Paul's words are not confusing. They are wrong.

[Brennin]

Here's a wonderful link for those who want to learn about Paul.

This will be easier and cheaper than buying a book (that was probably an ill-fated suggestion).

If you have already made up your mind and don't want to be confused by the facts.....do not click!



http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/paulthe.htm

Why is this important? Well, because Paul's Radical Grace Theology has come to so dominate "Christianity" that Paul has been elevated above Jesus and the teaching of Jesus (which is totally different from Paul's Radical Grace Theology) has been lost.

http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/paulthe.htm

That has already been posted here and criticized.

 

[Foon Nerfdahl]

Good, maybe some new people have come along since.



And I really doubt that it's all been discussed......it's a huge chunk of writing.

Maybe in light of the unfolding expose' of the Paul myths......new conclusions are just waiting.

 

[BlackLamb]

Here's a wonderful link for those who want to learn about Paul.

This will be easier and cheaper than buying a book (that was probably an ill-fated suggestion).

If you have already made up your mind and don't want to be confused by the facts.....do not click!



http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/paulthe.htm

Why is this important? Well, because Paul's Radical Grace Theology has come to so dominate "Christianity" that Paul has been elevated above Jesus and the teaching of Jesus (which is totally different from Paul's Radical Grace Theology) has been lost.

http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/paulthe.htm

That all seemed compelling enough, until I remembered that Peter himself said that Paul's writings were hard to understand, but true.

So....Peter did indeed acknowledge Paul's writing as having authority, despite what the author of that website says.

To be honest, Paul annoys quite a bit (he does seem to think too highly of himself) but hey, we're all human.

 

[Foon Nerfdahl]

Blacklamb,

But......who is "Peter himself?"

Who wrote those words?

Scholarly consensus has it that those words were written by a church leader who came along WELL AFTER the Peter that I think you're talking about.

A church leader or "Father" who had a vested interest in preserving the "Christian" faith that had evolved over the 1st and 2nd centuries and placed him in a position of relative wealth and power.

Most of what we call the NT has been tweaked and edited mercilessly to make it fit tradition that developed along the way.

If something Jesus had reportedly said caused a problem.....it was gently fixed......because the things Jesus said conflicted with the Pauline tradition that was so useful and popular with leaders.

Most of this tweaking was done by people who meant well......like, for our own good, by those who saw themselves as "fathers" who had to take care of us, the common herd, and keep us under control.

I see a lot of that attitude among church leaders today (and even on this very forum) when people seem to be learning too much and questioning traditional dogma.

 

[elman]

Blacklamb,

But......who is "Peter himself?"

Who wrote those words?

Scholarly consensus has it that those words were written by a church leader who came along WELL AFTER the Peter that I think you're talking about.

A church leader or "Father" who had a vested interest in preserving the "Christian" faith that had evolved over the 1st and 2nd centuries and placed him in a position of relative wealth and power.

Most of what we call the NT has been tweaked and edited mercilessly to make it fit tradition that developed along the way.

If something Jesus had reportedly said caused a problem.....it was gently fixed......because the things Jesus said conflicted with the Pauline tradition that was so useful and popular with leaders.

Most of this tweaking was done by people who meant well......like, for our own good, by those who saw themselves as "fathers" who had to take care of us, the common herd, and keep us under control.

I see a lot of that attitude among church leaders today (and even on this very forum) when people seem to be learning too much and questioning traditional dogma.

You want it both ways, Paul did not agree with the teachings of Jesus and "If something Jesus had reportedly said caused a problem.....it was gently fixed......because the things Jesus said conflicted with the Pauline tradition that was so useful and popular with leaders." So if we point out that Jesus and Paul taught the same thing, you want to say it was because of the tweaking.

 

[Foon Nerfdahl]

You want it both ways, Paul did not agree with the teachings of Jesus and "If something Jesus had reportedly said caused a problem.....it was gently fixed......because the things Jesus said conflicted with the Pauline tradition that was so useful and popular with leaders." So if we point out that Jesus and Paul taught the same thing, you want to say it was because of the tweaking.

Even after the copious tweaking over the years......it is STILL painfully obvious that Paul had a gospel and a theology all his own.

Paul said he and we are slaves to sin......and people needed him and his Radical Grace Salvation to elude eternal torture.

Jesus clearly did not believe in eternal torture and simply said to do good works and love God and Neighbor to get to heaven.

The tweakers were not bold enough to tamper with a famous teaching like the parable of the good Samaritan......and that teaching clearly shows what Jesus believed........to get to heaven--do as the good Samaritan did.

 

[DrFate]

It is great to see your posts again Foon!

 

[BlackLamb]

Even after the copious tweaking over the years......it is STILL painfully obvious that Paul had a gospel and a theology all his own.

Paul said he and we are slaves to sin......and people needed him and his Radical Grace Salvation to elude eternal torture.

Jesus clearly did not believe in eternal torture and simply said to do good works and love God and Neighbor to get to heaven.

The tweakers were not bold enough to tamper with a famous teaching like the parable of the good Samaritan......and that teaching clearly shows what Jesus believed........to get to heaven--do as the good Samaritan did.

So if we don't need grace, why would Jesus bother to suffer like he did? We would all be perfectly capable of doing good works without his salvation. You don't need to be a Christian to love your fellow man.

Also, how do you know the words of Jesus weren't tampered with as well? If Paul made things up, and Peter was tweaked, who knows, maybe everything was tainted, or just completely made up?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm really interested in why you have this philosophy, because it deviates so far from Christianity as most people know, believe, and follow.

 

[Foon Nerfdahl]

So if we don't need grace, why would Jesus bother to suffer like he did? We would all be perfectly capable of doing good works without his salvation. You don't need to be a Christian to love your fellow man.

Also, how do you know the words of Jesus weren't tampered with as well? If Paul made things up, and Peter was tweaked, who knows, maybe everything was tainted, or just completely made up?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm really interested in why you have this philosophy, because it deviates so far from Christianity as most people know, believe, and follow.

Foon opines:

Jesus didn't have much choice. He stood against evil and evil smacked him down. Thus he showed us how to live and how and WHY to die.

And, we ARE capable of doing good works and most do.

The followers of Paul, it seems, have little chance because they believe themselves to be inherently evil. Like Paul, they know the good they want to do and instead do evil. Cursed by the Paulian "Body of Death."

Paul invented a fake grace......so, what is the real Grace?

Grace, rather than forgiveness, is simply power. Paul screwed everybody up on the definition. It comes through more clearly in Apollos letter to the Hebrews.

Grace is not some magical amnesty or forgiveness.

Grace is POWER.

The more you take, the more like Jesus you can be (Jesus took a lot). Grab all you can. God freely gives it to those who want it.

No, you don't have to be a Christian to get it.......God gives it freely to all who sincerely yearn for it.

Were the words of Jesus tweaked? Of course. The whole NT was tweaked.

Constant tweaking by early "Church Fathers" who had a vested interest in controlling the peasants and maintaining their relative wealth and power......sometimes great wealth and power.

 

[BillR]

Blacklamb,

But......who is "Peter himself?"

Who wrote those words?

Scholarly consensus has it that those words were written by a church leader who came along WELL AFTER the Peter that I think you're talking about.

A church leader or "Father" who had a vested interest in preserving the "Christian" faith that had evolved over the 1st and 2nd centuries and placed him in a position of relative wealth and power.

Most of what we call the NT has been tweaked and edited mercilessly to make it fit tradition that developed along the way.

If something Jesus had reportedly said caused a problem.....it was gently fixed......because the things Jesus said conflicted with the Pauline tradition that was so useful and popular with leaders.

Most of this tweaking was done by people who meant well......like, for our own good, by those who saw themselves as "fathers" who had to take care of us, the common herd, and keep us under control.

I see a lot of that attitude among church leaders today (and even on this very forum) when people seem to be learning too much and questioning traditional dogma.

I here there are close to 24,000 manuscripts in full or part out there to show that the NT never changed so when did they change all these manuscripts??

Bill.

 

[Foon Nerfdahl]

I here there are close to 24,000 manuscripts in full or part out there to show that the NT never changed so when did they change all these manuscripts??

Foon says:

You must be hearing from bad sources. What documents are you talking about?

The texts that comprise the NT were living, changing documents for several centuries.

 

[DrFate]

So if we don't need grace, why would Jesus bother to suffer like he did? We would all be perfectly capable of doing good works without his salvation. You don't need to be a Christian to love your fellow man.

Also, how do you know the words of Jesus weren't tampered with as well? If Paul made things up, and Peter was tweaked, who knows, maybe everything was tainted, or just completely made up?

I'm not trying to be argumentative, I'm really interested in why you have this philosophy, because it deviates so far from Christianity as most people know, believe, and follow.

He might have decided to suffer like that so that people who felt they had to sacrifice something to the temple or that they were too sinful to ever commune with God would accept the sacrifice of the life of Jesus as atonement for their sins. Prehaps this was necessary because people were in a mindeset that made it necessary, not because God required it.

In other words.
He made the sacrifice because people are too stupid to realise how close and how forgiving God is . He made the sacrifice because people are too stupid to take God at his word.

 

[DrFate]

DrFate, you're not the first person to realize and say this. I agree with you ;-). So does Peter, an original disciple of Jesus. I hardly ever quote Bible verses, but this does really emphasize my point:

2nd Peter 3:15-17:

And consider the patience of our Lord as salvation, as our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, also wrote to you,

speaking of these things as he does in all his letters. In them there are some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction, just as they do the other scriptures.

Therefore, beloved, since you are forewarned, be on your guard not to be led into the error of the unprincipled and to fall from your own stability.

Except that 2nd Peter was written by some of Pauls supporters and not by Peter.

 

[DrFate]

It would be nice to see these 24000 manuscripts. Do you have any sources. Do they exist in the physical world?

 

[Vedant]

Except that 2nd Peter was written by some of Pauls supporters and not by Peter.

1) That is unsubstantiated, highly disputed, and lacking any general consensus as a fact.

2) I didn't say whether Peter wrote this or not. However, I do personally believe Peter preached this, and it's okay if you disagree with me.

3) You're missing my point, and attacking the Bible instead. I'm not trying to go against you, but trying to see things from your point of view so I can better explain what I believe. Anyway, even if you don't believe Peter wrote or even preached what is in 2nd Peter, other Christians from early times did have issues with Paul's writings as it led many to misconstrue the complexity of exactly what he was saying.

4) The Christians who put the Bible together, or canonized it, included 2nd Peter as scripture that reveals the Truth in the Christian way of understanding it. They valued 2nd Peter as part of the Bible as we do today, including the part that I selected.

5) Most, if not all Bible-bearing Christians have 2nd Peter in their Bibles, which says what I posted earlier, that in Paul's writings there are "some things hard to understand that the ignorant and unstable distort to their own destruction".

 

[Foon Nerfdahl]

There's nothing difficult about Paul's writing or his theology.

It's simply contradictory and self-serving for him.

It served him well......got him lots of dependent followers and love offerings.

No different than Kenneth Copeland of this era with his "Word of Faith" crap.

There is indeed nothing new under the sun.

 

[elman]

Even after the copious tweaking over the years......it is STILL painfully obvious that Paul had a gospel and a theology all his own.

Paul said he and we are slaves to sin......and people needed him and his Radical Grace Salvation to elude eternal torture.

Jesus clearly did not believe in eternal torture and simply said to do good works and love God and Neighbor to get to heaven.

The tweakers were not bold enough to tamper with a famous teaching like the parable of the good Samaritan......and that teaching clearly shows what Jesus believed........to get to heaven--do as the good Samaritan did.

Jesus believed to please God remain spiritually alive we must love our neighbor. Paul taught the same thing. John taught the same thing. NONE OF THEM BELIEVED IN ETERNAL Torture.

 

[Foon Nerfdahl]

Jesus believed to please God remain spiritually alive we must love our neighbor. Paul taught the same thing. John taught the same thing. NONE OF THEM BELIEVED IN ETERNAL Torture.

No. Jesus and Paul taught far different things.

Jesus preached salvation by good works, repentence and the forgiveness of God.

Paul preached salvation by some weird Radical Grace Theology that he had dreamed up to keep people confused and dependent.

 

[Im_A]

No. Jesus and Paul taught far different things.

Jesus preached salvation by good works, repentence and the forgiveness of God.

Paul preached salvation by some weird Radical Grace Theology that he had dreamed up to keep people confused and dependent.

i wouldn' tsay it was to keep people confused and dependant. even though i have heard the theories that Paul was actually out to destroy Christianity.

i figure Paul's message is worth of criticism in light of Christ's words because Paul shows nothing but some guilt ridden man with a thorn in his side, that he can't ever get out, so he provides some methodlogy for those who can't forgive themselves of their past mistakes.

i think Paul had some good things to say tho for the faith tho, but i think he needs to be critically examined as well.

 

[BlackLamb]

No. Jesus and Paul taught far different things.

Jesus preached salvation by good works, repentence and the forgiveness of God.

Paul preached salvation by some weird Radical Grace Theology that he had dreamed up to keep people confused and dependent.

But when we repent and are forgiven, that's grace, isn't it?