Pauline Christianity is the religion that Paul invented!

All thanks to sam for inspiring me to write this post, never in my wildest dreams, that I would, come this close to absolute indoctrination by religion upon a mere mortal.

Throughout the New Testament history, biblical scholars have claimed Paul was not the man he claimed to be, he was the enemy, of the true supporters of Jesus.  But who was Paul?  Well, ancient and modern scholars say that Paul’s alias was Simon Magus, the enemy.  Yet, the New Testament, is the platform to stage the Pauline epistles, however, only seven of the thirteen epistles are said to be authentic to Paul. The other six are disputed by the consensus of biblical scholars.  They are Ephesians, Colossians, 2 Thessalonians, and the Pastoral (1&2 Timothy, and Titus).  But, the supposed victor (Peter) of Simon the Magician does not fare well either.  It was the Roman Church who made him a prince among the apostles, yet this princely biblical personage is not seen by his master, Jesus, as his successor or one he could trust, the proof is in Matthew 16:23, as well as Saying 12 of Gospel of Thomas, (not to be confused with the Acts of Thomas) where Peter is shunned, and the apostles are told to seek James the Just, and not Peter, if Jesus is dead.  The supposed biblical battles between Peter and Simon Magus, aka Simon the Sorcerer, and Paul and Elymas bar Jesus.  Are both similar in nature and are both mentioned in the apocryphal Acts (Acts 8:9-24, and Acts 13:6-7) respectively.  However, most conservative Christians group all the deeds/Acts/epistles together so they can use them to rebuttal critics.  Such as sam and j/j who are fond of using apocrypha, and forged Pauline epistles, especially the pastoral epistles to score a point or two.  Don’t fall for their delusional deceptions.

In the late second century and early third centuries, Gnostic writers penned stories about the apostles. These stories are referred to today as the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles.  They include The Acts of John, The Acts of Paul, The Acts of Peter, The Acts of Andrew, The Acts of Thomas, and The Pseudo-Clementines.  Five of the above Acts of John, Peter, Paul, Andrew, and Thomas are also called the Leucian Charinus Acts, after their inventor.  The fullest account of Leucius is that given by Photius (Codex 114). He describes a book, called The Circuits of the Apostles, which contained the Acts of Peter, John, Andrew, Thomas, and Paul, that was purported to have been written by “Leucius Charinus”. Photius considers it to be full of folly, self-contradiction, falsehood, and impiety; Photius is the only source to give his second name, “Charinus”. Epiphanius (Haer. 51.427) made Leucius a disciple of John who joined his master in opposing the Ebionites, a characterization that appears unlikely, since other patristic writers agree that the cycle attributed to him was docetic, which denies the humanity of Jesus as Christ.

 Augustine knew the cycle, which he attributed to “Leutius”, which his adversary Faustus of Mileve thought had been wrongly excluded from the New Testament canon by the Catholics. Gregory of Tours found a copy of the Acts of Andrew from the cycle and made an epitome of it, omitting the “tiresome” elaborations of detail he had found within.  https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Leucius_CharinusAmong historians of early Christianity, the books are considered invaluable, especially those that almost made it into the final canon, such as Shepherd of Hermas. Bart Ehrman, for example, said: “The victors in the struggles to establish Christian Orthodoxy not only won their theological battles, they also rewrote the history of the conflict; later readers then naturally assumed that the victorious views had been embraced by the vast majority of Christians from the very beginning … The practice of Christian forgery has a long and distinguished history … the debate lasted three hundred years … even within orthodox circles, there was considerable debate concerning which books to include.” [Ehrman, Lost Scriptures, pp. 2, 3]Paul and his lies that he was a Roman citizen. Paul was never a Roman citizen, he was in fact, if anything, a Peregrini, foreigners—the term used by Romans for the free citizens of any other community than the Roman people. This was the status of the peoples of non-Roman Italy, except the Latins (see Latini), until 90 BCE and of allied and subject communities outside Italy until *Caracalla’s reign (211 CE to 217 CE). Bkts are mine.   https://oxfordre.com/classics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.001.0001/acrefore-9780199381135-e-4859 See below the Antonine Constitution of Emperor Caracalla.

As the centuries wore on, the Roman citizen body continued to expand.22 Roman citizenship, and access to Roman ius civile (Roman civil law), became less a special status and more a lowest common denominator. This process culminated in the issuance in 212 C.E. of the Antonine Constitution, in which the emperor Caracalla (211–217) granted citizenship to nearly all of the remaining free peregrini in the Roman Empire.23 The only surviving copy of Caracalla’s law, a papyrus Greek translation of the Latin original, is very fragmentary, but the crucial words are clear: “I grant to all those in the Roman world the citizenship of the Romans.” https://academic.oup.com/ahr/article/111/4/1011/26711?login=false Bkts are mine. Another Paul/Saul oddity is Act 21, which was plagiarized from the earlier works of Josephus, Jewish Wars 2.425-429.

I don’t like to use this tone in writing against anyone, but, when religion has indoctrinated, where it is an up-hill struggle without the use of an exorcist, or demonologist.  One has to fight the demon possessed brain with the tools at hand. . . The truth!  What do you say?

J.E. Jeanne p.p. Jero Jones.

Approved ~ FS