Good job yadda. Easy to understand response. Even the book of Luke starts out saying there many stories of Jesus but he was trying to write his version... The point is, Paul wrote his stuff before the gospels were written. If even that early there were so many false stories out there that Paul had to warn about it, How could a reasonable person assume that the 4 gospels are fully inspired?
2 Cor 11:4 PROVES there were various versions of Jesus and gospels BEFORE the gospels
Coma- Why do you think Paul's version was the correct version.
I don't... I do not think there is a "correct" version. My point is simply that the earliest christian writings in the bible speak of the many stories and false teachings out there. So after that to have 4 gospels written that often contradict each other, it seems naive to say they are inspired and all true.
Since Luke was Paul's travelling companion, should we then conclude that Luke's version of the gospel was the one endorsed by Paul? That is, assuming that it was Luke who wrote it.
Designs... this really interests me..
"What you discover when you study Judaism is that Paul abandoned a Jewish Messiah for an entirely new invention of his own making. His idea, while trying to tie in Jewish verses, is not the Jewish messiah. Paul (or whoever it was writing under that name) knew the Jewish response and moved his ministry to the Gentiles who were gullible and naive about Judaism. first major error with Paul's Gospel- The Messiah and Originl Sin in Romans, complete and utter lie and fabrication. It goes downhill from there."
I am not disagreeing with you at all D, but would you be so kind
as to post a short excerpt from one of your sources to show this?
The Complete Book Of Jewish Knowledge by Nathan Ausubel. See sections on Christianity, Jesus, and Messiah.
I include a discussion on the Jewish expectations of the "Anointed"/"Mesach" (Messiah) in my Study at:
Jesus says that when the Son of Man comes "he" will reward. Why does Jesus not say "I" will reward? Perhaps his riding into Jerusalem in victory indicates that as the Romans said, he planned to make himself the "King" in the kingdom that some "Son of Man" would soon set up (with his friend Judas as an accomplice???). Jesus repeatedly spoke of the "Kingdom" - which he was fully expecting to come in his time - hence his continuous focus on it. He was wrong.
Paul's version of Christianity and the nature of Christ were extremely different than James' version. Paul is warning his own disciples not to listen to James & his his disciples.
When I was a believing JW who took the Bible as being the word of god, it troubled me that certain things seemed so contradictory, the words on not eating Blood in Acts, for example, and Paul's advice to not give a fig about meat from the market that you might eat, that may well not have been bled at all in a Gentile market.
Looking at the Bible now, as Doug says , "from the outside", I can easily see that these things are evidence of the many strands of christianity that were around in the 1st Century.
The original words and teachings of Jesus are lost, although perhaps fragments remain in the Gospels and elsewhere. What is certain is that myth and legend about him started at the latest just after his death, it is this Mythos as Karen Armstrong calls it, that is contained in our Bible, and in later works, where it tends to get even more fabulous.
A real study of the Bible, using the methods that Doug Mason outlines, reveals an interesting back story unknown to most Bible believers.