Where the **** was Paul?

Create a topic and discuss! No subject is off limits, but moderators have the right to remove asshat posts. What's an asshat post? Selling stuff, trolling, harassing--the usual stuff you don't want to see either. Happy posting!
User avatar
SEG
Posts: 1869
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Where the **** was Paul?

Post by SEG » Wed Jan 02, 2019 9:00 am

If Paul was in Jerusalem at the same time as Jesus, why couldn't he identify who he and the disciples were when he was persecuting Christians? They were the main ones! If he was a a Pharisee and the son of a Pharisee, where was he during Passover when the chief culprit (a rabbi) was being crucified?
Premise One: If a compassionate God exists, then he would do things just as a compassionate person would.
Premise Two: God doesn't do things as a compassionate person would.
Conclusion: Therefore, a compassionate God does not exist.

Og3
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Og3 » Thu Jan 03, 2019 2:04 am

From what we know of Paul, he may not have been in Jerusalem because of one of two factors: He lived in Tarsus, in modern Turkey; and he may have been a mere teen at the time.

At the time of Stephen's martyrdom in Acts 7 -- this would probably have been within a year of the crucifixion -- Paul does not participate, but instead holds the coats of those who kill Stephen. This could indicate that he was too young to be involved in a stoning. Alternatively, some believe that he had a physical handicap that prevented him from getting a good loft on a rock.

Paul's purpose in coming to Jerusalem was to study under Gamaliel. He may well have been at Tarsus and arrived for his studies only after Pentacost.

But those are both moot. A Pharisee is not an office; it is a political party. There were, according to Flavius Josephus, three such parties. It would be similar to saying that "I was a Tory, son of a Tory, taught on the eighth day to call for votes of no confidence in labour." He would not have been, as a Pharisee, summoned to the trial of Jesus. Pharisees who were friends of Jesus, such as Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, were conspicuously absent, so clearly the Sanhedrin was convened with a skeleton crew for the purpose of reaching a decisive verdict. So that point is also moot.
EGO TE ABSOLVO, and there's nothing you can do about it.

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 1869
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by SEG » Thu Jan 03, 2019 12:46 pm

Og3 wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 2:04 am
From what we know of Paul, he may not have been in Jerusalem because of one of two factors: He lived in Tarsus, in modern Turkey; and he may have been a mere teen at the time.
If he came 600-1000 kms from Tarsus to study in Jerusalem for a few years and was present at the stoning of Stephen, it would be unlikely to travel all the way back, especially if he hated Christens and began persecuting them. Here's a handy timeline from Christianity Today:
The Apostle Paul’s Birth & Education
c. A.D. 6 Born a Roman citizen to Jewish parents in Tarsus (in modern eastern Turkey)

c. 20–30 Studies Torah in Jerusalem with Gamaliel; becomes a Pharisee

c. 30–33 Persecutes followers of Jesus of Nazareth in Jerusalem and Judea

Conversion
c. 33–36 Converted on the way to Damascus; spends three years in Arabia; returns to Damascus to preach Jesus as Messiah
Here's another timeline from Bible Study.org
c. 2 A.D.
Paul is born in Tarsus
Paul's birth occurs in the city of Tarsus to an Israelite family of the tribe of Benjamin (Philippians 3:5). He is circumcised on the eighth day, in compliance with the law of God (Leviticus 12:3, Philippians 3:5).

c. 12 to 15 A.D.
Religious training in Jerusalem

Paul's family sends him to Jerusalem to be taught in a Pharisaic Rabbinical school. The school is headed up by the well-known Rabbi Gamaliel (see Acts 5:34) who personally teaches the future apostle (Acts 22:3).

32
Martyrdom of Stephen

Stephen is stoned to death for his testimony about Jesus (Acts 6 - 7). He is one of the first deacons appointed by the early church (Acts 6:1 - 6). A zealous Saul (Paul) consents to and witnesses Stephen's death (Acts 7:58 - 8:1).

33 A.D.
The conversion of Saul

Paul requests and receives, from the High Priest, permission to go to to search for those who believe in Jesus. He is given the authority to arrest anyone who attends a Synagogue and professes belief in "the Way." Those arrested are to be taken back to Jerusalem for trial and punishment (Acts 9:1 - 2).

As Paul approaches the city, a burst of light suddenly appears and causes him to fall off his horse (Acts 9:3 - 4). He then hears the voice of Jesus asking why he is persecuting the church (Acts 9:4). Blinded, he is led to Damascus where his repentance leads to being healed, baptized, and becoming a Christian (Acts 9:4 - 18).

33 to 36
Taught by Jesus
...and another one by
Christian History Timeline: The Apostle Paul and His Times
Birth & Education

c. A.D. 6 Born a Roman citizen to Jewish parents in Tarsus (in modern eastern Turkey)

c. 20–30 Studies Torah in Jerusalem with Gamaliel; becomes a Pharisee

c. 30–33 Persecutes followers of Jesus of Nazareth in Jerusalem and Judea

Conversion

c. 33–36 Converted on the way to Damascus; spends three years in Arabia; returns to Damascus to preach Jesus as Messiah

c. 36 Flees Damascus because of persecution; visits Jerusalem and meets with the apostles

36–44 Preaches in Tarsus and surrounding region

So why wasn't he chasing JC and the disciples and attending the crucifixion?
At the time of Stephen's martyrdom in Acts 7 -- this would probably have been within a year of the crucifixion -- Paul does not participate, but instead holds the coats of those who kill Stephen. This could indicate that he was too young to be involved in a stoning. Alternatively, some believe that he had a physical handicap that prevented him from getting a good loft on a rock.

Paul's purpose in coming to Jerusalem was to study under Gamaliel. He may well have been at Tarsus and arrived for his studies only after Pentacost.

But those are both moot. A Pharisee is not an office; it is a political party. There were, according to Flavius Josephus, three such parties. It would be similar to saying that "I was a Tory, son of a Tory, taught on the eighth day to call for votes of no confidence in labour." He would not have been, as a Pharisee, summoned to the trial of Jesus. Pharisees who were friends of Jesus, such as Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, were conspicuously absent, so clearly the Sanhedrin was convened with a skeleton crew for the purpose of reaching a decisive verdict. So that point is also moot.
You really believe that the Sanhedrin would gather and convene during a holy holiday to conduct a court proceeding?
Premise One: If a compassionate God exists, then he would do things just as a compassionate person would.
Premise Two: God doesn't do things as a compassionate person would.
Conclusion: Therefore, a compassionate God does not exist.

Og3
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Og3 » Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:36 pm

The traditional timeline has them convening on a Thursday night and meeting early Friday morning at Pilate's house for the Roman meeting.

That the court was held at night is a procedural irregularity, which we today would call "reversible error."
So was that he was arrested at night.
So was that he was that he was taken to a private residence before being tried.
So was that he was not released when the witnesses failed to agree.
So was that the judge chose to question him, and made him answer under oath -- effectively demanding in the name of God that he testify against Himself -- even though there was no charge to answer.

Yes, Ananius and Caiphus were that desperate to conduct the arrest and trial in one go, thereby avoiding a riot. See Morrison on this.

A sanhedrin is like a grand jury, though with more power. It is not an elected office per se. The high Priest essentially selects and convenes a number of powerful people -- usually Pharisees, as their party outnumbered Saducees -- and presents the matter under discussion.
EGO TE ABSOLVO, and there's nothing you can do about it.

Og3
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Og3 » Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:37 pm

See Flavius Josephus for more information on Sanhedrim and the three Jewish parties.
EGO TE ABSOLVO, and there's nothing you can do about it.

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 1869
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by SEG » Thu Jan 03, 2019 9:33 pm

Og3 wrote:
Thu Jan 03, 2019 8:36 pm
The traditional timeline has them convening on a Thursday night and meeting early Friday morning at Pilate's house for the Roman meeting.
According to your only source, the Bible.
That the court was held at night is a procedural irregularity,

Correct.
which we today would call "reversible error."
Please explain.
So was that he was arrested at night.
Correct.
So was that he was that he was taken to a private residence before being tried.
Correct.
So was that he was not released when the witnesses failed to agree.
Correct, if this whole story is true, which is doubtful.
So was that the judge chose to question him, and made him answer under oath -- effectively demanding in the name of God that he testify against Himself -- even though there was no charge to answer.
See above.
Yes, Ananius and Caiphus were that desperate to conduct the arrest and trial in one go, thereby avoiding a riot. See Morrison on this.
What's he say about it? Is there any evidence beyond the Bible that it did? All the elements of all this happening on the eve of and during an important holy Jewish holiday are absurd. And what was the offense? Blasphemy or chasing the money changers out of the temple? He would have been stoned for the first offence by the Jew and killed on the spot if it were Romans if the "Lamb" would have attacked officials within a heavily guarded Roman money changing institution. Why bother with a ludicrous trial? If Jesus was wildly famous enough to cause a riot over this, why aren't there any records of all this throughout secular records?
Premise One: If a compassionate God exists, then he would do things just as a compassionate person would.
Premise Two: God doesn't do things as a compassionate person would.
Conclusion: Therefore, a compassionate God does not exist.

User avatar
SEG
Posts: 1869
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by SEG » Thu Jan 03, 2019 9:38 pm

Now please explain why Paul wasn't chasing JC and the disciples and attending the crucifixion if your Christian timelines as stated above and throughout other writings are in any way correct? It seems as though Christians want to dearly suppose that ST Paul existed in history as living, being educated, working and persecuting early Christians in Jerusalem, but forget Jesus and his disciples were supposed to be there at the same time too.
Premise One: If a compassionate God exists, then he would do things just as a compassionate person would.
Premise Two: God doesn't do things as a compassionate person would.
Conclusion: Therefore, a compassionate God does not exist.

Og3
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Og3 » Fri Jan 04, 2019 1:46 am

Maybe he was busy with other things. The Pharisees, as I've tried to explain, were a political party.

What you are asking, in effect, is why all the Liberal Party in Oz didn't rush to the beach in 1967 and search for Harold Holt. Or why the Tories weren't on the beach protesting his dastardly escape from their clutches.
EGO TE ABSOLVO, and there's nothing you can do about it.

Og3
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Og3 » Fri Jan 04, 2019 1:59 am

Why bother with a trial?

Good question. The Pharisees were worried about political pressure from the Saducees, who, though less numerous, held key positions and were demanding when it came to procedure. The Pharisees, following the crucifixion, were going to have to satisfy the Saducees that it was all done legally, and the people that it all needed to be done. If the Saducees were not satisfied, the Pharisees might have gotten removed from their positions; if the people were not satisfied, there might have been a revolt that would bring down Roman authority against them.

Reversible error, in American law, is a procedural error in a trial which might cause an appellate court to reverse the decision. For example, if illegally seized evidence were permitted at trial, that would be a reversible error. If the court permitted perjurious testimony to remain in the record, that would be reversible error. And so forth.

The correct answer to reversible error is a mistrial, however, if there has been at least one prosecution witness questioned, and one answer given, then the defense can argue that jeopardy has attached, and that the trial must be dismissed with prejudice, meaning that the accused can never face that charge ever again. In short, were Jesus tried in an American court, He would never have been crucified.

The turning point in the trial was when, the witnesses having had nothing to say, the High Priest then demanded that Jesus answer, using the formula, "I abjure you by the Living God." To refuse to answer would be contempt of God Himself, and sufficient cause for execution; Thus Jesus answers, and in so answering declares Himself to be God, which they interpreted as Blasphemy (note the rending of garments, which must be done when blasphemy is spoken). The penalty for blasphemy was death.

In America, we would call those violations of Jesus' fourth amendment right against self-incrimination.
EGO TE ABSOLVO, and there's nothing you can do about it.

Og3
Posts: 965
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 6:41 am

Re: Where the **** was Paul?

Post by Og3 » Fri Jan 04, 2019 2:13 am

And what was the offense? Blasphemy or chasing the money changers out of the temple? He would have been stoned for the first offence by the Jew and killed on the spot if it were Romans
Blasphemy was the stated charge, but Ananias (Whom Josephus consistently calls Ananus) couldn't make it stick. Two witnesses must agree under Jewish law in order for a death sentence to be carried out.

There were attempts at stoning Jesus, but He eluded them. On another occasion, people tried to throw Him off of a cliff.

Now, a curious point: The Pharisees state to Pilate that they cannot condemn a man to death. This authority had been taken away within Jesus' lifetime. This is significant because Jacob, blessing his sons, said this of Judah: "The scepter will not depart from Judah or the staff from between his feet until He whose right it is comes and the obedience of the peoples belongs to Him" (Gen 49:10 HCSB). With the seizing of authority to pass judgment unto death, the Romans effectively removed the scepter from Judah (Judea) and the staff from between his feet. So the One had already come to whom these things belonged.

And that is why the Romans had to be involved, and why a charge of inciting insurrection, obviously false according to Pilate's own examination of the facts, had to be raised as an excuse. No Roman would have executed a man for impiety and blasphemy.

Jesus had to be killed, in the mind of the Pharisees, because of the things He said. At a festival celebrating God's glory, Jesus declared Himself the Light of the World. At a ritual involving ritual purification of water, Jesus declared, "If any man is thirsty, let him come to Me." At a ritual involving wheat offerings, Jesus declared "I am the Bread of Life." In short, He was saying, over and over and over, that He was God incarnate.

Then he went so far as to raise Lazarus from the dead. This was intolerable. So they began to plot how they might kill Him.
EGO TE ABSOLVO, and there's nothing you can do about it.

Post Reply