The Problem With Paul.

A recent thread got me thinking.

When reading the Bible what do Christians believe in regards to Jesus?

That He died for our sins.
He was raised from the dead three day later.
He was seen by many after the resurrection.
He was a descendent of David.
He was betrayed.
He defined a bread and wine ritual for his followers.
He was killed by the Jews.
Just about every Christian holy believes this to be true, and this "truth" is what the Bible is written upon. But where does this information about Christ come from, information that essentially is the Bible and our perception of who Christ was and is and His message? Paul? Someone who never met Christ in the flesh??

Jesus says his sheep know his voice and follow him: “They will by no means follow a stranger, but will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers.” (John 10:5). Paul was a stranger.

Mahatma Gandhi, the renowned Indian prophet of nonviolence, in an essay titled “Discussion on Fellowship”, writes: “I draw a great distinction between the Sermon on the Mount of Jesus and the Letters of Paul. Paul’s Letters are a graft on Christ’s teachings, Paul’s own gloss apart from Christ’s own experience.”

Thomas Jefferson, third president of the United States and author of the Declaration of Independence; writes in his “Letter to William Short:” “Of this band of dupes and imposters, Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and the first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus.

Gene Savoy, American theologian and clergyman, declares in his “The Essaei Document:” “Paul’s Christianity is another matter. He taught a different kind of theology than that shared by the original disciples who were schooled under Jesus. Paul was the father of Pagan Christianity; a movement based on a concept completely foreign to Jesus. The teachings of Jesus the Messiah were overshadowed by the teachings of Paul.

I don't believe Paul intentionally went out of his way to pervert the who Christ really was or Christs true teachings, his nature was so that the evil one saw an opportunity.

a reply to: Cwantas

So
Paul taught wrong but your essay doesn’t say what Paul taught wrong
Lots of words to say, “Paul got it wrong” without saying what Paul got wrong

Gene savoy, never heard of him

Thomas Jefferson, heard of him but know nothing about him

Mahatma Ghandi
Seriously, this guy had so many flaws that are now completely ignored. His relevance and comprehension of Christianity is not proven, his opinion of Paul, who cares?

Going to run an argument of authority, get some relevant authority at least
Plenty of anti christians don’t like Paul is not an argument or a thread

a reply to: Cwantas

Romans 3:7 KJV

For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? Don't I Need to Be Fixed Up

Paul has always been something of an enigma in New Testament studies, not least because of his "advanced" theology from such an apparently early date. Paul never meets a human Jesus and yet he becomes the most important apostle of the new religion. Then again, the man and his seminal epistles, by convention placed in the mid-years of the 1st century, are actually unheard of until late in the 2nd century.
Curiously, the trail-blazing Christian missionary and apostle appears nowhere in the secular histories of his age. Ironically, though supposedly in Jerusalem at the right time, he can give no witness to a historical Jesus. But was Paul himself a genuine historical figure? The Pauline journeys, including the supposed transportation of the apostle to Rome, are characterized by incongruities, contradiction, and the absurd.
Could our hero from Tarsus be a pious fabrication – just like Jesus and the rest of the gang?

a reply to: Cwantas

Peter himself witnessed that Paul was the real deal...

2Peter 3:15-16
"Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."

...so if Paul was not the real deal, then you can't trust Peter's epistle's either. Then what? Nix those from the bible too?

a reply to: Cwantas

Only around 28% of the New Testament was written by, or about, Paul.

I think that you will find the things you have listed that Christians believe, are very well supported by the other contributors to New Testament and Paul didn't invent the ideas.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: Cwantas

Only around 28% of the New Testament was written by, or about, Paul.

I think that you will find the things you have listed that Christians believe, are very well supported by the other contributors to New Testament and Paul didn't invent the ideas.

Not only that but Paul obviously had divine revelations that were only ever given to Daniel and John as well as recorded in Holy Scripture. As for Daniel, he was given a cryptic prophecy by an angel about these things that would take place in the last days and he said he couldn't understand them. The angel told him to seal the things up and that in the time of the end those who have insight would rove to and fro through the scriptures and the true knowledge would become abundant.

As for John he was obviously given the revelation of some of the very same things by what the seven thunders spoke but he was told to seal up the words and not write them down.

As for Paul? He obviously revealed some of these things. But others he could not reveal, saying that it would be unlawful to do so:

"As for you, Daniel, keep the words secret, and seal up the book until the time of the end. Many will rove about, and the true knowledge will become abundant.”-Daniel 12:4

"Now when the seven thunders spoke, I was about to write, but I heard a voice out of heaven say: “Seal up the things the seven thunders spoke, and do not write them down.”-Revelation 10:4.

"I have to boast. It is not beneficial, but I will move on to supernatural visions and revelations of the Lord. I know a man in union with Christ who, years ago—whether in the body or out of the body, I do not know; God knows—was caught away to the third heaven. Yes, I know such a man—whether in the body or apart from the body, I do not know; God knows—who was caught away into paradise and heard words that cannot be spoken and that are not lawful for a man to say."-2 Corinthians 12:1-4.

If one reads through Paul's letters with a humble spirit, with prayer, and God's holy spirit, they can perceive how the understanding he had was obviously supernaturally inspired. That kind of makes me want to write a thread that ties all of these together. It is obvious to an observant mind that there is no way all of these things come together by human means. Being written hundreds of years apart. There is no doubt it is inspired of God.

Paul is the one that reveals the hope of heavenly life. The gift of immortality to the chosen faithful. Talks about the apostasy that would develop inside the Christian congregation after the death of the apostles. Something Jesus alluded to in his illustration of the wheat and the weeds. Jesus talks of the gathering of his chosen ones by the angels at his second coming. Paul reveals how that gathering will be. In resurrected immortal spirit bodies like that of Jehovah God and Jesus Christ their adopted Father and brother. He says that the start of the great tribulation referred to by Jesus Christ will be a cry of "peace and security."

All of these things the prophecies to Daniel and John allude to but in cryptic and symbolic measure. For example in Daniel 12:3 the angel tells Daniel:

"And those having insight will shine as brightly as the expanse of heaven, and those bringing the many to righteousness like the stars, forever and ever."-Daniel 12:3.

Jesus referred to this prophecy when he stated:

"At that time the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the Kingdom of their Father. Let the one who has ears listen."-Matthew 13:43.

There is no doubt this is referring to the time when the faithful elect, the chosen 144,000, are resurrected to heavenly spirit life.

Now the apostate Churches of Christendom teach that every good person goes to heaven. But we know that is not true. In fact scripture quite plainly in matter-of-fact super easy to understand language says that no one has gone to heaven except the one that descended, that is Jesus Christ. And that is actually what Jesus himself said:

"Moreover, no man has ascended into heaven but the one who descended from heaven, the Son of man."-John 3:13.

There is no mention of a heavenly hope in the Hebrew portion of the Sacred Scriptures. But Daniel does talk about the holy ones that will rule forever and ever.

But notice Paul tells us when these will be gathered together by Jesus Christ:

"For this is what we tell you by Jehovah’s word, that we the living who survive to the presence of the Lord will in no way precede those who have fallen asleep in death; because the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a commanding call, with an archangel’s voice and with God’s trumpet, and those who are dead in union with Christ will rise first.  Afterward we the living who are surviving will, together with them, be caught away in clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and thus we will always be with the Lord. So keep comforting one another with these words."-1 Thessalonians 4:15-18.

If a person with a little reading comprehension (of which yours is quite good) reads this they can understand that the chosen ones who have already died are resting asleep in death and remain so until the return of Jesus Christ. And then at his presence he will resurrect them to heavenly life first, and then afterward, we the living, those of us who are called and chosen who are alive at that point in time, will be caught away along with them so that we are all together brought to the Lord.

Then those passages quoted about in Daniel 12:3 and alluded to by Jesus Christ will have fulfillment. Then they will shine like the sun in the Kingdom of their Father.

Notice how all these are related. But just a cursory reading of scripture is not enough to put it all together. Of course if someone that God has enlightened by means of the holy spirit to understand these truths shares it with you, perhaps your mind's eye can be opened to see it, thanks to the undeserved kindness and spirit of Jehovah God.

But it certainly does a number of things. It reveals that the Bible is indeed of superhuman origin, inspired of God. It helps us to see that the Churches of Christendom teach lies. Not all good people go to heaven. In fact no one has gone to heaven except for Jesus Christ. And then only those whom have been called will go to heaven at his manifestation in heaven along with his holy myriads of angels. That is a future event. So all the holy ones, that is the saints, are still asleep soundly in death waiting for his return and manifestation that happens AFTER the great tribulation.

There are many other things we can glean from his inspired supernatural revelations that tie in Revelation and Daniel together.

There is NO WAY Paul or another human invented the inspired words he wrote.

And both Jesus' and Paul's words about the hope of heavenly life, who has gone to heaven, and when it will take place directly contradict everything the Churches of Christendom teach about the subject. And they have had almost two thousand years with the Bible. And there is NO EXCUSE they can't read these passages today now that they are easily available and realize their dogmas and doctrines are false.

Yes, every mystic, saint, religious reformer, humanist, skeptic and freethinker distinguishes between the teachings of Jesus and Paul. But none of them appear to have considered the possibility that Paul's letters were tampered with. Marcion was the first to draw attention to it.

originally posted by: Cwantas
I don't believe Paul intentionally went out of his way to pervert the who Christ really was or Christ's true teachings, his nature was so that the evil one saw an opportunity.

I think you're onto something here! If he had known what his decision to compromise truth for the lie would lead to, he'd have stuck to the straight path.

But Paul's own nature is not to blame. In Philippians 2:20-21 and 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, he offers a glimpse into the nature of the men he was working with. “For I have no one else of kindred spirit who will genuinely be anxious for your needs. For they all seek after their own interests, not those of Christ Jesus.”

Julian drew attention to this too:

"But that not only the Galileans of our day but also those of the earliest time, those who were the first to receive the teaching from Paul, were men of this sort, is evident from the testimony of Paul himself in a letter addressed to them. For unless he actually knew that they had committed all these disgraceful acts, he was not, I think, so impudent as to write to those men themselves concerning their conduct, in language... eulogies... wanton flattery and slavish adulation."

Generally speaking, creative pioneers show a poor judgment in company, they usually draw eccentrics, opportunists, flatterers to themselves, as seen from the resulting gossip, scandals, betrayals.

Like most reformers, Paul felt liberated from the religious fictions crammed into him, he merely made usage of prevailing fictions to get his message across. He was obliged to adapt his presentation in terms familiar to his correspondents, who he had wished to win over. The prophets were utilized for the same purpose in the gospels. Paul did not contradict Jesus (who was sent to Jews) by instead missionizing among the Gentiles. Rather, it signifies that he had an easier time conferring insight into the problems of the day to the latter.

a reply to: Cwantas

" He was seen by many after the resurrection." No, only a few authorized individuals saw him. He was not literally raised from the dead nor was he a deceased spirit seen clairvoyantly.

"He was betrayed." By Peter, by the early Christians, by the Church.

"He was killed by the Jews." Not all Jews, not even the Pharisees.

"He was a descendant of David." He was, but it can't be proven by ordinary means. The provided genealogies are bogus (the individuals before Abraham are mythical) and Paul was right to warn about the spinning of genealogies. I'd like to draw attention to the recurrence of 14 generations in Matthew 1:17, that is what the gospel authors really wished to convey to their readers.

"Paul was the father of Pagan Christianity; a movement based on a concept completely foreign to Jesus." Actually, Jesus is consistently portrayed as favoring pagans and putting in good words for them. Namely, the Samaritans and the Roman centurion. The Jews accused him of being a Samaritan. In Toledot Yeshu, he's slandered as the bastard son of a Roman soldier. He was not a Galilean, they would've recognized him from his dialect as they did with his disciples. The Galilean character was revolutionary, yet Jesus was passionate, not fanatical and zealous like Peter was. The early Christian ascetics tried to stifle their passions, which goes against Jesus' teachings.

Fun fact: in Matthew 5:29-30, Jesus invokes a Hellenic custom. According to Josephus, Jews did not cut off the hands of suicides as the Romans did. Jesus also went up into the mountains to pray alone, a Samaritan custom.

You can read more of my research here: drive.google.com...

There is definitely a number of brainwashed individuals that have strong opinions on Paul when the evidence is put before them they ignore it.
One is informed by Acts that St Paul's early day stance was as "Saul, the Christian persecutor". Yet if Saul really was a vigilante for orthodox Judaism at the time of Stephen's stoning (Acts 7.58-8.3), becoming the chief persecutor of Christians, no less – one wonders just where was Saul, not long before, when a supposed radical rabbi called Jesus was stirring up whole towns and villages?
Paul's role as religious policeman seems not to have awakened until shortly after the godman's death. But in itself this suggests Jesus of Nazareth had no great impact. After all, Saul was a contemporary of Jesus in time and place, raised in Jerusalem ("at the feet of Gamaliel" – Acts 22.3) at precisely the time the godman was overturning moneychangers in the Temple and generally provoking Pharisees and Sadducees.
Would not Saul, a young religious hothead ("exceedingly zealous of the traditions" – Galatians 1.14) have waded into those multitudes to heckle and attack the Nazarene himself? Would he not have been an enthusiastic witness to JC's blasphemy before the Sanhedrin? And where was Saul during "passion week", surely in Jerusalem with the other zealots celebrating the holiest of festivals? And yet he reports not a word of the crucifixion?
Paul, another "witness for Jesus", saw and heard nothing
“Faith is having a belief even though there is no evidence to support that belief! Blind faith is having a belief even though there is no evidence to support that belief and a considerable amount of evidence to contradict that belief “

a reply to: redchad

What Paul preached was total fabrication.

originally posted by: Cwantas
a reply to: redchad

What Paul preached was total fabrication.

I know it’s a fabrication as does most people with any intelligence and logic sadly there are lots of people otherwise! But all you can do is try and educate people with facts and evidence.

a reply to: redchad

In regards to Jesus?

originally posted by: Cwantas
a reply to: redchad

What Paul preached was total fabrication.

I know it’s a fabrication as does most people with any intelligence and logic sadly there are lots of people otherwise! But all you can do is try and educate people with facts and evidence.

a reply to: randomuser

So why do you think so many enlightened people In our recent history came to the same conclusion about Paul?

Not what paul preached, why they rejected what he preached as false?

a reply to: chr0naut

Pauls 28% contribution is regarding Jesus and how we perceive Him.

Though 1 Corinthians was written perhaps 20 years after the death of Jesus the oldest copy of Pauls contribution we have is 2 centuries after, a 200 year gap.

originally posted by: Cwantas
a reply to: randomuser

So why do you think so many enlightened people In our recent history came to the same conclusion about Paul?

Not what paul preached, why they rejected what he preached as false?

"For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled. They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories."-2 Timothy 3:3-4.