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.
Here is an inconvenient truth that a few Biblical scholars know about but that the vast 99% of Christianity does not:
Paul is the man who "invented" the idea that Jesus Christ rose from the dead.
Astonishing? Not really when you follow the timeline.
Paul was the first writer of the New Testament to even mention the idea that Jesus resurrected from the dead. Any Christian not in the know will tell you Matthew first wrote about it and then subsequent gospel writers but that's what the church presbyters had in mind when they placed in order the books of the New Testament: They deliberately placed the gospels first and not even in order of composition--the actual order is Mark, Matthew, Luke and John---so that they could give readers the idea that Paul merely followed the tradition laid down by the gospels when the exact opposite is true:
Paul laid the foundations of Christian belief as the New Testament's first writer and the gospel writers followed Paul's lead.
In case you don't know, Paul is the first to come up with the doctrines of
1. substitution atonement, 2. propitiation, 3. the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 4. salvation by grace through faith 5. the resurrection of the dead at the Last Judgment
and the fertile breeding ground he drew from to assemble this encyclopedia of religious beliefs under the banner of Christianity was mystery religions and a syncretism of Jewish and Hellenized pagan beliefs that were around centuries before Christ came on the scene.
The BIG question is why? Why did Paul, a complex and very troubled man, go through this dramatic conversion from persecutor of Christians to its champion? Paul's dramatic testimony is based on Paul's own words in his epistles, later fleshed out in Acts supposedly by Luke, his companion, but more likely fleshed out by a consortium of Christian churchmen roughly 100 years later.
Paul, being an educated man and a Pharisee, was well versed in all the pagan religions that had infiltrated the Jewish faith since the Jews' return from Babylonian captivity. His idea of Jesus raising from the dead was not novel. The Book of Daniel was written 200 years before Christ and has this key verse in 12:2 that Paul would have been intimately familiar with:
Paul first outlined this idea of all men raising from the dead as a result of Jesus raising from the dead (Firstfruits doctrine ) when he wrote
Paul was the first to insist that if Jesus didn't rise from the dead then man was doomed without hope of salvation; that it was only through Jesus' resurrection that men could attain eternal life; that if Jesus hadn't risen bodily, then men would never raise bodily as well. This was all pure pagan belief that had been around in one form or another for nearly a thousand years before Paul and Jesus.
Remember: Jesus had nothing to do with this belief. Paul invented it far as Christians go and he borrowed the concept from the pagans. The gospel writers would pick it up decades later and incorporate the idea into their gospels. There is no evidence Jesus ever taught this.
Prior to Daniel, the Jews believed the dead, both good and bad, went to a dark gloomy place called Sheol to spend time there being cleansed before being released. Daniel "borrowed" the idea of good people going to heaven and sinners going to hell from the Greeks and Paul, in turn, borrowed it from Daniel, incorporating it into Christianity in the doctrine known as "the resurrection of the dead" for a variety of reasons too complex to go into here and some reasons we'll probably never know--again given that Paul was a very mentally unstable and troubled man given to delusions of grandeur, a martyr complex and enough phobias to excite an army of psychoanalysts. Much of Paul's "grand plan' is explained here. Enjoy:
I absolutely agree with you...Paul made up his "own" religion and called it Christianity. Jesus taught none of these things, in fact, he taught just the opposite. The Kingdom of God is found within you...that's what Jesus taught and it is attainable to anyone who seeks within themselves earnestly. There is no need for a church, priest or any intermediary. Jesus showed us the WAY but Paul made up an entirely different way which is now called Christianity.
Back to the Topic, I have pointed out before that Paul was a Jew who was trying to reconcile this new philosophy of the Christians with Traditional Jewish mythology.
Paul seems to have never heard of Jesus until well after Jesus died and the Jesus cult started. Odd that if Jesus was really so outspoken and popular at the time that this was the case, but it shows that Jesus was not well known in Rome. Even Roman guards who supposedly came to arrest Jesus did not know which one in the crowd he was.
Here in Jesus was this man who preached some newer and groundbreaking philosophy for the time and the location: Love thy neighbor, love thyself, forgive thine enemies, be loyal slaves to your master etc
He also engaged in activities that were forbidden, such as healing on the Sabbath which angered the Jewish rulers.
So along comes Paul and he has to try to reconcile Jesus teachings, which while Jesus was a Jew, His teachings were NOT along the lines of traditional Jewish thought......AND Paul has to further try to reconcile the myth of the Messiah into Jesus.
Which may well could have happened in Paul's Mind, while in the postictal state of a seizure. There are no limits to the level of visual and auditory hallucinations that can happen with focal seizures. And in Paul's time, there was no cure, there was not even an understanding of the disease.
So Paul had mythology, which when put together could have been twisted to make Jesus appear to be the Messiah, but the vast majority of Jews at the time did not accept it, nor, according to what I see, do they today.
Back to the Topic, I have pointed out before that Paul was a Jew who was trying to reconcile this new philosophy of the Christians with Traditional Jewish mythology.
Paul seems to have never heard of Jesus until well after Jesus died and the Jesus cult started. Odd that if Jesus was really so outspoken and popular at the time that this was the case, but it shows that Jesus was not well known in Rome. Even Roman guards who supposedly came to arrest Jesus did not know which one in the crowd he was.
Here in Jesus was this man who preached some newer and groundbreaking philosophy for the time and the location: Love thy neighbor, love thyself, forgive thine enemies, be loyal slaves to your master etc
He also engaged in activities that were forbidden, such as healing on the Sabbath which angered the Jewish rulers.
So along comes Paul and he has to try to reconcile Jesus teachings, which while Jesus was a Jew, His teachings were NOT along the lines of traditional Jewish thought......AND Paul has to further try to reconcile the myth of the Messiah into Jesus.
Which may well could have happened in Paul's Mind, while in the postictal state of a seizure. There are no limits to the level of visual and auditory hallucinations that can happen with focal seizures. And in Paul's time, there was no cure, there was not even an understanding of the disease.
So Paul had mythology, which when put together could have been twisted to make Jesus appear to be the Messiah, but the vast majority of Jews at the time did not accept it, nor, according to what I see, do they today.
Clearly because Jesus didn't fulfill any of the requirements of the Messiah in the Old Testament, which opens an even bigger can of worms for Christian apologists to have to explain:
If God wrote the Old Testament, and if God gave the requirements for the Messiah, chief of which were:
1. He must gather the Jewish people from exile and return them to Israel. (Isaiah 27:12-13, Isaiah 11:12)
2. He must rebuild the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. (Micah 4:1)
3. He must bring world peace. (Isaiah 2:4, Isaiah 11:6, Micah 4:3)
4. He must influence the entire world to acknowledge and serve one G-d. (Isaiah 11:9, Isaiah 40:5, Zephaniah 3:9)
And if God then sent Jesus, His Son to fulfill these requirements, and if Jesus FAILED to fulfill these requirements as history attests he did,
Then where are the Christians left, except up a blind alley? And what are they left with, except a "Messiah" sent by God who failed to fulfill the requirements God gave him. And what does that do to the credibility of both the Old and New Testament, except show that Jesus was NOT a Messiah sent by God, but just an ordinary man who thought he was the Messiah and fooled a lot of people into believing he was.
In Acts chapters 15 and 21, James and Paul came to a good understanding. In Galatians 2:9 James gave to Paul the right hand of fellowship.
If Paul was insane, you can best bet the apostles would have distanced themselves from him.
Gal 2:9 When they saw the grace which was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who had the name of being pillars, gave to me and Barnabas their right hands as friends so that we might go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcision;
Show me WHERE James or Peter confirm Paul's claim here....
Gal 2:9 When they saw the grace which was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who had the name of being pillars, gave to me and Barnabas their right hands as friends so that we might go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcision;
Show me WHERE James or Peter confirm Paul's claim here....
Again, consider the source. Paul must have had all sorts of imaginary friends , of whom only he could see and hear.
Gal 2:9 When they saw the grace which was given to me, James and Cephas and John, who had the name of being pillars, gave to me and Barnabas their right hands as friends so that we might go to the Gentiles, and they to the circumcision;
Show me WHERE James or Peter confirm Paul's claim here....
well, some people take " just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, 16as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. 17You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness, 18but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity" as an indication.
well, some people take " just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, 16as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. 17You therefore, beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard so that you are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from your own steadfastness, 18but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him be the glory, both now and to the day of eternity" as an indication.
Ok...Where is James in all that?...You'd think if Peter really did support Paul that there would be more than just that one verse so there would be no confusion...And for someone to have supported Paul, it was not to nice of him to make the sarcastic comment that he did about those men who we're actually taught by and walked with Jesus....
I absolutely agree with you...Paul made up his "own" religion and called it Christianity. Jesus taught none of these things, in fact, he taught just the opposite. The Kingdom of God is found within you...that's what Jesus taught and it is attainable to anyone who seeks within themselves earnestly. There is no need for a church, priest or any intermediary. Jesus showed us the WAY but Paul made up an entirely different way which is now called Christianity.
Jesus spoke to 7 different congregations in Revelation--congregations gather as a religion to worship and be taught--Jesus started his religion, even the Pharisees made a comment about it--Acts 24:5--they called it a sect of the Nazarene. Paul is in harmony with the teachings of Jesus.
Ok...Where is James in all that?...You'd think if Peter really did support Paul that there would be more than just that one verse so there would be no confusion...And for someone to have supported Paul, it was not to nice of him to make the sarcastic comment that he did about those men who we're actually taught by and walked with Jesus....
You asked for supporting info, I did a quick search and posted one thing and now you want more detail about something you said that just the one post demonstrates as false. Why am I not surprised?
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.
