One thing that gets me about christianity, is that the teachings of St. Paul seem to be more valued then the teachings of Christ throughout mainstream christianity. Why is this?

I feel that St. Paul right as he may have been for the era in which he lived. His teachings fall far short of the criteria for happy modern day living. The first one that comes to mind the the "law" of celebacy untill marage. People forget that on average, in thoes days, the mariage age was about 13. In the modern day the mariage age is roughly the mid to late 20's and 30's this is far to long a time to wait to have sex. (If you dont use it you lose it). This, I feel, is the cause of the sexual problems that our society faces today. It is this demonization of sex that allows it to be such a rampant problem in todays society.

The other one is, due to the way that St. Paul writes, there is very little room for open mindedness in the mainstream curch. The cause of this is the fact that the area in which paul preached was generously estemated the size of texas. The open world in which we live carrys a much broader scope of people, places, things, idea, and cultures then existed in St. pauls world. I feel that this is a huge problem in todays culture.

The last problem was that St. Paul was an extremist. Extremism is always a problem. Now granted that St. Paul had to be an extremist due to the nature of the culture in which he lived. But, because of this, especialy considering todays society, his works must be considerd as such and must be therefore considered far form inspired by god as they are now. This would imply that his words should not be taken as the exact words of god as they are today. I feel that if these things were taken into consideration by the average christian. Christianity would be more appealing to the modern day human therby makeing Christianity a faith based religion as opposed to a fear based one like it mostly is now.

One thing that gets me about christianity, is that the teachings of St. Paul seem to be more valued then the teachings of Christ throughout mainstream christianity. Why is this?

I feel that St. Paul right as he may have been for the era in which he lived. His teachings fall far short of the criteria for happy modern day living. The first one that comes to mind the the "law" of celebacy untill marage. People forget that on average, in thoes days, the mariage age was about 13. In the modern day the mariage age is roughly the mid to late 20's and 30's this is far to long a time to wait to have sex. (If you dont use it you lose it). This, I feel, is the cause of the sexual problems that our society faces today. It is this demonization of sex that allows it to be such a rampant problem in todays society.

The other one is, due to the way that St. Paul writes, there is very little room for open mindedness in the mainstream curch. The cause of this is the fact that the area in which paul preached was generously estemated the size of texas. The open world in which we live carrys a much broader scope of people, places, things, idea, and cultures then existed in St. pauls world. I feel that this is a huge problem in todays culture.

The last problem was that St. Paul was an extremist. Extremism is always a problem. Now granted that St. Paul had to be an extremist due to the nature of the culture in which he lived. But, because of this, especialy considering todays society, his works must be considerd as such and must be therefore considered far form inspired by god as they are now. This would imply that his words should not be taken as the exact words of god as they are today. I feel that if these things were taken into consideration by the average christian. Christianity would be more appealing to the modern day human therby makeing Christianity a faith based religion as opposed to a fear based one like it mostly is now.

Just some thoughts.

thanks

Vajrasattva

i am not too well versed on christianity, though my parents were christian. but i do certainly agree that sex is badly mishandled...you have heard the saying 'i am a recovering catholic' i assume?

It means that they were raised Catholic and later found the teachings as they understood them to be unpalatable.

For example - "No sex before marriage!"

"Are you serious?"

"If you do, off to Hell!"

"Forget Catholicism."

....I feel that (as a recovering catholic) that preaching to the romans was an audacity considering what has happened to that sect of this religion. I feel that roman catholicism and catholicism in general is an abomination. Not to mention EVERY other fundamentalist sect of EVERY other religion....

that's not the way i understood it! it is to parallel the AA statement when an alcoholic no matter how many years he has been dry is still considering himself a 'recovering' alcoholic. the damage is lifelong and one has to continually struggle against the influence of the past which caused various hangups. it's an inside joke...sorry, i thought everyone knew. i must admit it was poor taste for me to have repeated it. sorry again.

I think one can put the past behind to a point it has no influence what so ever, it's a matter of how you look at it, your outlook. I've never let the pass influence me, nor will I ever, well certainly not the bad things, its easy you just ignore it til it goes away.
Thanks.

But the past does effect you dear Caroline, like it or not!

This is the reason that i said that St. Paul was wrong for evangelizing to the Romans. The Romans took Christ and proceded to make his teaching the central form of law and government in the roman world. This is a huge problem.

I just want to remind everyone that the Reformation takes place after a series of the "Secular Popes" who are noted historically for their immense abuse of power, lack of spiritual concern, the waging of war, and for gluttonous absurdity. In other words, they are not very good representations of the spiritual tradition of the Catholic faith, instead, they are great representations of just how corrupt any tradition can become.