Jay-
Interesting how many here can see the errors of the Watchtower Society and its leaders but can't see the errors in the source of their beliefs in the NT.
Fascinating study in human behavior.
Paul, leading authority on Christianity, does NOT quote Jesus!
by Terry 204 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
tec
Actually the account does state that he felt as if he was better.
Which part? I'm not trying to be argumentative. I just don't see what you're seeing. I see a man who is trying to state that his revelation came from Christ and not from other men.
Tammy
-
PSacramento
That's certainly true, but he arguably had a huge advantage inasmuch as he was not only the messenger of that Gospel, he by all appearances was the formulator of much of it.
I wouldn't say forumlater of Gospel as much as formulater of doctrine
What would Christianity be without Paul? Would we even know that Christ was born without sin were it not for Paul? Who's the most prolific writer in the NT by far? Who comes closest to actually explaining the mechanics of the Ransom? Who explains the parousia? Who explains the purpose of the Law and why it was no longer necessary? It's Paul, Paul, Paul and Paul
Quite true, but none of it at odds with the WHOLE of the rest of the NT.
Who's at the center of all the squabbles among the early Christians leaders? Who takes on the pillars of the Jerusalem congregation in their own backyard? (And wins) Eusebius quoting Hegesippus tells us that James the Just was a lifelong Nazarite who neither cut his hair nor ate meat. Paul tells us that a man who eats only vegetables is "Weak" and that long hair dishonors a man. The tension between Paul and James is palpable. Paul says he wishes that those teaching circumcision among the Christians would go castrate themselves.
Not sure your point...they didn't like each other, so what? Even Peter says that some of the things that our borther Paul says are hard to understand.
Paul was who he was BEFORE conversion and he stayed that way, personality wise, after it.
He was an ass at times and was stubborn and opinionated, just like most of the "great" philosophers of History.
It's against that backdrop --Paul as the most aggresive, outspoken and authoritative figure among the early Christians that his seeming unfamiliarity with Jesus of the Gospels appears out of place.
It was his way, had nothing to do with the Gospel per say, it was his personality.
That was one of the reason Jesus choose him, the other being a "punishment' of sorts for what he had done, since Christ knew how much Paul would suffer in proclaiming the word ( and in realising the blood on his hands).
-
PSacramento
RE: the circumsision of Timothy issue:
Tim was Jewish ( in part) and he got circumssied because of that.
Paul was adamant that GENTILES NOT NEED to be circumsized, but Jews were still Jewish.
-
jay88
Designs---Yes,.... it pays to protect what you have a vested interest in.
-
Band on the Run
The victors write history, not the vanquished. Jesus was a Jew. He never asserted anything otherwise. He dined with Pharisees on a social basis. There is some antisemitism in the Bible. Considering the time period of its origin, when Jews actively sought out Christians to deliver them to Romans for execution, it is understandable. The sad thing I read was that around Ignatius time, a different form of baptism was recognized. It was martyrom. The date of your execution was the start of your new life in Christ. Many volunteered. When faced with the reality, they recanted and named names so many Christians not willing to be sacrificed were executed, too.
I feel Jesus would freely acknowledge that he was shaped by the religious teachings of his youth. Mary and Joseph were not separate from the community at Nazareth. Imagine plying a trade as an outsider.
The Torah is just as inaccurate as the New Testament. The Psalms, altho so beautiful and inspiring, will verge from acingly beautiful statements of love and peace to Kill! Kill! Vengeance! Vengeance! within the same psalm.
This discussion could go on forever b/c different people of good will can read into the works their own backgrounds, needs and beliefs. There was clearly no golden age of Christian brotherhood with everyone singing political songs from the 60s about brotherhood.
-
designs
What! No Kumbaya oh noooo now where do I go
-
TD
Not sure your point...they didn't like each other, so what?
This was the point:
It's against that backdrop --Paul as the most aggresive, outspoken and authoritative figure among the early Christians that his seeming unfamiliarity with Jesus of the Gospels appears out of place.
It was his way, had nothing to do with the Gospel per say, it was his personality.
That doesn't quite explain how Paul would suddenly have a deeper insight into the full meaning of Jesus ministry, death and ressurection than those that walked with him, especially given the fact that Paul doesn't appear to know the specifics of those events at all. That stretches the boundary of stubborn and opinionated and almost borders on irrational. Source critics are looking for the most plausible explanation for Paul's behavior and Paul doesn't appear irrational in his writings.
(And again, there's not a guarantee that the most plausible explanation is the correct one )
-
PSacramento
This was the point:
It's against that backdrop --Paul as the most aggresive, outspoken and authoritative figure among the early Christians that his seeming unfamiliarity with Jesus of the Gospels appears out of place.
What about Jesus of the Gospels does Paul seem unfamilare with ?
That doesn't quite explain how Paul would suddenly have a deeper insight into the full meaning of Jesus ministry, death and ressurection than those that walked with him, especially given the fact that Paul doesn't appear to know the specifics of those events at all. That stretches the boundary of stubborn and opinionated and almost borders on irrational. Source critics are looking for the most plausible explanation for Paul's behavior and Paul doesn't appear irrational in his writings.
We don't know that Paul DIDN'T know the details of Jesus's death, as a matter of fact, as a persecuter of Christians it would make sense for him to know that.
Just because we don't find the info in his letters, doesn't mean he didn't know since the letters were follow ups to the churches he established or helped establish with Barnabas and others.
It sounds like you have specififcs in mind, specifics of things Paul should have known AND have stated in his letters.
Which ones?
I doubt that Paul had a deep insight into the full meaning of Jesus and his ministry then the apostles, a reading of the GOJ makes that clear.
He may have come off that way, but this is also the guy that openly says he is the LEAST of all the apostles.
Its fine to ream on Paul because of the crap he says sometimes, but it is also equally fine to point out the good stuff he says too.
Personally I find it funny that I, not a fan of Paul at all, am defending him !
LMAO !! -
tec
I thought it was funny that I was defending Paul too :) But if someone is saying something false about anyone, and I know or at least think it, then I'm probably going to say something and at least ask for that person to back up what they've said.
Tammy