanding is that most Mythicists assume Paul to be a historical person, but let us now carefully study how he is described in the Bible and by the Church Fathers.
What do we know about Paul?
We know that Paul was originally named Saul. We know that he was of the tribe of Benjamin. We know he persecuted the church. We know he converted after he had a vision of Jesus, where Jesus said “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” We know he named himself “the least of the apostles” and “one abnormally born”. And we know that Paul was saved by Grace not Works.
It does not take too much imagination to see that this is strikingly similar to when King Saul persecuted David, and David was yelling “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” King Saul was rejected by the Lord for his deeds, and the only way he could be saved was by Grace.
Then one could argue that this is just a strange coincidence. But there was a reason to why Saul was blinded by the vision. Paul could hear, but he could not see. And because of Paul’s blindness, Jesus could speak to the blinded Saul through David. This isn’t something taken from my own mind, but something some Church Fathers believed.
Look what Ephraim writes in his – Homily on our Lord:
** you do not have permission to see this link **
32. Why then was it meet that he(Paul) should hear(But not see)? Clearly because by that voice our Lord was able to reveal Himself as being persecuted by Saul. For He was not able to show Himself by sight as being persecuted; for there was no way whereby this should be, that the son of David should be seen fleeing and Saul pursuing after Him. For this happened in very deed with that first Saul and with the first David. The one was pursuing; the other was being persecuted; they both of them saw and were seen, each by the other. But here the ear alone could hear of the persecution of the Son of David; the eye could not see that He was being persecuted. For it was in [the person of] others He was being persecuted, while He was Himself in heaven;— He Who beforetime had been persecuted in His own person while He was upon earth. Therefore the ears [of Saul] were opened and his eyes were closed. And He Who by sight could not represent Himself before Saul as persecuted, represented Himself by word before him as persecuted; when he cried and said— Saul, Saul, why do you persecute Me? Accordingly, his eyes were closed, because they could not see the persecution of Christ; but his ears were opened, because they could hear of His persecution.
Look what Tertullian have to say about Paul. Tertullian “Against Marcion” Book 5
** you do not have permission to see this link **
“Because even the book of Genesis so long ago promised me the Apostle ** you do not have permission to see this link ** in David, from whom He descended according to the Virgin’s genealogy”.
Paul in Saul as Jesus in David, it says. What does this mean? My view is that this means that Paul was of the seed of Saul, as Jesus was of the seed of David.
King Saul had a son named Jonathan, Jonathan had a son named Mephibosheth, Mephibosheth had a young son named Micah.
My goal in the next postings is to argue that Paul is a symbolic Micah figure.
But of utmost importance to notice is something Paul often mentions in his letters: “Be not concerned with genealogies”!
We see this both in his letter to Titus, and in his letter to Timothy. Why?
It seems like he wishes to emphasize that a name found one place in the Scriptures, is the same person regardless found in other parts of that same scripture – “Be not concerned with genealogies”!
Micah in 1 Kings 22 is the same Micah found throughout the Tanakh!
Ananias is a very important figure in the story of Paul. It may therefore be helpfull to first clarify whom Ananias symbolized. Ananias is mentioned several times in the Acts, but he is usually thought to be different people – Ananias and Sapphira, Ananias of Damascus etc. My claim is that they are all the same Ananias!
While Ananias of Damascus apparently is portrayed as a Christian – Ananias in Paul’s trial is portrayed as deceitful. The same goes for Ananias and Sapphira.
But John Chrysostom has nothing good to say about Ananias of Damascus – On the contrary. Just read his Homilies on the Act of the Apostles – Homily 20.
** you do not have permission to see this link **
1. Kings 22. is the most important chapter concerning Paul’s vision and repentance. It describes Micah caught up to the third heaven where he faced the Lord and angels were standing around him. Again: Be not concerned with genealogies!
Ananias of Damascus:
1 Kings:8 “And the king of Israel(Ahab) said to Jehoshaphat, “There is yet one man by whom we may inquire of the Lord, Micaiah the son of Imlah, but I hate him, for he never prophesies good concerning me, but evil.”(…) 18 And the king of Israel(Ahab) said to Jehoshaphat, “Did I not tell you that he would not prophesy good concerning me, but evil?”
v.s.
Acts 9:13 But Ananias answered, “Lord, I have heard from many about this man, how much evil he has done to your saints at Jerusalem. 14 And here he has authority from the chief priests to bind all who call on your name.” 15 But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the children of Israel.
Micah the third heaven:
1 Kings 22;19 And Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing beside him on his right hand and on his left;20 and the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramoth-gilead?’ And one said one thing, and another said another.21 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, saying, ‘I will entice him.’ 22 And the Lord said to him, ‘By what means?’ And he said, ‘I will go out, and will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And he said, ‘You are to entice him, and you shall succeed; go out and do so.’ 23 Now therefore behold, the Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the Lord has declared disaster for you.”
The trial:
1 Kings 22:24 Then Zedekiah the son of Chenaanah came near and struck Micaiah on the cheek and said, “How did the Spirit of the Lord go from me to speak to you?” 25 And Micaiah said, “Behold, you shall see on that day when you go into an inner chamber to hide yourself.” 26 And the king of Israel said, “Seize Micaiah, and take him back to Amon the governor of the city and to Joash the king’s son, 27 and say, ‘Thus says the king, “Put this fellow in prison and feed him meager rations of bread and water, until I come in peace.”’” 28 And Micaiah said, “If you return in peace, the Lordhas not spoken by me.” And he said, “Hear, all you peoples!”
v.s.
Acts 23:2 And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth. 3 Then Paul said to him, “God is going to strike you, you whitewashed wall! Are you sitting to judge me according to the law, and yet contrary to the law you order me to be struck?” 4 Those who stood by said, “Would you revile God’s high priest?” 5 And Paul said, “I did not know, brothers, that he was the high priest, for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people.’”
And last: The story of Ananias and Sapphira is best understood as an allegorical narrative about Ahab and Jezebel.
It bothers me, being a mythicist, being allowed to post on this site. But I guess this is what true scholarship is all about.
Acts 9:11 “The Lord told him, “Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying. 12 In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight.”
Ahab(Ananias) the king of Israel should go to Jehoshaphat king of Judah(Judas) and ask for Micah.
1 Kings 22:10 “Now the king of Israel (Ahab) and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah were sitting each on his throne, arrayed in their robes, in an open place at the entrance of the gate(street) of Samaria; and all the prophets were prophesying before them”.
moose said
It bothers me, being a mythicist, being allowed to post on this site. But I guess this is what true scholarship is all about.Acts 9:11 “The Lord told him, “Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying. 12 In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight.”
Ahab(Ananias) the king of Israel should go to Jehoshaphat king of Judah(Judas) and ask for Micah.
1 Kings 22:10 “Now the king of Israel (Ahab) and Jehoshaphat the king of Judah were sitting each on his throne, arrayed in their robes, in an open place at the entrance of the gate(street) of Samaria; and all the prophets were prophesying before them”.
May be you should establish your methods first. Just pointing out what you believe is an analogy/parallel won’t do alone. There are lots of parallels between many legendary figures and your life, but that doesn’t mean that your are legendary too. It is also quite sure that many real, historical persons have been described by means of typologies of the past. That does not make them inventions of past material.
gavriel.
If this was something taken from the top of my head, then you certainly have a point. But that’s why I have carefully referred to what the Church Fathers wrote concerning Saul/Paul.
Why did the Church Fathers even make a comparison between “the blessed” Saul/Paul and King Saul in the first place, if it wasn’t something to it?
You know, King Saul was perhaps one of the most tragic of all the Israeli kings – abandoned by God!
Using The criterion of embarrassment in this case then… well, I don’t know.
Here something more that ties Saul/Paul to the gallery of people in the Old Testament
The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs(Benjamin)
11. And I shall no longer be called a ravening wolf on account of your ravages, but a worker of the Lord, distributing food to them that work what is good. And one shall rise up from my seed in the latter times, beloved of the Lord, hearing upon the earth His voice, enlightening with new knowledge all the Gentiles, bursting in upon Israel for salvation with the light of knowledge, and tearing it away from it like a wolf, and giving it to the synagogue of the Gentiles. And until the consummation of the ages shall he be in the synagogues of the Gentiles, and among their rulers, as a strain of music in the mouth of all; and he shall be inscribed in the holy books, both his work and his word, and he shall be a chosen one of God for ever; and because of him my father Jacob instructed me, saying, He shall fill up that which lacks of your tribe.
moose said
gavriel.If this was something taken from the top of my head, then you certainly have a point. But that’s why I have carefully referred to what the Church Fathers wrote concerning Saul/Paul.
Why did the Church Fathers even make a comparison between “the blessed” Saul/Paul and King Saul in the first place, if it wasn’t something to it?
You know, King Saul was perhaps one of the most tragic of all the Israeli kings – abandoned by God!
Using The criterion of embarrassment in this case then… well, I don’t know.
Because they liked to think that early Christianity was predicted in Scripture. You need to establish criteria for determining when a supposed parallel has been sought in the OT, given historical facts, and when “facts” have been invented from Scripture. And finally when Christian historical facts have been formulated by means of a Scriptural template. Just pointing out possible parallels is not enough.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)