https://youtu.be/Reh-ADlllUMIs this true /his/
>>18099225
>>18099225Didn't watch the video but yes Paul was totally on Roman payroll.
>>18099225no
>>18099303>>18099399Which one is it though
>>18099466Just take a quick look at Paul's story. According to his letters and Luke-Acts, he was:>A Pharisee with Roman citizenship>Went under the protection of a high-ranking Roman officer such as Claudius Lysias, who commanded hundreds of men to escort him to Caesarea;>Magically escaped from Roman prison, attributed to a sudden earthquake that fred him and Silas (another Roman citizen) from their shackles;>Literally had contacts inside the imperial household.Despite claims of conflict with the Romans and even, later on, of martyrdom, Roman law never actually convicts Paul of anything. He's arrested only once in Philippi because he cast a fortune-telling spirit out of a slave, which caused her masters to lose their source of profit. The imprisonment only lasted a day and the magistrates released them saying, “Nowthen, come out, and go in peace” (Acts 16:36). He's taken into protective custody by the Romans, without which it he would have been lynched by a Jewish mob because of Jewish (not Roman) accusations. Last, but not least, Luke conveniently stops writing about him while he's awaiting trial, meaning there's not even an (alleged) first-hand source to serve as argument for his execution. Everything related in Acts and the Pauline Epistles points to him being in cahoots with the Roman goverment.
>>18099225Paul of Tarsus is a character created by Pliny the Younger
>Jesus believed it was our own individual responsibility to discover truth, through him.No, Jesus did not believe that.
>>18099225>profKEKGood enough for God and the Apostles, good enough for me:"But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake. " (Acts 9:15-16)"It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. " (Acts 15:25-26)"And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. " (2 Peter 3:15-16)
>>18099622>Paul's friend and the guy claiming to be Peter says he's a good guy, so it must be true!
>>18099517If God wants somebody to live and accomplish some task, there's nothing anybody can do to prevent that. He provided help and protection to other Apostles as well."And, behold, the angel of the Lord came upon him, and a light shined in the prison: and he smote Peter on the side, and raised him up, saying, Arise up quickly. And his chains fell off from his hands. And the angel said unto him, Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals. And so he did. And he saith unto him, Cast thy garment about thee, and follow me. And he went out, and followed him; and wist not that it was true which was done by the angel; but thought he saw a vision. When they were past the first and the second ward, they came unto the iron gate that leadeth unto the city; which opened to them of his own accord: and they went out, and passed on through one street; and forthwith the angel departed from him. And when Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know of a surety, that the Lord hath sent his angel, and hath delivered me out of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people of the Jews. " (Acts 12:7-11)
>>18099608Know the truth and truth shall set you free.
>>18099641God is mythology, we're discussing history here.
>>18099636>the verse quoted doesn't suit my retarded larp therefore the verse is false
>>18099646You're discussing your mythology. I'm discussing the facts in the historical records.
>>18099622>Good enough for God and the ApostlesBut was it? Why did John Mark refuse to continue traveling with Paul and Barnabas on their first missionary journey? (Acts 13:13, 15:38)
>>18099650>Acts>historical recordslol
>>18099517>>18099574There's a very strong case to be made that Saul/Paul was just a pen name of Josephus. If you read Paul's trip to Rome in Acts where he suffers a shipwreck on the way and compare the account with Josephus' autobiography Vita, there are at least 12 unbelievable coincidences, including the Roman procurator Felix being involved. The shipwreck happens in the same sea and landing on the same island, both Paul and Josephus save the day, they both go to Rome via Puteoli, and both go to see Nero.So either Luke copied Josephus' autobiography to invent Paul's backstory or Josephus and Paul were actually the same person. The former thesis is supported by the fact that much of the information we find in Luke-Acts does come from Josephus. The latter thesis, however, explains much of Paul's behavior as described in Acts, especially his relationship with the Romans and his enmity with the Jews.
>>18099652John Mark wasn't an apostle? I think you're confusing Mark of the Gospels with him.
>>18099663Anon...>John Mark (Greek: Ἰωάννης Μᾶρκος, romanized: Iōannēs Markos) is named in the Acts of the Apostles as an assistant accompanying Paul and Barnabas on their missionary journeys. Traditionally he is regarded as identical with Mark the Evangelist, the traditional writer of the Gospel of Mark.
>>18099671KEK
>>18099652Mark wasn't an apostle and the reasons for the split are not given.
>>18099671It's not beyond certainty they are one and the same, but even if it were the case, he wasn't an apostle. The Gospel of Mark is anonymously written and speculated that it was Peter relaying the words to the writer. So, we wrap back around to whatever the other anon was saying earlier.
>>18099721https://www.oca.org/saints/lives/2007/04/25/101204-apostle-and-evangelist-mark
>>18099723>So, we wrap back around to whatever the other anon was saying earlierBetter not since you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.
>>18099724>Orthodox Church lol>>18099726Do you even know what an apostle is?
>>18099728Good enough for the OG Church good enough me :)
>>18099731It ain't good enough for me
>>18099724>article written by slopAI or a complete retard"Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; The first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus; Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him. " (Matthew 10:2-4)
>>18099738"John Mark and Mark the Evangelist aren't the same!""O-Ok maybe they're the same but he wasn't an apostle!""L-Lol only the original Church considers him an apostle!""There were only 12 apostles a-actually... (sorry Paul)" <----- you're here
>>18099671gotta love how zoomers larping as devout christians on the internet always find a way to out themselves
>>18099751He wasn't an apostle, it's not complicated. Also, the Orthodox Church can suck my ass. >LE ORIGINAL (with Mary and Saint """veneration""" lolz) Yeah, good luck with that.
>>18099759
>>18099765I'll pray for you, anon (After I throw it to Mary like a football and she can QB sling it to God for a tuddy)
>>18099225If he was a Roman spy why in the world did he spend all his time converting Greek pagans and pissing off the Jews by saying the law was cancelled
>>18099772>I'll pray for you, anonYou won't.
>>18099778You're right, I won't. No hard feelings
>>18099751>"John Mark and Mark the Evangelist aren't the same!" "O-Ok maybe they're the same but he wasn't an apostle!"Where did I ever say this? He's in fact, the exact same character from what I can discern.>"L-Lol only the original Church considers him an apostle!"Never said that either. All I know is that he isn't an Apostle because he isn't listed as such there or anywhere else.>"There were only 12 apostles a-actually... (sorry Paul)" <----- you're hereNever said that either. Judas fell and was replaced by Paul, and Barnabas was also called an apostle:"Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out, " (Acts 14:14)
>>18099782>I won'tYou're right, because you're not a Christian.>>18099789So Paul was an apostle?>Judas fell and was replaced by PaulHe was replaced by Matthias.
>>18099797>So Paul was an apostle?Of course. How's that even a question?>He was replaced by Matthias.Matthias disappears from the narrative as soon as he's mentioned. He is effectually "replaced" by Paul if using the word replace is even contextually applicable here, because Barnabas got in and there's no mention of replacement either.
>>18099810>this shameless reply after 10 minutes googling who the fuck Matthias wasFuck man it's the FIRST chapter of Acts of the Apostles.You guys should just try reading the Bible for once in your lives.
>>18099817What are you even trying to argue for here? The semantics of who or who isn't an apostle? (Which you keep letting the clear definition fly over your head continuously). What are you trying to accomplish? Discrediting Paul's apostleship or what?
>>18099830Go read the Bible, faggot.
>>18099517>Magically escaped from Roman prison>Literally had contacts inside the imperial householdso he was like an Elder Scrolls main character? Was he an Aspect of God too?
>>18099834OMG DID YOU CALL ME A HECKIN FAGGOT? THAT'S NOT A REAL CHRISTIAN THING TO SAY!!!!!!Your whole stance is convoluted, much like how your church operates. You don't even know what you want to argue for, why you're arguing for it, just that there are some perceived barbarians at the gate and you need to sound the war horn to nobody who will hear it.
>>18099838>Was he an Aspect of God too?Paul is God the Hon.Some have conjectured that Paul’s ‘thorn’ was some kind of psychological problem, such as depression, a tendency to doubt, or even some kind of sexual temptation. Concerning this latter suggestion, I mention the theory of John Shelby Spong, who in Re-Claiming The Bible For A Non-Religious World, claims that Paul’s ‘thorn in the flesh’ was his repressed homosexuality:‘Paul was a zealot who tried with all his might to worship God properly. He bound the desires that he found natural within himself, but nonetheless deeply troubling and intensely negative, so tightly inside the laws of the Jews that he was able, at least partially, to suppress those desires. This was the internal pressure that caused Paul to view his body quite negatively. The promise of death, said the Torah, was the end result of the sin that Paul appears to have felt sure lived in his uncontrollable “member.” … Was his thorn in the flesh his deeply repressed homosexuality? Other theories have been offered: malaria, epilepsy, a chronic eye disease, diabetes, perhaps even an abusive and distorting childhood sexual experience. None, however, fits the details we know of Paul’s life so totally as the suggestion that he was a gay man.’In support of his argument, Spong cites Paul’s deep agony of spirit (Rom 7) and his ‘fear within’ (2 Cor 7:5). Paul’s reference in Rom 7:23 to the ‘war’ taking place in his ‘members’ (Gk. ‘melos‘) which suggests, to Spong, that what disturbs him is some aspect of his sexuality. Paul’s sense of shame is also reflected in Rom 6:21. He regards himself as an imposter who longs to be true (2 Cor 6:8-10). Even though Paul recommends marriage to others (1 Cor 7:9), for some reason he does not follow his own advice. Indeed, he seems not to have liked women (and many women today do not like Paul).
>>18099847>THAT'S NOT A REAL CHRISTIAN THING TO SAY!!!!!!Sorry I meant to say arsenokoitai.
>>18099858Orthobros are exhausting and they need to stop listening to their cult leader Jay Dyer. When even they can take something as simple as The Bible and manage to confuse themselves and others with it.
>>18099862>The BibleYou could be reading it right now but you don't want to because it's boring as fuck.
>>18099868I only read when I need to
>>18099893>I only read when I get btfo Glad to help.
>>18099903>Btfo This wasn't even a contest in the first place, since you failed in knowing what an apostle is from the start. Frankly, it was a waste of time, but that's how it goes sometimes.
>>18099919>waste of timeHow so? I got you to read Acts 1 at least. Tell me when you feel like reading Acts 2.
>>18099759>can suck my assWhy are proddies so anally fixated? Luther exactly the sameit's not a myth though, he had chronic constipation and that was simply a remedy for himthe man was a certifiable lunatic regardless, had an anal fixation>[The] Devil has emptied… his stomach again and again, that is a true relic, which the Jews, and those who want to be a Jew, kiss, eat, drink, and worship.>"But if that is not enough for you, you Devil, I have also shit and pissed; wipe your mouth on that and take a hearty bite.">"Again and again, in recalling Satan's attacks on him, Luther uses the crude verb bescheissen, which describes what happens when someone soils you with his Scheiss. In another demonic stratagem, an apparition of the prince of darkness would humiliate the monk by "showing his arse" (Steiss). Fighting back, Luther adopted satanic tactics. He invited the devil to "kiss" or "lick" his Steiss, threatened to "throw him into my anus, where he belongs," to defecate "in his face" or, better yet, "in his pants" and then "hang them around his neck.">"I resist the devil, and often it is with a fart that I chase him away.”>“The Holy Spirit unveiled the Scriptures for me in the tower.” The pope, a nemesis, was his “dearest little ass-pope.”>“I’m like a ripe stool, and the world’s like a gigantic anus, and so we’re about to let go of each other.”
>>18099225Nothing this schizo chink says is true.
>>18099941Jesus Christ.
That's what rejecting Mary and the Saints does to one's brain. It becomes a toilet
>>18099944Shut him down
>>18099662>Luke copied Josephus' autobiography to invent Paul's backstoryHe probably did. Luke-Acts takes its facts from Josephus' works and recontextualizes them. Certain events are not easy to explicate unless one accepts some degree of Lucan dependency on Josephus. This not only includes those narratives involving Agrippa I's death, Felix and Drusilla’s relationship and Agrippa II and Bernice’s actions but also the following group of commonly reported events: The Census under Quirinius; Judas the Galilean; Theudas; The Egyptian False Prophet; and The Sicarii.Steve Mason points out: "As the historical discrepancies could only have occurred as a result of Luke conflating specific information presented in Josephus’ writings this is seen as important prima facie evidence of influence." (Josephus & Luke-Acts: A critical review of a thesis by Steve Mason, Nicholas Allen, M.Theol Dissertation)
>>18099958He sucks up to the jews all the time. He says that the Gospels can't be trusted because they blame the Jews for killing Jesus and thinks jews and chinks should form an alliance against whites. He doesn't even blame jews for zionism but thinks it's whites using jews as a shield and the jews are innocent victims.
This guy needs to read Carrier
>>18100135>He doesn't even blame jews for zionismThat's true it's the Brits' fault after the Balfour declaration
>>18100148You sound so stupid, right now.
>>18100142>This guy needs to read a crackpot cuck
>>18100150I accept your concession
>>18100135>jews and chinks should form an alliance against whiteslink?
>>18100148Who was Theodore Herzel?
>>18100161Surely not the guy who wrote this
>>18100165retards think the jews conquered palestine all by themselves without white goylems doing the dirty work for them
>>18100175They need to read Pierce
>>18100181dangerously countersemitic
>>18100181This guy was s fed.
>>18100165And would he gave written it without jews telling him to?
>>18100201Based glowaryan
>>18100205>whites have no agency and therefore no accountability when it comes to their jewish overlordsThe last bullet belongs to the traitor said some Romanian dude
>>18100159I made that up, apologies.
>>18099662>There's a very strong case to be made that Saul/Paul was just a pen name of JosephusJosephus was Arrius Calpurnius Piso and he was a foster brother of Pliny the Younger, the creator of Paul
>>18100642QRD?
>>18100700Schizo nonsense from Joseph Atwil.
>>18100159Every single of his gnosticism videos has him sucking up to jews. Pick one.
>>18099225Can we talk about how St. Augustine was a Manichaean/Persian spy?
>>18100853https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bXHBT5NTfc>one hour video give me a timestamp
>>18099225He doesn't ever know what the fuck he's talking about, but he talks about it anyway, in Jordan Peterson style.
>>18100863What
>>18100700https://www.henryhdavis.com/>>18100845Abelard Reuchlin in fact https://www.henryhdavis.com/
>>18100863oh shit that actually makes sense
>>18099225Trypei
>>18099517The Romans also bought all those tents he made.
>>18099225Not watching that but this jew nigga Paul probably realized persecuting the followers of Christ was only making them stronger so he decided to organize the church himself to distort his message and to make sure the jews stayed jews so they don't convert. Bro didn't even met the OG and he was talking like an apostle
>>18099225Yes, except the part about Jesus.
>>18099517>>18099225>>18099941Today, it is known that 10% of the inhabitants of the Roman Empire had converted to Judaism.The famous anti-Zionist radio host Kim Iversen exposed this research by stating that not even the Jews of the Roman Empire had anything to do with the Jews of the Old Testament because conversions to Judaism were common at the time, and even Nero had converted.Among these converts to Judaism, an anti-slavery sentiment grew, comparing slavery under the Romans to slavery in Egypt.The imperial elite and their Maccabean allies, such as Agrippa I, Agrippa II, and Berenice, were reportedly very wary of this because they lived in fear of a new slave revolt on the scale of the Spastacus Revolt and decided to destroy the Jewish capital of Jerusalem.They did everything they could to provoke the Jews, such as stealing the temple treasury and placing statues of Roman gods there, until the Jewish rebels reacted and gave the Romans a justification to invade Judea and massacre the Jewish leaders.Just like the US does: they provoke, provoke, and then invade when the provoked react.Obviously, Christianity was born and fed by this desire of the Roman elite to control the empire's slaves and serfs.It's a religion that clearly preaches submission. Clearly and visibly.Why would groups of poor Jewish slaves create a religion that preaches that these same slaves and poor people passively submit to Roman authorities?Literally a messiah who takes the beatings of the Romans in silence and with his head bowed, and then a certain Paul who says that the supposed creators of the religion should submit to their masters.A religion of masochists, is that it?This traditional view of Christianity makes ZERO sense. No sense. Nothing.
>>18102529If Christianity were truly a religion OF slaves, as traditionally thought, like Nietzsche, it wouldn't say things like "If your master beats you to death, bow your head and endure it, because your reward will be in the next life."Christianity was clearly created by the elite to preach resilience and submission to slaves. In other words, it is a religion FOR slaves, not BY slaves. It was created by the Roman elite to be preached to illiterate slaves and peasants who were completely ignorant of how nature works."Blessed is the man who perseveres under trial, for when he has stood the test, he will receive the crown of life." James 1:12.If it were a religion OF slaves, created by slaves and marginalized and impoverished groups, it would preach things like "we have to rip the heads off those Roman slave-owning bastards and hang them in the forum."It was clearly created by the elite, who controlled writing in the Empire, to APPEAR as if it originated from the common Jewish people and not from the elite itself. They even invented persecutions to legitimize it as a religion originating from the oppressed classes.The Roman elite were masters of literature and did these things easily.
>>18102533>it is a religion FOR slaves, not BY slavesIndeed.
