As everyone(most?) know, Paul is the most prolific author of the New Testament. Thirteen books(letters, actually) attributed to him, seven of which are deemed by scholars as pseudepigrapha (not written by Paul, but by someone claiming to be him). Nonetheless, they are all looked upon as sacred scripture by around two billion people that identify as Christian. We first learn abut Paul in Acts 7:558 as “Saul”. Most of Acts, after that, is about Saul, his conversion and renaming to Paul and his missionary work. The meeting with the disciples is mentioned in Acts 9:26-28 but more is given to us by Paul himself in Galatians 1:18-19, some three years after his conversion. The question often arises, among believers and non-believers, as to what Paul knew about the Jesus that Peter and the other disciples knew. But more, why Paul never mentions Jesus’ earthly existence. Ever.

It is curious that we never hear of any of the life of Jesus by Paul leading some critics to believe that there never was a real Jesus; that he existed only in some spiritual world. Isn’t it interesting that a missionary, who lived basically in the same time as Jesus, doesn’t cite anything about him? Pauls first letter was to the Thessalonians, written between the years 49-51 CE, some twenty years after the cruxifixction of Jesus. Yet nowhere in that epistle does Paul ever mention anything about the earthly life of Jesus.

I used to be one of those Ah-Ha! atheists, the absence of any mention is another piece to the Jesus is a myth puzzle. My own ignorance was(and still is) annoying by itself. I never considered was the context of any of the letters that were written. The people he wrote to were already established churches. These letters don’t actually prove anything concerning Pauls knowledge of the life of Jesus. Paul was writing to these churches, as we know, to encourage them and in some cases, correct them if they were going down an errant path. Why would he be writing about Jesus’ miracles or his resurrection and ascension to those that most likely were already aware?

The silence of Paul doesn’t prove anything, one way or the other. It’s possible that Paul knew nothing of this itinerant preacher. If he were the one that established at least some of the churches with which he corresponded, then the likelihood of him preaching Jesus as risen is very probable. Heres my question if Paul did establish those churches: How did he attract anyone to his message? I don’t think we can compare modern evangelists to those 2,000 years ago, but I would think there would be similar themes. Then again, I might be wrong.