St. Paul

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

xris
 
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 02:26 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
He converted it from a message of love and hope, a popular faith of the forgotten into a dogmatic power driven force that was the complete opposite to the concept Jesus intended. He moved it from its spiritual home, Jerusalem, against Peters wishes and placed it where the Roman elite could use it to abuse and control the masses. Funny how The Vatican is directly over the mythical gods mithras catacombs, the Romans god of choice. He gave the pope the authority of god, that has condemned many to death by their bigoted opinions
 
vajrasattva
 
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 02:30 pm
@vajrasattva,
I dont think the fact that it has been used to control the masses is due entirely to St. Paul. Considering the fact the he was propogating christianity in a time when christianity was small. But his teachings I feel may have been at least a little less than inspired, and may have, through their cannonization given the curch their ability to abuse the curches power.
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 02:42 pm
@xris,
Again, a great many assertions and absolutely no source.

How does Paul turn Jesus' message into one that is the complete opposite of Jesus' message?

And how does Paul move the spiritual home of Christianity to Rome when he only goes to Rome to appeal his arrest, and while in Rome is kept on house arrest until his beheading?

Paul does not put Christianity in the hands of "Roman elite" - that was Constantine, the emperor, well over a century later. Paul was beheaded under the reign of Nero, when Christians were still being persecuted by the Roman state.

Funny how Paul had absolutely nothing to do with establishing the Vatican. The first Church was built there in the 300's; Paul died in the 60's. Paul was never Pope, and never gave any authority to the Bishop of Rome - the Bishop of Rome was no more authoritative than any other Bishop until long after Paul's death, really, not until Leo convinced the Huns to turn away from Italy.
 
vajrasattva
 
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 03:02 pm
@vajrasattva,
I think that the most common of problems with people who stand "against" christianity is the fact that we misunderstand the teachings of the bible and misapprehend the nature of christianity itself. I myself am gutily of this. I have been attending curch since I started this thread and have found the teachings of st. paul to be much different then I thought they were.

Now granted the reason that i started this thread was in light of the fact that it seems that st pauls gospels are more often studied that the gospels of christ. And considering that the only thing that i have heard preached at curch is st pauls gospels, this concern of mine still holds true.

But the teachings of st paul as a whole seem, especialy in the light the era and areas in which they were taught, to be reasonable, senseable and accessable. My concern is that the teachings of paul seem to superceide the teachings of christ wholesale. And personaly i have found the teachngs of christ, with or without a doctorate in theology, to be enlightening and effective unlike the teachngs of st paul. I need a preaher with a doctorate in theeology to help me comprehend the teachings of paul. This to me dictates the fact that christ is the man worth studying, not paul (i think paul would agree). And on top of this i have my doubts as to wether or not paul was in posession of christ consciousness in the first place. If he did not have that he was not st paul at all he was Rev. paul.

The issue here is not of wether or not st paul was evil (though he may have been, hes dead, we wouldnt know), it is one of wether or not christianity is christianity or paulianity. This to me is an issue. And frankly i feel the divergencce from the teachings of christ is the cause of the (often violently) anti christian movement and attitude amongst some of the public.
 
Labyrinth
 
Reply Wed 28 Oct, 2009 11:27 pm
@vajrasattva,
What message of Christ are we talking about here? I thought Paul was considered the closest source to Jesus as the gospel material was later. Its difficult to call Paul a softie in any way. When he saw something he felt was destructive to the unity of the faith, he made sure to aggressively address it (see Galatians 2 and both books of Corinthians).
 
xris
 
Reply Thu 29 Oct, 2009 03:58 am
@Labyrinth,
He made the pope the divine presence on earth so his dogmatic attitude can not be questioned. His authority has caused no end of suffering ,something i don't believe the man Jesus would have allowed to be executed in his name.
 
Fido
 
Reply Thu 29 Oct, 2009 06:15 am
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas;100361 wrote:
Are we just having fun berating Paul, or do we want to sight reasons for these negative opinions of the man, like excerpts from his work and our interpretations thereof.

I'm noticing a great many historical inaccuracies, for example. Paul was not trying to make the Christian sect more palatable to Romans. He was bringing the message to Gentiles. This is happening after the Romans have destroyed the Jewish Temple, which was an important site for Christians up until it's destruction.

There is also a great deal of talk about how people today read Paul - but so what? How on Earth can modern misinterpretations be the fault of Paul? Modern misinterpretations are not uncommon for the rest of the New Testament, so if that is our criticism we might as well bemoan Matthew's efforts, Luke's efforts, ect. But this does not seem reasonable.

First of all, he was a Roman for none but a Roman could appeal to Caesar... And he was a Greek decendent of Greeks as his rhetoric on love as the greatest virtue, and his reference to fights and races indicate.
Clearly, the party of the circumcision was the Christian Jews, and they were holding to a formal relationship with God, as Paul was not... Without the support of Rome and Romans the religion would not have gone anywhere... And it is tough to say this is universally true, since some of the sects of Jesus' day survived into quite modern times in Iraq in spite of Islam...To survive, Christianity had be cut off from the Jews, but it had to be made formal as well, which wrecked the relationship with God that Jesus encouraged...Martin luther, in the end made the Protestant Christians like the Jews, accepting a formal relationship, and believing in tangible justification... God blesses those he justifies with a good life, wealth, and success... Is this really what Jesus was saying???

---------- Post added 10-29-2009 at 08:23 AM ----------

xris;100441 wrote:
He made the pope the divine presence on earth so his dogmatic attitude can not be questioned. His authority has caused no end of suffering ,something i don't believe the man Jesus would have allowed to be executed in his name.

Not only that; but he did not challenge earthly authority at all, even while saying that all were equal in the sight of God... He did not attack the institution of slavery even when we all know that the mind goes with the body, and that only out of freedom can one choose one God over another...Slavery was central to the world economy of Rome, and if Paul had challenged that economy he would have died the death Jesus did, as a revolutionary on the Cross; and who can say he did not, in the conflict or as a result of the conflict between Jews and Christians in Rome...
 
Didymos Thomas
 
Reply Thu 29 Oct, 2009 01:28 pm
@Fido,
xris;100441 wrote:
He made the pope the divine presence on earth so his dogmatic attitude can not be questioned. His authority has caused no end of suffering ,something i don't believe the man Jesus would have allowed to be executed in his name.


Again, it would be nice if you gave some evidence rather than just accusation. The Pope was not the divine presence on earth in the time of Paul and did not become the highest authority in the Church until Leo turned back the Huns.

What Jesus would have allowed in this case is beside the point - suffering has been caused in the name of Jesus, as well. Again, misinterpretation of teaching is no slight against the teaching itself.

Fido;100450 wrote:
First of all, he was a Roman for none but a Roman could appeal to Caesar.


Yes, he was a Roman citizen - who was beheaded by the Roman state.


Fido;100450 wrote:
Is this really what Jesus was saying???


Would you like to show us where Paul says that God "blesses people... with wealth"?

[/COLOR]
Fido;100450 wrote:
Not only that; but he did not challenge earthly authority at all, even while saying that all were equal in the sight of God.


And so he was executed for what, then?

Fido;100450 wrote:
if Paul had challenged that economy he would have died the death Jesus did, as a revolutionary on the Cross; and who can say he did not, in the conflict or as a result of the conflict between Jews and Christians in Rome...


Paul was beheaded instead of being crucified, probably because he was a Roman citizen who were typically given easier executions than non-citizens.

I'm not a big fan of Paul, but if we're going to criticize him, let's at least have some good reason. Baseless accusations are not good reason, and impossible historic speculation is worthless as well.
 
Fido
 
Reply Thu 29 Oct, 2009 07:49 pm
@Didymos Thomas,
Didymos Thomas;100545 wrote:
Again, it would be nice if you gave some evidence rather than just accusation. The Pope was not the divine presence on earth in the time of Paul and did not become the highest authority in the Church until Leo turned back the Huns.

What Jesus would have allowed in this case is beside the point - suffering has been caused in the name of Jesus, as well. Again, misinterpretation of teaching is no slight against the teaching itself.



Quote:

Yes, he was a Roman citizen - who was beheaded by the Roman state.


Where is your evidence for this??? I have read quite a bit about Paul and never read anything definitive about his end... Some people believe that he may have died after Christian and Jewish rioting, perhaps after the fire of Rome under Nero...


[QUOTE]Would you like to show us where Paul says that God "blesses people... with wealth"?
Tangible justification which is what I call it for lack of a better term is not what Paul seemed to be saying, though it was common to the Jews; Note the blowing of horns to celebrate an offering at the temple... Jesus was saying just about everyone was blessed, but how can that be??? The only thing people have in common is their life...Luther was saying we are not justified by works, as James, and the Muslims say; but by faith... And how shall one know they are blessed???The Methodists certainly looked at wealth as evidence of God's blessing... So, no; I am not saying that Paul said we wealth is a sign of justification...[/COLOR]

[/COLOR]

Quote:
And so he was executed for what, then?
I think; for the very thing he was arrested for in Judea; for rioting with the Jews...



Quote:

Paul was beheaded instead of being crucified, probably because he was a Roman citizen who were typically given easier executions than non-citizens.

I'm not a big fan of Paul, but if we're going to criticize him, let's at least have some good reason. Baseless accusations are not good reason, and impossible historic speculation is worthless as well.[/
[/QUOTE]QUOTE]

There seems to be a lot of information that can be gleaned from the record, acts, and other bits of info... Paul is an interesting character, one of our earlies examples of a true individual, all things to all men... But he has a dark side, and I would draw him as stepping iinto the dark and out of it on many occasions...
 
xris
 
Reply Fri 30 Oct, 2009 05:04 am
@Fido,
Paul undermined the authority of Peter , who never gave his account of any conflict. He placed himself above all others and claimed divine contact. He gave an example of how to give authority to his views by claiming it is gods demands not his. He reduced womens authority in the church and describes a RC church that we can see even to this day. He changed christianity from the historical story of jesus into a mythical pagan worship.
 
Fido
 
Reply Fri 30 Oct, 2009 06:25 am
@xris,
xris;100609 wrote:
Paul undermined the authority of Peter , who never gave his account of any conflict. He placed himself above all others and claimed divine contact. He gave an example of how to give authority to his views by claiming it is gods demands not his. He reduced womens authority in the church and describes a RC church that we can see even to this day. He changed christianity from the historical story of jesus into a mythical pagan worship.


He changed Jesus from prophet to God...He undermined the mission of Jesus, and the Authority of James who was said to be the brother of Jeus, he antagonized the Jews by bringing people who were uncircumcised into the temple district, and like a televangelist of today, he cleaned out the fortunes of little old ladies... In spite of his telling women to keep quiet in church, which may have meant no more than it says, to behave with dignity and respect, he seems to have held an attraction for women... I do not think he was all bad...I surely do not believe he, or all he did was good... He, as much as Jesus, is responsible for Christianity...He took Jesus out of an obscure sect, and made him ours... Yet, Muslims are more Christian than us, more devout and true to their faith...If we follow the words of Jesus in his parables we get a picture of him, and of God, that is unique, and not ubiquitus... Do you want God??? Here is your God: Do not expect fairness, or justice... Give fairness and justice, but above all, mercy... Share and care for others as the hand of God... Do not celebrate wealth, because that is your reward, but share your reward to deserve a better reward beyond the Grave... Sin not in your mind, and your body will be pure... God is your God, individual, and has already given you the greatest gift in life... Do not waste life, or stand by while people are injured... See God as your father, and all people as your brothers and sisters...Heaven is love...
 
vajrasattva
 
Reply Sun 1 Nov, 2009 02:27 pm
@vajrasattva,
As I understand it St. Pauls mission on earth was to prepare the newly founded curch for the second coming of Christ. St. paul felt that the second coming was eminent and wold happen in his lifetime. So he felt that the most IMPRESSIVE thing that he could do to show jesus when he returned was to make jesuses chrch as he felt jesus would see fit. The pastor at the curch ive been attending told us this in his sermon.

I feel that if jesus had come back when paul was alive it would have been impressive. But considering that jesus hasn't come back I feel that the original plan as outlined for the curch by paul was inadiquit considering the vast amount of time that has passed and changes that have occured. I feel this because the nature of society has changed so drasticaly since his life on earth. At the time of paul the curch was a small and persecuted institution. Now christianity is the largest and most popular of all of the religious instiitutions [(largely because it is the easiest path to "heaven") Ironic considering the teaching of christ "the path to heaven is streight and narrow the path to hell is wide and easy". Simple faith in christ is enough to bring you to higest heaven]. And now the chistians do more of the persecuting than the other faiths. In the days of paul the christians were persecuted. Now the christians persecute the people of other religions by means of their one way mentality (e.g. if your not a christian you go to hell "forever"). I feel that this attiude embraced by the people of the modern curch is not only contrary to the teachings of christ, but even by their own doctrine, heretical. None the less it is the overwhelming fact of the faith of the modern christian.

I feel that a new new testament is in order if true christianity is to survive. If the teachings of the curch are not reformed (especialy the catholic curch) then i think that christianity is doomed to fall to the guise of pop culture as opposed to an inspired and effective faith.

But considering the fact that the modern christian can only reach sainthood by means of perfect following of the counterintuitive, counterindicative, and "perfect" doctrine of the holy mother curch. And the fact that one who is a saint by those standards will only be cannonized hundreds of years after their death. The odds of an inspired curch reformation is unlikely. Not to mention the fact that the saints of old worked tirelessly to reform the doctrine of the curch and now the doctirne is so imbeded that any attempt at changing it by a person would lead to hereticism and ultimately bear not fruit.
 
 

 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.02 seconds on 06/16/2019 at 07:54:17