Can you reject Paul and still be a "Christian"?

Originally posted by adjensen
reply to post by bb23108

 

Sorry, I've read through your post several times and I can't make heads or tails of it. I have little to no interest in eastern philosophy, which is what you seem to be equating that passage to, so maybe you want to "dumb it down" a little for the likes of me.

So of course I am wondering if my second attempt to communicate what I meant helped? That post is here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If not, would you tell me what you specifically don't understand?

adjensen, so I am guessing that I am not going to get a reply to the post that I was requested by you to rework. I don't really understand why someone would ask for something and then not respond to it. Maybe you just forgot, but even so, if I asked someone to elaborate on or re-explain something, and they did, I would at least acknowledge the attempt, even if it still didn't make sense to me or I disagreed with it, etc. In other words, if someone puts out some energy at someone else's request, it is good to respond in some relational manner.

Speaking in general about another pattern I have noticed on this Religious area of the Forum, it seems that a topic is often considered with a lot of energy to begin with, but often times no firm conclusions are reached - perhaps due to the nature of the topic, perhaps an impasse is reached, perhaps belief systems are too in place already - although it sometimes seems like a firm conclusion about a consideration is not reached because a topic is not fully considered. Personally I prefer to consider an issue thoroughly on one thread than to just address a whole bunch of issues on multiple threads with likely less depth given my time constraints, etc.

With regards to this thread, it still seems to me that there is a major difference between what Jesus was teaching and what Paul taught - the issues I have raised, as well as what a few other posters have said, have not been fully considered nor refuted by those advocating no difference is to be found between Jesus' teachings and Paul's writings. If I am wrong about my argument, I have no problem with that, but it would be good to hear why in as specific terms as possible. Or perhaps people have just grown weary of this thread or ...? Dunno.

Thank you for listening.

reply to post by bb23108

. . . often times no firm conclusions are reached - perhaps due to the nature of the topic . . .

Or that is the nature of discussion forums in general.
I suppose you can find discussions on a craft blog, where people share ideas about how to cut paper and glue it together, and that sort of thing.
But vigorous discussion needs to center on things controversial, and by definition, not easily resolved.
Now it could be one of the persons involved will do due diligence and find the answers, but the others who neglected that and just rely on their own opinion, however arrived at, fail to recognize the correctness of it.
So it is not necessarily that everyone is 'wrong' but the lack of a god-like authority handing out awards for the 'winner'.

reply to post by jmdewey60
I appreciate you input, jmdewey. I also appreciate that you take the time to respond to others even if they are in an obvious disagreement with you at times.

People join forms for a number of reasons, to share ideas, to discover new ways of considering matters, to reach firm conclusions, some to feel victorious in their "beating" another with their own point of view, etc., etc. But what is the common element in all of these?

People value relationship! Why? The answer is staring us in the face in every moment. We all arise in an apparently infinite field of relatedness. No one is independent of this field of relatedness. Relatedness is inherent in our situation here and so also holds a kind of "secret" in terms of what people value. We all value our inherent relatedness though unfortunately we often forget this and the simple fact that relatedness is our condition here.

If one deeply considers this matter, it can also be noticed that none of us is actually independent or separate, and this is the basis for feeling our actual situation together, and to even feel love and inherent non-separation with all.

So here's to relatedness!

Originally posted by Akragon

Originally posted by felonius

Originally posted by Akragon
reply to post by felonius

 

Show me ONE place where J.C. used fear to gain deciples. You cant do it.

Actually I can...

Though im getting the impression you don't know who you're speaking to... So lets just agree to "crap can" paul and his writing

Fair enough?

obviously I dont know who this is. I guess were on a similiar page about paul.



honestly you dont require the bible at all to be "xtian". gnostics for example.

btw where did jc use fear to wrangle in the converts? u have me curious.

Matthew 10:28
And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell

Now personally I don't believe in "hell"... I believe he was talking about an entirely different thing then Christians will tell you...

but there it is...

I'll be damned (lol)

I've missed that way too many times!

I agree though, I think that tends towards the parable more than a direct threat.

To answer the OP entirely as best I can. You can reject certain books and still follow Jesus. I do not call myself a Christian I call myself a servant of God though. Jesus said do as they say not as they do. One only needs to look at modern day Christians to get the point of what he means. I do not believe the book of Mathew or the Second Epistle of Peter were divinely inspired. What does that make me? I temper my spirit with logic and reason. I do not test God but he gave me a brain to think with and free will to do so.

God is our one and only father in Heaven. He sent his son Jesus to open the door to all.

reply to post by AllGloryIsGods


Interesting... Thanks for your reply

What is your issue with matthew?

reply to post by Akragon

What is your issue with matthew?

My guess would be all that "virgin birth" stuff.
He seems to not like the idea of Jesus being in some way considered 'god'.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by Akragon

 

What is your issue with matthew?

My guess would be all that "virgin birth" stuff.
He seems to not like the idea of Jesus being in some way considered 'god'.

Im not particularly fond of it myself...

Though I don't understand dismissing one of the closest sources known...

Originally posted by Akragon
What is your issue with matthew?

The Gospel of Matthew does not name its author. The tradition that this was the disciple Matthew begins with the early Christian bishop Papias of Hierapolis (about 100–140 AD)

Papias does not identify his Matthew, but by the end of the 2nd century the tradition of Matthew the tax-collector had become widely accepted, and the line "The Gospel According to Matthew" began to be added to manuscripts. For many reasons scholars today believe otherwise—for example, the gospel is based on Mark, and "it seems unlikely that an eyewitness of Jesus's ministry, such as Matthew, would need to rely on others for information about it"—and believe instead that it was written between about 80–90 AD by a highly educated Jew (an "Israelite", in the language of the gospel itself), intimately familiar with the technical aspects of Jewish law, standing on the boundary between traditional and non-traditional Jewish values.

en.wikipedia.org...

As I said in another thread. When something doesn't feel right or contradicts another part of the Bible I go and find out where it came from. You do not need to accept every book in the Bible. Man himself chose which books became the canon. I will even look at books outside of the Bible to see if they have anything of worth. I explained a little more in detail on the other thread. Hope this helps and God bless.

AllGloryIsGods

reply to post by AllGloryIsGods


To what GOD do you give glory? Just curious...
Matthew is a discipleship handbook for Jewish believers. If you can't see it, it might be because you aint Jewish and it wasn't written specifically for you....

reply to post by Lucius Driftwood


I do not need to be Jewish. Jesus opened the door to all.

reply to post by AllGloryIsGods


Agreed.
Not everybody speaks the same language.
Matthew's listeners were Jewish. It's apparent.
Matthew is not an autobiography of the life of Jesus. It's a discipleship manual for Jews who believe in Jesus.

reply to post by AllGloryIsGods

As I said in another thread. When something doesn't feel right or contradicts another part of the Bible I go and find out where it came from.

All of the gospels contradict the rest of the bible... so what specifically do you have issues with in Matthew, aside from its dating and authorship... There is a reason its considered a "synoptic" text

You do not need to accept every book in the Bible. Man himself chose which books became the canon.

You should look over my threads...

I will even look at books outside of the Bible to see if they have anything of worth. I explained a little more in detail on the other thread. Hope this helps and God bless.

Actually I only use four of the books in the bible... which is why Im asking.

Matthew happens to be one of them