Was Paul of Tarsus a real historical person or a mythical creation?

Answer 1

It was Saul of Tarsus. Who became Paul. And yes he is very real.

Answer 2

Paul of Tarsus was a real person. He was on the road to Damascus, when Jesus called him to be an Apostle of God appointed by Him. Before that, Paul, a Jew was working for the Romans. His job was to kill every Christian he could find. Jesus or God blinded Pau for three days. This forever changed Paul, and he became the most prolific writer in the New Testqment.

Answer 3

Well, if the Apostle Paul didn't exist, then who wrote all of those New Testament books? And for that matter, who was running around spreading Christianity tirelessly around the Roman Empire like a fanatic? If Paul didn't exist, then there probably would not be a Christianity as we know it (it would still be an unpopular, small, obscure Jewish sect).

It appears that Pauls lifelong companion, Luke, who chronicled Paul's and Peter's travels in the book of "ACTS of the Apostles" was a historical person also, and he was writing about real people.

...............................
About a century ago British scholar William Ramsay focused on the book of Acts to try to show it was rife with geographical and archaeological errors. After all, many scholars of his day, equipped with the tools of textual criticism and archaeology, had exposed many errors in other classic writings. This eminent humanity professor diligently prepared himself by studying archaeology and geography before departing for the Middle East and Asia Minor in his quest to prove Luke's history of the early Church was mostly myth.

His quest didn't turn out as he expected. After a quarter century of research in what is today Israel and Turkey, where he carefully retraced the steps of the apostles as described in the book of Acts, this famous unbeliever shook the intellectual world when he announced he had converted to Christianity. He confessed this radical change of mind and heart was thanks in great part to his surprise at the accuracy he found in Luke's narrative in Acts.

After decades of examining the historical and geographical details mentioned in the book, Ramsay concluded: "Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of fact trustworthy, he is possessed of the true historic sense ... In short this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians" (The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament, 1953, p. 80).

He went on to write many books about Acts and the epistles of Paul. Ultimately Ramsay was knighted for his contributions to the study of archaeology and geography.

Answer 4

Interesting. I wouldn't have thought that the alleged author of so much would be a creation. Perhaps he could be a character invented by an author to be the personality behind the letters. If the true author was just some dude using the name of a real person that would make it all the more interesting now wouldn't it?

Answer 5

Paul was real, but the fact that he became the most prolific writter in the New Testament without ever having seen Jesus convinces me that the bible is not real.

Answer 6

No Paul no Christianity. Whether or not he was real or just a pseudonym is irrelevant. He invented Christianity.

Answer 7

I think real, because he left his writings, and he's referenced by so many other writers of the ancient world.

As it is, you might ask the same question of anyone who's been dead for more than 200 years, because you won't be able to find anyone who ever actually met them.

Answer 8

He was a real human being, although considered a

Saint by Catholics he was both
i,Jewish and a Roman citizen and soldier
HE IS FAMOUS FOR HIS LETTERS TO THE CORINT HIANS AND OTHER ETHNIC GROUPS

Answer 9

It was Saul, then Paul. Yes, he was a real person.

Answer 10

theres more evidence Paul was real then there is evidence Jesus was real