Paul The First Heretic

reply to post by Akragon

... Paul added his own "spice" to Jesus' words...

Not really. He downplayed Jesus' sayings the few times he mentions them.
Paul was more interested in what he learned directly from the risen Christ.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Akragon

 

... Paul added his own "spice" to Jesus' words...

Not really. He downplayed Jesus' sayings the few times he mentions them.
Paul was more interested in what he learned directly from the risen Christ.

Ah the "inspiration" thing...

Don't you find it odd that he asked others to imitate him, yet also considered himself the "chief sinner"? The man admits he struggles with sin on many occasions...

Jesus did not have that problem...

reply to post by Akragon

The man admits he struggles with sin on many occasions...

I don't think so.
I have the same problem as Paul so I can relate and maybe not too many people can, so it is difficult to understand what Paul is describing.
I was brought up believing that the Jewish Sabbath was still in effect, being part of the ten commandments.
Now I realize it really isn't, but on Saturday, I wait till the sun goes down before going out to like the store or whatever.
Even though my mind says one thing, I can not will my body to go shopping or whatever until the sun goes down.
With Paul it is worse because he shouldn't even be doing things like eating meals with gentiles. He knows intellectually that it is ok but he has to struggle to make his body sit down and eat with Christians he knows are not Jews.

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Akragon

 

... Paul added his own "spice" to Jesus' words...

Not really. He downplayed Jesus' sayings the few times he mentions them.
Paul was more interested in what he learned directly from the risen Christ.

Ah the "inspiration" thing...

Don't you find it odd that he asked others to imitate him, yet also considered himself the "chief sinner"? The man admits he struggles with sin on many occasions...

Jesus did not have that problem...

How do you know that Jesus didn't have that problem? Because it is not recorded in the Gospels? Remember, his parents were prepared, raised him from birth knowing what his potential was. Mary was prepared, chosen even, for this task. What do we know of that time, while he was being raised and educated? And we hear nothing of Joseph, did he sit with gentiles?

Compare it say, to if I as an adult converted to Buddhism, would you expect me to have the same serenity as the Dali Lama, who was raised from age two in that faith? Paul had no preparation, responsibility was thrust upon him as an adult, and he struggled to bear that burden every day. But he bore it none-the-less with great dignity and fortitude.

reply to post by Akragon

Don't you find it odd that he asked others to imitate him, yet also considered himself the "chief sinner"? The man admits he struggles with sin on many occasions..

" "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.""

He says he's the "chief" of the sinners because he persecuted Christians before meeting the risen Lord.

"For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:" ~ Galatians 1:13


That's repentance and humility. He admits the flesh wars with the Spirit. Which it does, if it didn't we couldn't be tempted.

Originally posted by Biliverdin

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Akragon

 

... Paul added his own "spice" to Jesus' words...

Not really. He downplayed Jesus' sayings the few times he mentions them.
Paul was more interested in what he learned directly from the risen Christ.

Ah the "inspiration" thing...

Don't you find it odd that he asked others to imitate him, yet also considered himself the "chief sinner"? The man admits he struggles with sin on many occasions...

Jesus did not have that problem...

How do you know that Jesus didn't have that problem? Because it is not recorded in the Gospels? Remember, his parents were prepared, raised him from birth knowing what his potential was. Mary was prepared, chosen even, for this task. What do we know of that time, while he was being raised and educated? And we hear nothing of Joseph, did he sit with gentiles?

Compare it say, to if I as an adult converted to Buddhism, would you expect me to have the same serenity as the Dali Lama, who was raised from age two in that faith? Paul had no preparation, responsibility was thrust upon him as an adult, and he struggled to bear that burden every day. But he bore it none-the-less with great dignity and fortitude.

Well according to the church he lived a sinless life.... This is not something i believe actually... though i do believe during his ministry he did not sin... he perfected himself as he grew up and learned...

Have you read the "infancy gospels"?

IF you haven't... you might want to take a look at them, at least you would understand where im comming from.

My issue with paul is that he did not practice what he preached... he did not know Jesus personally... and what he taught contradicted Jesus in many cases...

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon

 

Don't you find it odd that he asked others to imitate him, yet also considered himself the "chief sinner"? The man admits he struggles with sin on many occasions..

" "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief.""

He says he's the "chief" of the sinners because he persecuted Christians before meeting the risen Lord.

"For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:" ~ Galatians 1:13


That's repentance and humility. He admits the flesh wars with the Spirit. Which it does, if it didn't we couldn't be tempted.

edit on 6-2-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)

The issue is pauls teachings are not needed.... Jesus covers everything... and paul adds his own twist to the words of Jesus....

The evidence shows that he clearly hijacked the religion and made it his own.... paulianity

This is why even on these forums you can see "christians" that prefer to use pauls words instead of Jesus... Some even attempt to counter his words with paul...

Considering nearly 1/3 of the NT is his work.... i believe what i said is quite true

Paulianity > christianity... how sad

reply to post by Akragon

The issue is pauls teachings are not needed.... Jesus covers everything... and paul adds his own twist to the words of Jesus....

Jesus covers everything? Well, that's cool, then where can I find the gospel of Jesus at? Anything you know about Christ is from works penned by men Christ revealed Himself to. And Paul's epistles display the exact same astounding heptadic discoveries underlying the text as do the gospels, meaning they were authored by the same Holy Spirit.

Do you at all trust the gospels of Mark or Luke?

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon

 

The issue is pauls teachings are not needed.... Jesus covers everything... and paul adds his own twist to the words of Jesus....

Jesus covers everything? Well, that's cool, then where can I find the gospel of Jesus at? Anything you know about Christ is from works penned by men Christ revealed Himself to. And Paul's epistles display the exact same astounding heptadic discoveries underlying the text as do the gospels, meaning they were authored by the same Holy Spirit.

Do you at all trust the gospels of Mark or Luke?

edit on 6-2-2012 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)

Lets leave chuck out of this conversation... The codes that ivan panin "discovered" are not 100% truthful as far as i've read... many people believe he "cooked" his results...

I would like to see a real mathmatician check through either of these peoples work, and see what they can find... unfortunatly math is not my thing...

And the fact is IF the bible was entirely "the inspired word of God" there would be no errors within its pages... There is no error in Christ's teachings... They are Gods word... from the ONE person that knew God as a Son knows his Father...

reply to post by Akragon

The evidence shows that he clearly hijacked the religion and made it his own.... paulianity

Christ didn't come to make a new religion, He also didn't come to make bad men good. He came to die and give dead men life. Christianity isn't a "religion", it's about a relationship with the Living Savior. And Paul and Luke detail his relationship with and service to Jesus. You really do need to heed the advice of Peter written shortly before his death:

"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

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Christ didn't come to make a new religion, He also didn't come to make bad men good.

Don't you think i know this?

34Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

He came to die and give dead men life.

He only died because they did not know... IF they knew... they would not have killed him...

34Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.

Christianity isn't a "religion", it's about a relationship with the Living Savior.

Tell that to your fellow "Christians"...

And Paul and Luke detail his relationship with and service to Jesus.

Paul did not know him...

Luke is a different story on the other hand...

You really do need to heed the advice of Peter written shortly before his death:

I do not need peters advice... thank you though.

I've seen this verse at least 10 times in the past month. It does not change my mind on paul...

Originally posted by Akragon
Well according to the church he lived a sinless life.... This is not something i believe actually... though i do believe during his ministry he did not sin... he perfected himself as he grew up and learned...

Have you read the "infancy gospels"?

IF you haven't... you might want to take a look at them, at least you would understand where im comming from.

Infancy applies, generally, to the age up to about two, very few children, however 'special' begin their education that early. Or perhaps you can point to the specific passages that deal with his education, as far as I am aware, those texts refer more specifically to Mary and the concealment of Jesus from Herod. There is nothing in there about his childhood and education beyond infancy. There is a little syncreticism of the legends of Zeus's birth too, which is most likely why they ended up on the cutting room floor, such ambiguity was something that the early Church struggled to explain.

Originally posted by Akragon
My issue with paul is that he did not practice what he preached... he did not know Jesus personally... and what he taught contradicted Jesus in many cases...

Paul's audience was very different to Jesus's and just as Jesus used parabels to speak to those who had not 'seen', Paul tailored his teaching to the needs of those he was called to minister to. I see no contradiction, just a different form and style of presentation of those teachings. Admittedly, he didn't entirely practice what he preached, but then as he said to his audiences, he didn't expect them to take it to the extent that he did, there was no need for them to do so, that was his cross to bear, not their's, but he didn't as far as I am aware contradict the word. But, then I don't know the scriptures all that well myself, as I am not a Christian, so I am open to a demonstration by you to the contrary.

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon

 

The issue is pauls teachings are not needed.... Jesus covers everything... and paul adds his own twist to the words of Jesus....

Jesus covers everything? Well, that's cool, then where can I find the gospel of Jesus at? Anything you know about Christ is from works penned by men Christ revealed Himself to. And Paul's epistles display the exact same astounding heptadic discoveries underlying the text as do the gospels, meaning they were authored by the same Holy Spirit.

Do you at all trust the gospels of Mark or Luke?

Lets leave chuck out of this conversation...

You mean, Dr. Ivan Panin,. And you can leave his discoveries out of the equation if YOU wish to, but I'm already convinced based on shear probability, that the scriptures are inspired by an entity far superior to any of us.

The codes that ivan panin "discovered" are not 100% truthful as far as i've read... many people believe he "cooked" his results...

Sure, everyone has critics, even Jesus had a couple here or there. The ancient manuscripts are present, any part of them can be tested by anyone today using his 7-based methodology and can tell if they are inspired scripture or not.

I would like to see a real mathmatician check through either of these peoples work, and see what they can find... unfortunatly math is not my thing...

You don't need to be a mathematician to do basic probability, it's multiplication subtraction and addition.

And the fact is IF the bible was entirely "the inspired word of God" there would be no errors within its pages...

There are no "errors" in the inspired manuscripts, there are some errors in translation. No matter how many descriptive words are used, the culture, nature, and some feelings and such cannot be translated properly into another language.

There is no error in Christ's teachings... They are Gods word... from the ONE person that knew God as a Son knows his Father...

You're right, nothing Christ ever said is in error. As God's only begotten Son.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

You mean, Dr. Ivan Panin,. And you can leave his discoveries out of the equation if YOU wish to, but I'm already convinced based on shear probability, that the scriptures are inspired by an entity far superior to any of us.

I wish to... and since this is my thread im allowed too

You are free to believe what you wish... i am not so easily convinced...

Sure, everyone has critics, even Jesus had a couple here or there. The ancient manuscripts are present, any part of them can be tested by anyone today using his 7-based methodology and can tell if they are inspired scripture or not

Many people believe that same methodology can be used with any other book as well...

There are no "errors" in the inspired manuscripts, there are some errors in translation. No matter how many descriptive words are used, the culture, nature, and some feelings and such cannot be translated properly into another language.

i disagree... there are logical/factual/geological errors all through out the book regardless of the translation... not to mention contradictions... but this is not the topic at hand.

You're right, nothing Christ ever said is in error. As God's only begotten Son.

I know... which is why i stick with his words...

Pauls on the other hand can not be trusted... In my humble opinion

reply to post by Akragon

Many people believe that same methodology can be used with any other book as well...

And which other books also display the same heptadic structure the Biblical accounts do?

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon

 

Many people believe that same methodology can be used with any other book as well...

And which other books also display the same heptadic structure the Biblical accounts do?

I haven't looked that far into it... i've only read that other books also have this same structure...

And if Ivan panin actually "Cooked" his results as i previously implied... any book could possibly used

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon

 

Many people believe that same methodology can be used with any other book as well...

And which other books also display the same heptadic structure the Biblical accounts do?

I haven't looked that far into it... i've only read that other books also have this same structure...

So, neither have you researched Panin's work, or other works that allegedly do or do not share the same characteristics? What are you basing your informed decision upon in the matter?

And if Ivan panin actually "Cooked" his results as i previously implied... any book could possibly used

I see no reason yet at all from you to reject Panin's discoveries, I think you made up your mind against him because of your presuppositions.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

So, neither have you researched Panin's work, or other works that allegedly do or do not share the same characteristics? What are you basing your informed decision upon in the matter?

Upon the fact that there are errors within the bible... Anyone trying to point out that the entire book is "inspired" of God is overlooking the fact that "inspired" work of God would not have errors...

I openly admit i haven't researched his work... but i have no need to do so either...

I see no reason yet at all from you to reject Panin's discoveries, I think you made up your mind against him because of your presuppositions

I simply have no interest in his "discoveries"... its plainly obvious the entire bible is not "the word of God"...

Though IT can be found in its pages...

reply to post by Akragon

Luke is a different story on the other hand...

Akragon, respectfully, while I agree with you on nearly everything you post, this one I would question.

I have read on Luke. He never met 'Jesus the Christ'.....he talked to people who had, but...

He was the only Apostle who was not a Jew. He never saw Christ. All that is written in his eloquent but restrained Gospel he acquired from hearsay, from witnesses, from the Mother of Christ, from disciples, and from the Apostles. His first visit to Israel took place over a year after the Crucifixion.

From the preface to Dear and Glorious Physician, by Taylor Caldwell, Doubleday; 1st edition (June 1959)
www.amazon.com...

I highly recommend it for those wanting to seek further than the Bible.

Publication Date: June 1959
The world-famous novel about the triumphant story of St. Luke, man of science, and Gospel writer
Today St. Luke is known as the author of the third Gospel of the New Testament, but two thousand years ago he was Lucanus, a Greek, a man who loved, knew the emptiness of bereavement, and later traveled through the hills and wastes of Judea asking, "What manner of man was my Lord?" And it is of this Lucanus that Taylor Caldwell tells here in one of the most stirring stories ever lived or written.

Lucanus grew up in the household of his stepfather, the Roman govenor of Antioch. After studying medicine in Alexandria he became one of the greatest physicians of the ancient world and traveled far and wide through the Mediterranean region healing the sick.

As time went on he learned of the life and death of Christ and saw in Him the God he was seeking. To find out all he could about the life and teachings of Jesus, whom he never saw, Lucanus visited all the places where Jesus had been, questioning everyone--including His mother, Mary--who had known Him or heard Him preach. At last, when he had gathered all information possible, he wrote down what we now know as the Gospel according to St. Luke.

Taylor Caldwell has chosen the grand, the splendid means to tell of St. Luke. Her own travels through the Holy Land and years of meticulous research made Dear and Glorious Physician a fully developed portrait of a complex and brilliant man and a colorful re-creation of ancient Roman life as it contrasted in its decadence with the new world Christianity was bringing into being. Here is a story to warm, to inspire, to call forth renewal of faith and love lying deep in each reader's heart.

reply to post by wildtimes

I have read on Luke. He never met 'Jesus the Christ'.....he talked to people who had, but...

What about Mark? As in John Mark. Who wrote what Peter wanted him to write seeing as Peter was an illiterate fisherman. Is Mark out now too?