Paul invented his own religion

tommy_mylex

Not having been one of Jesus' original disciples or a member of his family, Paul did not belong to the "old-boy network.  But, beyond the borders of Judea the world had many more Gentiles than Jews. It has been estimated that Jews constituted 10% of the population of the Roman Empire. The Hellenistic world held many more possibilities for Paul than the Jews did. More significantly, having come from that background, Paul was familiar with the people who lived in the Roman Hellenistic world of Greece and Asia Minor.  

To accomplish his purpose, he used every artifice of diplomacy, not excluding expediency and duplicity. He told us this about himself in his first Epistle to the Corinthians: Though I am free and belong to no man, I make myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I become like a few, to win the Jews. To those under the law I become like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I become like one not having the law (though I am not free from God's law but am under Christ's law), so as to win those not having the law. To the weak I become weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men...(1 Cor. 9:19-22).       

Debmey

Wouldn't it then be more expedient then for Paul not to be Christian or Jew? Wouldn't it be better then for Paul not to be a missionary in the first place and suffered so much persecution and hardship? I still don't see the validity of your claim? You sound very illogical Tommy. You ought to try something else next time. Can we have some fresh from you? Not someone else's bankrupt ideas please.

peace

[ Last edited by Debmey on 11-3-2004 at 01:24 PM ]

tommy_mylex

In his letter to the Galatians Paul related that he delayed three years before going to Jerusalem to meet Peter and James, the leaders of the Jerusalem Church. This seems strange, that an apostle in the new faith would remain aloof from his co-religionists.  They were suposedly working toward the same objectives and would have been facing similar problems. It could be expected that Paul, as the new man on the job, would seek out the older members for support and advice. Instead he chose to work alone.  Paul was veering off on his own and setting up a new cult. He knew that his doctrines of faith were opposed by the men in Jerusalem. Paul did not want any interference or hindrance in building a base for his ideology. Nor did he wish to be subservient to the authorities in Judea or anywhere else. He wanted to be at the helm and in command.

Debmey

Looks like Tommy does not even know the life and ministry of Paul before he made his comments. He must have swallowed his stuff from a secondary source w/o checking it for himself. Hahahahahahahahaha..............

The truth is, Paul only started his minsitry long after he met Peter, not before. And he does certainly have the full endorsement of the Jerusalem church and the other disciples of Jesus.

What else can you muster Tommy? All your charges are so easily debunked by me, so much so that you don't even dare stand by them. Hahahahahahahahaha.............

What else?

cheers

tommy_mylex

Only when Paul had established his own missions in Asia Minor did he appear in Jerusalem; and then he came for a brief two weeks. He was less than forthright about the religious beliefs he was imparting to his converts. After that visit, Paul avoided Jerusalem and the Nazarene leadership for the next fourteen years. Only after he had a large following did he confront the leaders of the Jerusalem Council again. He had proven himself a powerful adversary. He had established many churches according to his doctrines and had numerous converts.  Those of the Jerusalem Church (Jesus REAL apostles) realized his power and accomplishments; they could not impose their religious ideas on him.  Nor get him to accept what they KNEW from first hand experience, what Jesus really taught and what he was about.  Paul faced them down on issues on which they differed and then went on to spread his ideas of Christianity among the Gentiles.

Debmey

Wrong again Tommy. Paul started minsistering only after he has been to Jerusalem, not before. And all the while, his ministry was endorsed by the apostles right till the very end.

What about your Mohamad? Was  Mo around when Jesus was on earth? Hahahahahahahahaha................

kyas

... when jesus was on earth he told u christians that muhammad will be born as the last prophet... but u prefer paul's story...

Debmey

Mo was never mentioned at all in the Bible. You must be dreaming my fren.

tommy_mylex

Keep in mind that the "story" of Paul's "vision" was NOT told by Paul, himself.  And if Jesus was going to change his message, why wouldn't he have ALSO told his original apostles?  In fact, Jesus told them DON'T preach anything but what HE told them!

Let us never forget that the "winners" write the history and we only have to look at Roman dominance after the destruction of the Ebionite believers in the fourth century to know how the New Testament was slanted for a pro-Paul and pro-Roman bias. Paul's imprisonment and execution by the Romans left the field wide open to the Jerusalem Church to spread its doctrines, but the war in 66 C.E. annihilated the ranks of the Nazarenes. Sadly, the original followers of Jesus, were now considered heretical by both Jews and Gentile Christians!

Debmey

Keep in mind that the "story" of Paul's "vision" was NOT told by Paul, himself.

So? Wouldn't that make it more credible?

And if Jesus was going to change his message, why wouldn't he have ALSO told his original apostles?  In fact, Jesus told them DON'T preach anything but what HE told them!

And how did Jesus change his message? I already dealt with all those cut and paste of yours long ago. what else do you have?

Let us never forget that the "winners" write the history and we only have to look at Roman dominance after the destruction of the Ebionite believers in the fourth century to know how the New Testament was slanted for a pro-Paul and pro-Roman bias.

You have NT manuscripts as well as sermon records dating back to the 1st century. The NT could not have changed.
There is no evdience whatsoever of Romans having to change anything.

Paul's imprisonment and execution by the Romans left the field wide open to the Jerusalem Church to spread its doctrines, but the war in 66 C.E. annihilated the ranks of the Nazarenes. Sadly, the original followers of Jesus, were now considered heretical by both Jews and Gentile Christians!

Your story line contradicts itself by the post. First yu claim that Paul wanted to win Romans w/o any logic, sequences, motive nor setting. Then after all this alledged trying to win Romans, Paul ended up imprisoned and executed. And all of a sudden, only Nazarenes are destroyed among all Christians.
The funniest thing is, all the apostles preached teh same gosple as Paul with total consistency.
In the end, we see Tommy twisting and turning w/o knowing what he is talking about and cooking up incredulous stories that don't make sense to anyone.

What else?

tommy_mylex

(2) Jesus--"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments and shall teach men so, he shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven...." (Matt. 5:17-19)
"it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fall" (Luke 16:17)
"The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: all therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do" (Matt. 23:2-3) and (John 7:19, Mark 1:44)

versus

Paul--"Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ" (Rom. 7:4) and
"Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law" (Gal. 3:13) and
"For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace" (Rom. 6:14) and
"But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter" (Rom. 7:6) and (Rom. 10:4, 3:28, Gal. 3:23-25, 5:2-4, 18, 2:19, 21, 16, 4:10, Eph. 2:15, Col. 2:14, 16, Heb. 7:19, 1 Cor. 8:8 and many others).

Jesus said the law would stand till heaven and earth passed, while Paul said it need no longer be followed.

How about it ! ! ! . That is how I read it.  Paul Invented his own religion

Did Jesus say the law would stand?

Did Paul say it no longer needed to be followed?

Debmey

didn't I already dealt with all those alledged contradiction long ago? Why waste your time and mone Tommy. anything else?

tommy_mylex

You never answered my questions! Here they are again.

Jesus said the law would stand till heaven and earth passed, while Paul said it need no longer be followed.


Did Jesus say the law would stand?

Did Paul say it no longer needed to be followed?

Yes or no will do just fine.

Debmey

Jesus already fulfilled the law. When something is fulfilled, yu have no need to do it again. So why should we try to fulfill it anymore?
There is perfect harmony between what Jesus and Paul taught.
Its so simple.

tommy_mylex

Some people can't handle yes-or-no questions, A yes or no answer would lead to clarification, and show intellectual honesty

I will have to guess that this means that you agree that Jesus said the law would stand and St. Paul said it no longer needs to be followed. Will the real Christianity please stand up!

Debmey

Jesus said that the law will be fulfiled and he fulfilled it.
What else and what use is there for us to try to fulfill it when it is no more necessary to do so?

Yes tommy? what esle?

tommy_mylex

So what is the truth? Is Jesus telling the truth when he says the old law will stand, or is Paul telling the truth when he says the old law is dead? Which of these two contradictory statements is correct?

Debmey

don't twist word with a Christian, we know exactly what Jesus said. He said the law will be fulfilled. Didn't you read the Bible? you wanna testing your luck that we don't know? Hahahahahahahahahhahaha........

what else Tommy?

[ Last edited by Debmey on 13-3-2004 at 02:18 AM ]

tommy_mylex

What we have to do is what we have done, which is read what Jesus said, [the old law stands] then read what Paul said [the old law doesn't stand], and then decided if Jesus and Paul contradict each other. Surprise, they do.  

Debmey

OK, show us what Jesus said.