Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I never meant to imply 100% of Paul's writing are pagan--some is brilliant and certainly faithful to Jesus; nor is everything he said worthless and of the devil.
But I do detect in the last few posts, as I somewhat predicted earlier, that even the fundamentalists are starting to ease into the idea that the Bible is not the 100% pure "droppings of the minds of God and Jesus". If even a fraction of eastern Mysticism has crept into the scriptures by any means, Paul or someone else, then it is not the pure Word of God anymore, is it, unless ancient writings from earlier philosophers were also inspired by God.
What I personally would like to see is Paul's writings gone over by a team of scholars who know the message gospel of Jesus and have them lined up and those things Paul wrote that conflicts (and there's plenty) cut out of his writings like the cancer it is and the rest, the things he said that are faithful to Jesus gospel of faith and good works and obedience to the tenants of the law, which form the foundation of our own legal system, by the way, preserved. Jesus' gospel must be paramount. Paul cannot come in claiming to have divine revelation from Jesus and write his own gospel. And according to some of the best scholars, ethical ministers, and Biblical philosophers, that's exactly what Paul did.
If only one person were saying that I'd have a weak accusation of Paul, But hundreds of brilliant scholars say the exact same thing. I've listed no less than ten on different posts. Are they ALL wrong about Paul?
You really have to read every single word in that quote to get the full weight and seriousness of what Holmes-Gore says:
Paul misrepresented Jesus' message; in doing so he betrayed his Master, Jesus; because the Church followed Paul instead of Jesus it has failed to redeem the world; the true apostles John, Peter and James tried in vain to preserve Jesus' original message and failed because the Pauline gospel, filled with the powers of darkness, proved too formidable to overcome.
That's a heavy millstone around the neck of Christians struggling to decide which gospel they should follow: Paul's or Jesus'. Sadly, Paul's gospel has buried Jesus'. Satan has succeeded in his mission.
I believe peter and the other apostles would have taken action if paul was preaching contrary to their beliefs and the doctrine of the gospel. also, they were in a better position to evaluate him than you and I are.
Honestly speaking, the evidence against Jesus actually having appeared to Paul is non-existent. And if someone supernatural did appear to Paul don't we have plenty of fundamentalists who have said repeatedly that satan often appears as an "angel of light" to deceive us?
Isn't it possible, even likely, given the lack of credible evidence in support of Jesus, it was actually satan that Paul met on the road to Damascus?
We have no record of testimony from anybody other than Paul himself, who, we've established, was an egoistic narcissistic braggart who really thought the world revolved around him alone. I'm afraid these voluminous revelations about the real character of Paul of late have become so commonplace they barely elicit a yawn anymore, even from the most hardcore fundamentalists who, normally, would spring into a rant of apologetics at the slightest slur against him. I think even they are resigning themselves to the truth of Paul's checkered nature.
So are you honestly suggesting Paul had access to buddhist writings?
I think I read parts of his epistle--the prophetic stuff regarding 6 days of creation equals 6000 years of man's time on earth. I used to believe that. When 6000 years came and went around 2000 AD I dropped it all as a lot of prophetic nonsense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wade345
I believe peter and the other apostles would have taken action if paul was preaching contrary to their beliefs and the doctrine of the gospel. also, they were in a better position to evaluate him than you and I are.
I disagree. Peter and James did not have a fraction of Paul's writings at their fingertips. Today we have everything Paul wrote and with benefit of lining it all up against the gospels, which Peter and James also didn't have at their fingertips, scholars today can see microscopically exactly how different Paul's gospel is from Jesus'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vizio
So are you honestly suggesting Paul had access to buddhist writings?
Of course I do. If the magi could come from the Far East to visit the Baby Jesus don't you think they could have carried Eastern mysticism writings with them?
a saying is everyday life. “I have a million things to do”. do we?, well it’s seem like we do, but we get the point. we have a lot of thing to do, not literally a million.
but the whole question of Saul/Paul Damascus road experience is his meeting God, to be a witness unto him. for he is a true witness chose by God almighty himself. God approved Paul. and was with Paul every step of the way. so Paul is a faithful witness. that the Point of his Damascus road experience, meeting almighty God to be a witness.
Of course I do. If the magi could come from the Far East to visit the Baby Jesus don't you think they could have carried Eastern mysticism writings with them?
What makes you think the magi were from the Far East? The song "We Three Kings of Orient Are..." doesn't necessarily reflect the accurate story. I mean...if you believe that, you also think there was a drummer boy present, right?
What makes you think the magi were from the Far East? The song "We Three Kings of Orient Are..." doesn't necessarily reflect the accurate story. I mean...if you believe that, you also think there was a drummer boy present, right?
Magi which were Magus in Babylon most likely came from Babylon or that area.
When Daniel was taken to Babylon the wise were called Magus there.
Magi which were Magus in Babylon most likely came from Babylon or that area.
When Daniel was taken to Babylon the wise were called Magus there.
I agree that is probably true--but we honestly don't know for sure--the text just doesn't say it. It's very possible that they knew of the Messianic prophecies because Daniel was there, and left the stories of them.
I never meant to imply 100% of Paul's writing are pagan--some is brilliant and certainly faithful to Jesus; nor is everything he said worthless and of the devil.
Quote:
But I do detect in the last few posts, as I somewhat predicted earlier, that even the fundamentalists are starting to ease into the idea that the Bible is not the 100% pure "droppings of the minds of God and Jesus".
Many behavioral science studies of religious fundamentalism are seriously hampered by conceptual confusion. The major source of much of this confusion is the lack of a coherent sociological definition and theoretical context for the term fundamentalism. We propose a Parsonian definition of Fundamentalism, which is interpreted in the context of a theory of evolutionary social change. The methodological implications of this approach are identified and then applied in a survey research study of the lay leaders of two historically related denominations, the Disciples of Christ and the Church of Christ. Our factor analysis of 25 questionnaire items suggests there are three types of Fundamentalism. Socio-economic variables explain some of the variation in the Fundamentalism scores, but denominational affiliation explains more. Our findings suggest that future research should use denomination-specific indices of Fundamentalism.
Interesting read for those who can read technical jargon, from the Sociological Quarterly article entitled, Varieties of “Fundamentalism”: a Conceptual and Empirical Analysis of Two Protestant Denominations Ethridge, F. M. and Feagin, J. R. (1979), Varieties of “Fundamentalism”: a Conceptual and Empirical Analysis of Two Protestant Denominations. The Sociological Quarterly, 20: 37–48. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-8525.1979.tb02183.x
Changes in Fundamentalism, no. More than one type of Fundamentalism, yes. Lumped together as one on CD Forum, ALWAYS!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
2nd pillar, paul's teachings
