Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I wonder if it isn’t really Paul but theologies that pick and choose bits of his teachings ignored by the rest and what Jesus taught.Would Christianity be different without St Paul?
Could Christianity survive without his teachings?
I am starting to wonder if we should hold onto the words of Jesus in the NT more than those of Paul. It seems to me that Paul has taken over the NT. Rightly or wrongly so?
Would Christianity be different without St Paul?
Could Christianity survive without his teachings?
I am starting to wonder if we should hold onto the words of Jesus in the NT more than those of Paul. It seems to me that Paul has taken over the NT. Rightly or wrongly so?
I follow only the teachings of Jesus as he is the son of God and the one who judges, not Paul.
Jesus forgives sin and it was Gods plan to be so.
But there is nothing truly wrong with the teachings of Paul for his time for the teachings of a man as he was not perfect him self, no man is.
But I only go to the teachings of Jesus as he is the judge and man is not.
Would Christianity be different without St Paul?
Could Christianity survive without his teachings?
I am starting to wonder if we should hold onto the words of Jesus in the NT more than those of Paul. It seems to me that Paul has taken over the NT. Rightly or wrongly so?
Hi Hedrick, I always like your wise and mature insights on CF. I agree that the Gentile world experienced the resurrected Jesus and the story of parts of his life from Paul and his followers. But sooooo much of the focus of Paul, and subsequent Christianity, was/is about the death and resurrection, overlooking the triumphant life that Jesus had already demonstrated.I give priority to Jesus' teaching as well. But there's a danger. Jesus taught that he came to bring the Kingdom of God, that it was based on him, that we were called to join him as its agents, and we would be held accountable for how we responded.
But this is all before his death and resurrection. The early Christian community experienced the resurrected Jesus, as someone they could have spiritual communion with, and as the source of new life. Do we ignore that half of the story because Jesus didn't say anything about it during his life? It's that half of the story that we see in Paul and the Gospel of John. You can say that his followers created a whole new thing that he wouldn't have approved of, and ignore Paul. But it seems reasonable to say that Jesus can't have been expected to teach about that during his life because it wouldn't have made sense, and thus the early church experience with the resurrected Jesus is also something we should include in our faith.
Paul isn't the only witness. But he's the most detailed.
Of course the Gospels were not written as Jesus spoke. Again, I never meant to imply they were.The gospels were not written as Jesus spoke. They were written at some point many years later by people who recalled what He spoke (or recalled what they heard that He spoke)--by inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
That same Holy Spirit inspired Paul to write what the Holy Spirit wanted him to write.
It doesn't make sense to think that the Holy Spirit who inspired one set of unknown writers was less reliable than the Holy Spirit who inspired Paul.
Before Paul's missionary journeys, one needed to be circumcised in order to become Jewish and be a member of a Jewish community in order to receive their teachings. Paul worked to admit Gentiles into fellowship with the Jewish apostles without making them swear to observe the entire Torah law and its many rabbinical commentaries. I can not imagine a world without Paul's epistles, or without the writings of his companion Luke the physician.Although Saint Paul really developed Christian theology I think Christianity would be off to the worse without him. And would have given in to heretical sects such as the Judaizers.
Before Paul's missionary journeys, one needed to be circumcised in order to become Jewish and be a member of a Jewish community in order to receive their teachings. Paul worked to admit Gentiles into fellowship with the Jewish apostles without making them swear to observe the entire Torah law and its many rabbinical commentaries. I can not imagine a world without Paul's epistles, or without the writings of his companion Luke the physician.
It depends on how one interprets Scripture. If we understand that the New Covenant is intended to justify us by really changing us, into just beings, and knowing that the standard for that justice is love, the Greatest Commandments, then we find nothing but common ground between Paul and the rest of the NT. Faith is intended to connect us to the God who transforms us into His own image. This is a matter of His putting His Law in our minds and writing it on our hearts as per Jer 31. So from Paul:Would Christianity be different without St Paul?
Could Christianity survive without his teachings?
I am starting to wonder if we should hold onto the words of Jesus in the NT more than those of Paul. It seems to me that Paul has taken over the NT. Rightly or wrongly so?
But God chose to include those letters in His Word. So I believe God knew that these issues were issues that many others would experience and that Paul’s letters were included for a reason.The everlasting words Christ said are in a special level of being for all of eternity --
"Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away."
Paul's writings (just as you've said) are usually to a specific church and it's specific temporary situation.
The problem with that approach is that there were many things that Jesus only told to His disciples. Jesus taught them things He didn’t teach the masses and they took all of this with them after His death to continue on.I follow only the teachings of Jesus as he is the son of God and the one who judges, not Paul.
Jesus forgives sin and it was Gods plan to be so.
But there is nothing truly wrong with the teachings of Paul for his time for the teachings of a man as he was not perfect him self, no man is.
But I only go to the teachings of Jesus as he is the judge and man is not.
Yes exactly. Like Moses, Paul did not bring his own Word but the Word if God through revelation. That is the same as Christ Speaking and is the very thing Christ paid for on the cross. To purchase our bodies, clean us from our ideas (like Paul had his own ideas before his convertion and persecuted Christ) and then use our mouths to speak His Own Words through. It was not Paul's Gospel but Christ's. It is the very Word of God and the Word is God. John 1:1Where do you think Paul got his words from?
Unless you think Paul was lying, he didn't come up with what he wrote on his own.
In Ephesians 3:3-6 he wrote that by revelation from God he learned of the mystery that we Gentiles would be part of God's plan.
Galatians 1:12 says that he didn't come up with the Gospel he taught on his own, but he received it by revelation from Jesus Christ.
2 Corinthians 12 says that he received many revelations from Jesus Christ.
The church today would be very different, and not for the better, without Paul.
God may have used someone else to do what Paul did, and people would complain about that person as well.
Peter wrote how the untrained misunderstood and misapplied Paul back then, to people familiar with that culture, it's use of idioms, and other context effecting influences. We are so far removed now, that we really do misunderstand Paul because we are not only ignorant of the cultural influences but we are ignorant of the exegetical methods Paul used (like the rules of Hillel) that are design to directly effect context.Would Christianity be different without St Paul?
Could Christianity survive without his teachings?
I am starting to wonder if we should hold onto the words of Jesus in the NT more than those of Paul. It seems to me that Paul has taken over the NT. Rightly or wrongly so?
Would Christianity be different without St Paul?
Could Christianity survive without his teachings?
I am starting to wonder if we should hold onto the words of Jesus in the NT more than those of Paul. It seems to me that Paul has taken over the NT. Rightly or wrongly so?
Interesting question. Many build their theology from Paul, instead of first going to Jesus teachings, and understanding Paul from them. Maybe the reformers are to blame for this?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?