• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

St. Paul's type?

INTJMom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
5,413
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
Has anyone ever wondered what St. Paul's type was?

I wondered if he must have been an E because he did so much traveling to preach the gospel.
Many of his letters are extremely long, like Romans, Corinthians, but many Is write long explanations, I think.

He was a tentmaker.
He was a strict Pharisee before he became a Christian.
He was so zealous for Jewish law that he was rounding up Christians to have them executed.

I don't know if he was F or T. He seemed very passionate about people.

Hmmm. I don't know.
 

cafe

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
9,827
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
I lean towards INTJ.

The tent-making thing doesn't really count towards his personality. That was his family's trade and it was expected of him to learn it.

His orneriness gives me a little bit of pause. Seriously, standing before the Sanhedrin and announcing that it was his belief in the resurrection of the dead that was getting him in trouble. He knew exactly what kind of sh-t storm that was going to cause. Do INTJs do that kind of thing?
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
I think ESTJ, but sorta shaken out of all stereotypeishness for his type because of allowing himself to be transformed/re-formed for God's purposes.

I agree with cafe on the tent making.

I also don't think the travelling says anything - I know a lot of people of different types who travel widely on mission work simply because they believe it's God's will for them and they wish to obey; it has nothing to do with their own preferences.

I don't think his passion for people is to do with type but what he believed again, he was putting God's priorities as his own.

I do think though, that the Te is really strong as an undercurrent through all his theology and leadership methods. And his earlier life as a persecutor - I can't see IxTJ doing that, they're usually more content to just sneer at rulebreakers/deviants/naughty people and leave the eradication of them to others.

The reason I say S rather than N is because I don't see much evidence of him juggling many alternatives either internally or externally. He tends to pursue very linear arguments and doesn't seem to stop along the way to check for coherence, which is why he ends up correcting himself several times in later letters. He also often doesn't follow his own thoughts through to conclusion, or their inevitable social effect. And he seems to have a low tolerance for wish-washyness. He's big on repeating facts, evidence, etc, and doesn't tend to consider many factors beyond his own experiences.

All in all, yeah... ESTJ.
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
Has anyone ever wondered what St. Paul's type was?

I wondered if he must have been an E because he did so much traveling to preach the gospel.
Many of his letters are extremely long, like Romans, Corinthians, but many Is write long explanations, I think.

He was a tentmaker.
He was a strict Pharisee before he became a Christian.
He was so zealous for Jewish law that he was rounding up Christians to have them executed.

I don't know if he was F or T. He seemed very passionate about people.

Hmmm. I don't know.

I think he was ENTP. A lot of his letters are dictated, so that explains how an E can make them so long. (Of course modern ENTP's can certainly be wordy even when writing.)

I tend to think he is an ENTP, because he had to be very adaptable in order to connect with people in such a wide variety of cultures. Also he tended to only start churches and then let the members take over, which is how ENTP's prefer to handle projects. His letters tend to have the theology in the beginning and the second half explains what people should do because of the theology. That is an ENTP way of thinking, bringing theory into reality.

His orneriness gives me a little bit of pause. Seriously, standing before the Sanhedrin and announcing that it was his belief in the resurrection of the dead that was getting him in trouble. He knew exactly what kind of sh-t storm that was going to cause. Do INTJs do that kind of thing?

ENTP's do that kind of thing. ;)
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
I think he was ENTP.

I totally disagree. I can't see myself doing almost any of the things he did, or taking my thoughts in many of the directions he did, given the facts and experiences he had. He's a natural fundamentalist type, which I don't think ENTP's generally tend towards. When I read his reasoning, I find myself thinking after each sentence, "But why? Why must that mean that? What about this? Did you take that into account? Obviously not..."

No, I really don't see much evidence of Ne going on with him... No Ne, but lots of Te.
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
I totally disagree. I can't see myself doing almost any of the things he did, or taking my thoughts in many of the directions he did, given the facts and experiences he had. He's a natural fundamentalist type, which I don't think ENTP's generally tend towards. When I read his reasoning, I find myself thinking after each sentence, "But why? Why must that mean that? What about this? Did you take that into account? Obviously not..."

No, I really don't see much evidence of Ne going on with him... No Ne, but lots of Te.

I think you are looking at him from a modern perspective and not what he would be like in his own culture. By the standards of his time he is a radical and not a fundamentalist. He said that Gentiles did not have to follow the Jewish laws. In their time period that is as radical as it gets, because to them the Law was everything.

By today's standards you might not see him as radical, because his ideas are 2000 years old, and have helped shape the views of much of the Western world. But to determine his type I believe you should interpret him within his own cultural context and not our own.
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
I think you are looking at him from a modern perspective and not what he would be like in his own culture. By the standards of his time he is a radical and not a fundamentalist. He said that Gentiles did not have to follow the Jewish laws. In their time period that is as radical as it gets, because to them the Law was everything.

By today's standards you might not see him as radical, because his ideas are 2000 years old, and have helped shape the views of much of the Western world. But to determine his type I believe you should interpret him within his own cultural context and not our own.

No dude that's what I am doing, that's what I mean. I know that some parts of his theology were radical but I don't think they were really uniquely his, they were more balls that others put down that he picked up and ran with. But the way he ran with them, the direction in which he took them and how he 'enforced' things - Te all the way, baby.

Anyway it's hard to say because all we have of him are a few letters, some of which we don't even know for sure are authentic in some parts, and he would obviously, given the secret nature of the work he was doing, the riskiness of it, have been worded with that in mind, so there may be all sorts of bits we're missing out on, lost meanings etc... And these letters were for achieving a certain end, every one of them set out with a purpose from the start (again, not very ENTP-ish - we're more likely to ramble and take the reader on a sorta whirlwind tour whilst his style is very Te), so we can't say for sure how much of it's his personality and how much is just "what was required", whether he liked it or not. Or how much of it was stuff that didn't really come naturally to him, but which he'd been made to realise by others of his company.

It's a tricky subject to debate because some people will inevitably come up with the line that all of what he wrote was inspired by God, and tells us what God wanted, not merely Paul's own personal reflections and opinions. And then we're into very sticky territory...

I still stand by what I said. ExTJ, more likely S than N.

I've known a couple of ESTJ's who, though unlikely to come up with much radical themselves, if 'given' a radical idea by someone else and they come to understand it and valule it, will be fearless and rigid in implementing it and propagating it. Whether Paul's inclusion of gentiles was his idea or someone else's, we can't know for sure, and the same goes for the idea of gentiles not having to follow Jewish law - we can't say for sure whether it was his idea originally, or whether it was an idea that someone else persuaded him the logic of, so that he absorbed it into his own views and objectives.

All I can say is that, giving it all the benefit of the doubt as his own words, I'm bowled over by the Te-ness of it all, which means basically I'd go with INTJMom's INTJ hypothesis before any kind of P.
 

INTJMom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
5,413
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
I think ESTJ, but sorta shaken out of all stereotypeishness for his type because of allowing himself to be transformed/re-formed for God's purposes.

I agree with cafe on the tent making.

I also don't think the travelling says anything - I know a lot of people of different types who travel widely on mission work simply because they believe it's God's will for them and they wish to obey; it has nothing to do with their own preferences.

I don't think his passion for people is to do with type but what he believed again, he was putting God's priorities as his own.

I do think though, that the Te is really strong as an undercurrent through all his theology and leadership methods. And his earlier life as a persecutor - I can't see IxTJ doing that, they're usually more content to just sneer at rulebreakers/deviants/naughty people and leave the eradication of them to others.

The reason I say S rather than N is because I don't see much evidence of him juggling many alternatives either internally or externally. He tends to pursue very linear arguments and doesn't seem to stop along the way to check for coherence, which is why he ends up correcting himself several times in later letters. He also often doesn't follow his own thoughts through to conclusion, or their inevitable social effect. And he seems to have a low tolerance for wish-washyness. He's big on repeating facts, evidence, etc, and doesn't tend to consider many factors beyond his own experiences.

All in all, yeah... ESTJ.
Hmm. Very convincing.
Thank you.
 

cafe

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
9,827
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
The salvation by faith alone thing strikes me as not being an SJ kind of thing. My impression is that SJs are more into concrete acts of duty.
 

INTJMom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
5,413
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
No dude that's what I am doing, that's what I mean. I know that some parts of his theology were radical but I don't think they were really uniquely his, they were more balls that others put down that he picked up and ran with. But the way he ran with them, the direction in which he took them and how he 'enforced' things - Te all the way, baby.

Anyway it's hard to say because all we have of him are a few letters, some of which we don't even know for sure are authentic in some parts, and he would obviously, given the secret nature of the work he was doing, the riskiness of it, have been worded with that in mind, so there may be all sorts of bits we're missing out on, lost meanings etc... And these letters were for achieving a certain end, every one of them set out with a purpose from the start (again, not very ENTP-ish - we're more likely to ramble and take the reader on a sorta whirlwind tour whilst his style is very Te), so we can't say for sure how much of it's his personality and how much is just "what was required", whether he liked it or not. Or how much of it was stuff that didn't really come naturally to him, but which he'd been made to realise by others of his company.

It's a tricky subject to debate because some people will inevitably come up with the line that all of what he wrote was inspired by God, and tells us what God wanted, not merely Paul's own personal reflections and opinions. And then we're into very sticky territory...

I still stand by what I said. ExTJ, more likely S than N.

I've known a couple of ESTJ's who, though unlikely to come up with much radical themselves, if 'given' a radical idea by someone else and they come to understand it and valule it, will be fearless and rigid in implementing it and propagating it. Whether Paul's inclusion of gentiles was his idea or someone else's, we can't know for sure, and the same goes for the idea of gentiles not having to follow Jewish law - we can't say for sure whether it was his idea originally, or whether it was an idea that someone else persuaded him the logic of, so that he absorbed it into his own views and objectives.

All I can say is that, giving it all the benefit of the doubt as his own words, I'm bowled over by the Te-ness of it all, which means basically I'd go with INTJMom's INTJ hypothesis before any kind of P.
I'm curious...
have you thought about this before or were you just able to command this knowledge to the forefront on the spur of the moment?

Seems like an awfully convincing argument for ESTJ. I will have to read his letters with that in mind. I know an ESTJ man - a pastor - very commanding in the pulpit.

How does that mesh with Paul being spoken of as not a good public speaker, and being more forceful in his letters than he is in public?

"For they say, "His letters are weighty and strong, but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech of no account."" 2 Corinthians 10:10 ESV
 

cafe

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
9,827
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
Substitute is, like, a theology and church history machine. IRL. :rock:
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
The salvation by faith alone thing strikes me as not being an SJ kind of thing. My impression is that SJs are more into concrete acts of duty.

...but many I've known in fundamentalist churches and charismatic ones, have taken it as requiring concrete acts of faith by extension of that... such as the ones who claim that if you're not speaking in tongues or rolling around on the floor in tears, you're obviously not filled with the spirit, therefore have not much faith, therefore are not saved... etc etc...

Anyway, I don't think that's what he was saying... that's just what Martin Luther interpreted him as having said... but here's where we're gonna get into theological debates... which we're not anyway, cos I'm not and I'm sure you don't wanna go there... lol

I'm curious...
have you thought about this before or were you just able to command this knowledge to the forefront on the spur of the moment?

Bit of both... I have obviously studied Paul quite a lot, you can't get away with not doing as a lay minister... but I've never thought of him in terms of MBTI type before just now. Though I have often wondered about his psychology and personality, and pondered on it. Partly because it's certain teachings of his - or interpretations of teachings of his - that are what a lot of people use to justify making my life a misery!! lol

How does that mesh with Paul being spoken of as not a good public speaker, and being more forceful in his letters than he is in public?

Maybe he was just ugly... lol

No, I think maybe, in the areas he was preaching there were well established conventions for public speaking, rhetoric and stuff, which, if he didn't obey those or used 'foreign' ones (to his audience), he might've found it hard to engage his audience. Another thing that causes me to reject the theory of ENTP - these clues that he was not able to adapt to his audiences and really move them in person.

Substitute is, like, a theology and church history machine. IRL. :rock:

I am?? :blink:
 

The_Liquid_Laser

Glowy Goopy Goodness
Joined
Jul 11, 2007
Messages
3,376
MBTI Type
ENTP
I'm curious...
have you thought about this before or were you just able to command this knowledge to the forefront on the spur of the moment?

Seems like an awfully convincing argument for ESTJ. I will have to read his letters with that in mind. I know an ESTJ man - a pastor - very commanding in the pulpit.

How does that mesh with Paul being spoken of as not a good public speaker, and being more forceful in his letters than he is in public?

"For they say, "His letters are weighty and strong, but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech of no account."" 2 Corinthians 10:10 ESV

Hmmm... I had not thought of that quote. That does seem to paint him as an introverted NT rather than an extravert, so that is a point toward INTJ.

It is hard to talk about Paul's type because it's hard to separate the man from our own personal religious views. I do believe the way that he is portrayed in Acts is very much like an ENTP though: starting churches and then leaving for the next town, adapting quickly to each culture, changing the rules so that Gentiles did not have to follow Jewish law, etc....
 

INTJMom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
5,413
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
It seems like that excerpt is saying that he is more bold in his letters than he is in person.
That's the one thing that makes me wonder if he truly is ESTJ or not- because the ESTJ pastor I know is a force to be reckonned with in person.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
INTJ.

(That is my advice, but I've already had this discussion somewhere before, I think...)
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
Hmmm... I had not thought of that quote. That does seem to paint him as an introverted NT rather than an extravert, so that is a point toward INTJ.

It is hard to talk about Paul's type because it's hard to separate the man from our own personal religious views. I do believe the way that he is portrayed in Acts is very much like an ENTP though: starting churches and then leaving for the next town, adapting quickly to each culture, changing the rules so that Gentiles did not have to follow Jewish law, etc....

Acts ...is just that. Acts. Heh. No I mean it's heavily girded with poetic licence, it was written for a purpose, morale boosting, encouragement, kind of like distributing 'King and Country' magazines through the trenches in World War 1 - not entirely untrue, but a bit of like I say, literary licence and glossing going on there, to further an agenda. I'd use the word 'propaganda' if it didn't have such negative connotations...

They wanted to portray their movement as big, dynamic, fast growing and stuff, so...


Yeah, I'd go with INTJ possibly yeah, highly possible. My money's still on ExTJ, with SJ representing the sorta home-boy thing that couldn't adapt to foreign audiences... maybe he was a force to be reckoned with at home and among his own people, but where perhaps an NJ would be able to adapt to a foreign audience, an SJ would be less likely to. But it's a close one, to be sure.
 

Ghost of the dead horse

filling some space
Joined
Sep 7, 2007
Messages
3,553
MBTI Type
ENTJ
Active, visible and people-orientated career would suggest E, but there's strong situational reasons to explain it too. Preaching was just the thing to do if you were a follower of the Christ, no matter what I/E preference. I'd have to find the I/E some other way.

Many of his teachings comprised of factual, doctrinal as well as value-based views. He spoke much of emotions and made a lot of value judgements, which seemed to motivate him. He was still quite analytical and factual about the feelings involved, making it hard to decide.

Definitely N more than S, judging from the connections he makes from distant places of the scriptures and his inventive and unusual way to apply the scriptures. He is too comfortable to abandon many literal interpretations to be considered S.

His letters go to great length, and the influence of his personal presence was being criticized at some point, making me think of I who likes to write, and does so to handle his thoughts. Letters Ti, real-life Fe, suggesting T and F close to each other in preference. These two are ENTP (Ne Ti Fe Si) and INFJ (Ni Fe Ti Se).

He tended to go explain his doctrinal views in great length, rather than straight-to-point. Such a pondering style, going in circles around the issue, would suggest a P. He was consistent in the general theme of his doctrine, suggesting J. It's hard to use this to decide.

So did he use Ne or Ni more? Now I'm out of clues.

ENTP or INFJ, that is as much as I can narrow down now.. terribly tired, must go to sleep :)

Ah, I will have to remember how zealous he was before converting to christianity, and how duty-driven afterwards. INFJ!
 

INTJMom

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2007
Messages
5,413
MBTI Type
INTJ
Enneagram
5w4
Active, visible and people-orientated career would suggest E, but there's strong situational reasons to explain it too. Preaching was just the thing to do if you were a follower of the Christ, no matter what I/E preference. I'd have to find the I/E some other way.

Many of his teachings comprised of factual, doctrinal as well as value-based views. He spoke much of emotions and made a lot of value judgements, which seemed to motivate him. He was still quite analytical and factual about the feelings involved, making it hard to decide.

Definitely N more than S, judging from the connections he makes from distant places of the scriptures and his inventive way to apply scriptures. He is too comfortable to abandon many literal interpretations to be considered S.

His letters go to great length, and the influence of his personal presence was being criticized at some point, making me think of I who likes to write, and does so to handle his thoughts. Letters Ti, real-life Fe, suggesting T and F close to each other in preference. These two are ENTP (Ne Ti Fe Si) and INFJ (Ni Fe Ti Se).

He tended to go explain his doctrinal views in great length, rather than straight-to-point. Such a pondering style, going in circles around the issue, would suggest a P. He was consistent in the general theme of his doctrine, suggesting J. It's hard to use this to decide.

So did he use Ne or Ni more? Now I'm out of clues.

ENTP or INFJ, that is as much as I can narrow down now.. terribly tired, must go to sleep :)

Ah, I will have to remember how zealous he was before converting to christianity. INFJ!
Thanks for your contribution.
 

cafe

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
9,827
MBTI Type
INFJ
Enneagram
9w1
...but many I've known in fundamentalist churches and charismatic ones, have taken it as requiring concrete acts of faith by extension of that... such as the ones who claim that if you're not speaking in tongues or rolling around on the floor in tears, you're obviously not filled with the spirit, therefore have not much faith, therefore are not saved... etc etc...
I know they do, believe me. But what does that have to do with the price of grace in Romans? :smile:

Anyway, I don't think that's what he was saying... that's just what Martin Luther interpreted him as having said... but here's where we're gonna get into theological debates... which we're not anyway, cos I'm not and I'm sure you don't wanna go there... lol
I've no intention of debating theology. It's mostly an exercise in sillyness. And I recognize that I surely have some reformation biases going on. How could I not?

Your take on Paul is that he does not teach salvation through faith alone? I'm asking not to debate, but to see another side of it so I can understand a different point of view from what I've primarily heard. Questions I may ask are for the purpose of clarification, not debate.
 

substitute

New member
Joined
May 27, 2007
Messages
4,601
MBTI Type
ENTP
Ah, I will have to remember how zealous he was before converting to christianity. INFJ!

It was a totally different meaning of 'zeal' than what we mean by the word today, that he espoused in his persecuting days... and which he morphed into later times.

In those days, 'being zealous for God' was a bit of a euphamism for 'a zero tolerance policy towards theological or practical deviance' in which violence and persecution were considered completely justifiable. The movement he was a part of was the equivalent of today's radical, fundamentalist Muslims who not only persecute other faiths, but even people in their own faith who they don't see as being sufficiently orthodox.

When he later talked about having 'zeal for Christ', it was kind of a euphamism for 'be single-minded and tolerate no shilly-shallying or vagueness' - in other words 'this is the truth, the only truth, and I don't want anyone making up new interpretations, TYVM'.

Hardly the kind of attitude I'd associate with INFJ.
 
Top