| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 6:30:32 AM | Blueberry. With all due respect returned to you...:)
You can read in Acts of the two (or 3?) times that Paul was hauled back to Jerusalem to account for his changes to the teachings to the pillars of the 'church': James, Peter, John and others.
Romans baldly outlines how Paul rationalized his teachings and diversions away from even Yeshuva ben Joseph's teachings...away from the "Jewish Law"...Which I have always found extremely amusing considering Yeshuva ben Joseph was a Jew a nd lived as one.
Galations also outlines another disagreement on which Paul was recalled back to Jersualem to answer to the Pillars of the Church.
Paul's authority was also questioned by the leaders of the Jesus movement back in Jerusalem.
Please keep in mind, Most of the NT Letters were written by Paul or by Paul's disciples. Most of the letters were written by his 'team with Acts being the earliest. So, events are highly biased in his favour. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 12:24:31 PM | " Paul's authority was also questioned by the leaders of the Jesus movement back in Jerusalem. "
Peter also repeatedly tried to have Paul arrested and executed...Paul always slipped out of it by hauling out and playing the magic get out of jail free card, anytime,anwhere...the words..."I am a Citizen of Rome !!!"... If this was a group of agreeing and interconnected ministiries..then all of these events do not make any sense,...if Paul was in direct competition with the Church Founders and in fact seen by them as "hijacking" their movement ,...then Peter's efforts make more sense... | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 12:31:45 PM | Essaress:
Yes, that's exactly how it was. Christianity didn't start out as a nice uniform movement. After the sacking of Jerusalem by the Romans, many of the followers of the Jesus movement were dispersed and continued to develop and grow in their own ways.
James, as the brother of Yeshuva, had inheirited the torch and along with Peter and John was considered the 'authentic' group and remained based out of Jersualem. Paul did much to discredit the Jerusalem group and Christianity more or less was based on the Pauline tradition. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 3:01:21 PM | " Paul's authority was also questioned by the leaders of the Jesus movement back in Jerusalem. "
Peter also repeatedly tried to have Paul arrested and executed...
Esaress, there is little doubt that as, pointed out by Kytasue and yourself, that "Christianity didn't start out as a nice uniform movement". There were strong contentions in the Early Church between, among others, Paul and Peter. According to the Bible, most of them seem to have been satisfactorily resolved -- between those two individuals at least -- in the end.
I have never heard anything about Peter trying to have Paul arrested and executed. Where does this information come from?
In some ways at least, much of Christianity has adopted a stance more on the "Pauline" side of things, as Kytasue notes. On the other hand, the Catholic Church, still the largest and -- arguably at least -- the "founding" branch of Christianity, considers Peter to be the first Pope and all subsequent Popes, in theory (and I stress -- in theory!), are believed by Catholics to be in his "line of succession".
Interestingly, the tension between the "Pauline" and "Petrine" (or "Jamesian"?) outlooks is still in evidence. Protestants who stress "justification by faith" often accuse Catholics of thinking they can get to Heaven by "works".
This tension also plays a big role in what I called "the worst Christian heresy of all" in the post that began this thread. I contend that many have overstressed and misunderstood Paul's teachings on "justification by faith". Hence, many people who call themselves Christians continue to believe that they have been "saved" once and for all by a single prayer accepting Jesus as their saviour and that further action on their part and efforts to actually live by His teachings, while desirable, are not essential. More on that soon.
Thanks to all for some great contributions to the discussion here. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 3:29:20 PM | So, ArtandSoul, Essaress:
Why do you think Paul shifted the emphasis onto faith alone as being the ticket into heaven? What function did it serve for him to do so?
Kytasau | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 3:42:37 PM | Well, Paul sums it up pretty well in Romans...
Rom 9:30 What can we say, then? Gentiles, who were not pursuing righteousness, have attained righteousness, a righteousness that comes through faith. But Israel, who did pursue the righteousness that is based on the law, did not arrive at that law. Why not? Because they did not pursue it on the basis of faith, but as if it were based on works. They stumbled over the stone that causes people to stumble. As it is written, "Look! I am placing a stone in Zion that people will stumble over and a large rock that will make them fall, and the one who believes in him will never be ashamed."
Paul being a well versed Pharisee obviously knew his old testment..
Rom 4:2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God. For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
None of the above is stating we can do as we want and then be saved, we have to bear fruit in many ways, these are the "works" after salvation :-
John 15:4 "Abide in me, and I will abide in you. Just as the branch cannot produce fruit by itself unless it abides in the vine, neither can you unless you abide in me. I am the vine, you are the branches. The one who abides in me while I abide in him produces much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing. Unless a person abides in me, he is thrown away like a branch and dries up. People gather such branches and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.
To abide in the vine is to be aware of Christ's presence in our life this will produce fruit
>>>>> | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 4:31:43 PM |
Why do you think Paul shifted the emphasis onto faith alone as being the ticket into heaven? What function did it serve for him to do so?
Interesting question, Kyta. I think that people other than Paul have misunderstood and/or distorted his true beliefs, as Nevercanezzer points out. Paul himself had a much more balanced view of the relationship between faith and works -- one more corresponding to the view of James that "faith without works is dead". This is evident in many passages in the Pauline letters. I think that -- looking down, as he presumably is now, from one of the levels of Heaven that he spoke of -- Paul must be rather disconcerted at what people have done with his ideas. But, to the extent that he did "shift the emphasis" -- as Blueberry observed -- part of his purpose was certainly to move away from requiring the Gentile believers to observe the Jewish laws regarding circumcision, diet, etc. I believe that Paul certainly had much more integrity than to deliberately "lower the qualification requirements" for salvation or to present them as less demanding merely to gain a larger "membership". However, in the days of "easy Christianity" and "instant salvation", it does appear that others today are doing just that, unfortunately. I'd be interested to hear your views about it. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 5:50:54 PM | Oooh boy. My views on Paul shifting the emphasis? I'm afraid I wouldn't be as giving as you, artandsoul, in my perception of his intentions.
As I launch into my explaination, please understand that I am not coming from a faith based perspective so what you might consider sancophant, I would see it from a purely human perspective. That being said, here I go:
I believe Paul shifted the intention to actually encourage people to join his 'community' as it does state in his letters that many people had issue with some of the Judaic practices that Jesus himself lived by. I also believe that Paul did want to create a community that was totally distinct from the Jerusalem one and that this was due to a tendency or a desire for power/ego.
As his community grew and changed, Paul himself changed what was originally taught to soothe and keep his community happy. A further example of this is when members of his community were getting nervous cause Paul had promised that the kingdom of heaven would happen within their lifetimes. HOwever, members of the community were dying off and the other members were getting quite alarmed at the fact that maybe it wasn't going to happen at all. You can read at this point of Paul shifting the expectation of a Kingdom Of Heaven on Earth (physical) as a Spiritual Kingdom of Heaven that you gain entrance way to by faith.
(Galations? not sure...I have to look it up and I'm pressed for time right now - forgive).
Kytasau | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 6:37:11 PM | Kyta, as you are admittedly not speaking from a faith based perspective, it's not surprising that you find it hard to believe in Paul's integrity to the extent that I do. Perhaps it is hard for those who are not -- and/or have never been -- motivated by religious faith to understand the depth of commitment and integrity that it can produce. As Blueberry has pointed out, Paul suffered greatly for his efforts to spread the Christian faith.
Certainly, a man as intelligent, resourceful and energetic as Paul obviously was could have had a much easier life with plenty of benefits for his egotistical side had he remained a leading Pharisee. If the religion that is now called Christianity and that Paul sacrificed his life to spread was called "Paulism" and we worshipped Paul rather than Jesus, I would be more inclined to agree with your assessment of his egotism. Undoubtedly, as he himself frankly admits, he had his human weaknesses and perhaps egotism was one of them. Many remarkable, high achieving persons have their moments of egotism. Perhaps if they did not have some ego, pride or ambition they would not have done the great things that they did. At that same time, these persons often conduct themselves with the greatest integrity. I believe that Paul was such a person. I'll have more to say on this later and will respond to other interesting questions raised in your post. If you get a chance, pick up "Great Lion of God" by Taylor Caldwell. It's a great novel that deals with this remarkable man and explores many philosophical ideas as that great writer's books often do.
Happy New Year to you and all the other thoughtful posters who have contributed to this forum! | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 6:50:57 PM | I also have come over the years to think of Paul as something other than a "Saint" ...I think there was a great deal of hubris involved in both his teachings and his choices of places to "minister" unto...
Artandsoul, sorry ...I honestly do not remember where I read that account,..it went like this....Paul was "summoned" (read ordered most strongly) to Jerusalem to "explain "(read stop) his bringing the Gentiles into the mix...Recall this was a "Jews only" club up unto that point...It was their Messiah..no one else's... Paul came the long way apparently stopping in each little berg and asking (read demanding) tithes for the first church in Jerusalem...He showed up with baskets of fat cash to "give" to Peter (read bribe) and announce to all how wonderfully the "faith" was catching on...
He went into the Temple looking for the church elders who were inside observing a Hebrew ritual ( I mean these guys were Hebrews..it Was their Temple) and finally found them whereupon Peter called for the Temple Gaurds to arrest him as a Gentile (which he was) defiling the interior of Yaweh's House...This was a death sentence...Paul was quick to proclaim himself a Citizen of Rome and Gaurds backed off....
He left the Temple, (and the cash) and escaped but If I remember (and I might have it garbled) Peter was so incensed over this breach that he tried several more times to have Paul arrested...
Now If this was the case...it goes a long way into explaining the rift then and now in Christianity..
I think Peter saw what Paul was all about and was enraged that the thing he and the others had gone thru and travailed over, and had their Master killed over was being "stolen " by an interloper who was up to that point a killer of Jews( by his own admission)...
I think Paul was successful in his travels because he often used the trump of being a Roman to get into and out of Roman controlled areas...I have little doubt nowdays that whatever his original motivation for doing so, once the "Church" had become his creature ..defacto making him the Pope...he did begin to change and adopt his own teachings (like an out of touch politician believing his own press) and became a big enough pain in the ass that the Romans finally killed him...But mind you even then it was at the impetus, and urging of the Hebrews...
This is of course heresy... every bit of it..but I have had a long time to think it over...and BTW "heresy" just means dissent, or different opinion.. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 7:29:29 PM | | Esaress, with all due respect, your rather unsavory slant -- some might call it a "slander" even -- on the characters of both Paul and Peter seems to be heavily, if not entirely, based on an account for which you can cite no reliable source. To this you add a number of personal interpretations, ie, you suggest we should "read" this or that into actions allegedly taken by Paul and Peter. These are similarly very open to question. I certainly don't call you a "heretic" but if you're going to freshly crucify the characters of both these historically remarkable people in this fashion in a public forum, don't you think you ought to come up with more solid evidence and a better argument than that? | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 7:45:08 PM | I have to agree with Art, essares thats a pretty weird interpretation.. The letter we attribute to be being written by Peter seems to say that Paul had his doctrine correct..
II Peter 3:15 Think of our Lord's patience as salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him. He speaks about this subject in all his letters. Some things in them are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort to their own destruction, as they do the rest of the Scriptures. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 12/31/2005 10:12:31 PM | Oh, My....
It's late so I'm going to make this quick and will continue on tomorrow, but just wanted to say...
Art...I was a born again Christian from the time I was sixteen to the time I was twenty five when I could no longer uphold the beliefs as they contradicted everything that I had researched and studied (I also attended a Christian university) and....
I totally am in agreement with Essaress....and will happily propound that tomorrow....
Good night to you all and best wishes for the new year...
Kytasau | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/1/2006 5:27:18 AM | "don't you think you ought to come up with more solid evidence and a better argument than that?"
artand soul...I dont think I was slandering anyone...especially not Peter, he was a product of his times and ethnic background,...and acting wholly within his rights as a grown Man and elder in the Hebrew community....If anyone is upset, apologies...I am not here change anyone's mind,... just share what I know. I will attempt to find the text but it has been a long time..it may take a while...However I was not aware that I would be required to bring proof..I mean this is the religion forum...proof is a kinda rare and open to individual speculation and interpretation... But I will look for it.. okay??? | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/1/2006 5:58:54 AM | Here is some of the material that I used to come to my "weird" interprertation... As I stated ..I might
have gotten bits garbled.. but this might help you..
http://www.religioustolerance.org/intol_bibl2.htm
http://www.broadcaster.org.uk/section2/transcript/paulimprisonment2.htm
http://www.geocities.com/paulntobin/pauljerufinal.html
Again ,...I am not looking to do anything here but share... | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/1/2006 1:16:10 PM | Esaress ... In general, the internet isn't the most reliable place to get accurate information about anything given that any fool can publish a webpage and many do. Still, I looked at the links you gave and can't find anything that lends any credence to your statement that Peter tried to have Paul executed.
I appreciate your apology but I'm not sure why you feel that just because this is a religious forum we are thereby exempted from having to properly back up statements that we make here. The statements you made are very strong accusations that portray Paul as extremely corrupt and cynical and Peter as his would-be potential murderer. While Peter may have been an elder among Christians, he certainly had little credibility or authority in the Hebrew community in general given that the Christians at that time were little but a persecuted sect whose leader had been executed. All Christians faced possible stoning and reprisals for departing from Jewish laws and doctrines from the established Hebrew authorities. I don't know how in the world you can assume that Peter had any "right" to seek Paul's execution. To what authority would he have appealed to get such a thing done? Certainly not the Romans and certainly not the Jewish leaders as each of these groups would have been just as likely to execute Peter himself had he attempted such a thing.
The only "history" that we have regarding Peter and his actions at that time comes from the Bible and there is certainly no evidence other such as may be gleaned from pure speculation to support your accusations there. I suppose you have a right to say what you will. Given the fact though that many foolish people do believe what they read here, it seems a little irresponsible to contribute to their ignorance by making such strong and potentially outrageous statements without any reliable evidence.
At the very least, you should have said "some speculate that Peter tried to have Paul executed" instead of stating it as though it was a fact as you did. That is how rumours get started. Bad news always travels faster than good news and misinformation spreads like wildfire. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/1/2006 3:33:31 PM | "In general, the internet isn't the most reliable place to get accurate information about anything given that any fool can publish a webpage and many do."
This very forum is on the internet...as is very nearly Everything else ever written...and if it isnt yet..it will be soon... The internet is a Very Reliable source of information...both accurate and otherwise...
But no matter...dismissiveness and magical thinking are hallmarks of religion that has gotten away for too long without haveing to nor needing to provide any explanation or proof other than that which the powers that be deem acceptable...
I refer you to you first paragraph and your ending question asking for "our" thoughts...this is what I was trying to provide... If it does not meet your standards or pass your quality control ,...again I am sorry, but you misunderstand the apology if you are taking it mean that I have erred in some fashion and wish to make ammends...This simply is not so...I am sorry that you are apparently not open to hearing new (and this is not new) information...
As to your assertion that just because this is a religious forum no one is exempted from providing "proof" of what they post....really??? I have no response to a statement like that...it is too confounding for me to come up with a response...
And artand soul...I am not making accusations here...you must have misunderstood what I wrote.. I was and have been only making an attempt to share...
If this is not what you meant when you asked for "your thoughts"...I do not wish to embark on an endless series of attacks and will certainly desist from posting on your thread if you ask me to...
But to call my sharing irresponsible and make the allusions you have strikes me as well...not openminded.. I can respect that, but not understand it.... Say the word. .. Im gone. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/1/2006 11:23:27 PM | Esaress, I understand that you are stung by my statement that your post was irresponsible. It was not really my intention to offend you and I regret that you have taken offence. I never suggested that you should leave this forum nor that you do not have any good contributions to make. In fact, I acknowledged and agreed with at least one good point that you raised. Nevertheless, my point remains and I feel strongly enough about it that I cannot say otherwise.
Peter also repeatedly tried to have Paul arrested and executed...
This is the original statement that you made and which I suggested that you should back up with facts from reliable sources. Your "sources" were some amateurish websites that hardly inspire confidence. That is what prompted me to observe that the internet is not the most reliable place to get information.
Your response, noting that "this very forum is on the internet" just proves my point. Do you really think that a large percentage of the people posting here are experts or truly knowledgeable about the subjects they express opinions on? Do you think that everyone here is above posting false information for whatever reason? Think about it. Aren't you just about as likely to get generally reliable and accurate information from the local barroom philosopher?
Despite your assertions to the contrary, though I thought your statement preposterous, I was "openminded" enough to at least consider the possibility that it could be true and therefore asked for your sources. They were rather unimpressive. Why would I or anyone want to "open our minds" to what really amount to little more than unsubstantiated rumours?
Your remark was not prefaced by anything such as "I think that.." or "I believe that...". It came across like a statement of fact. That remark and the further statements you made constitute a slander on the character of historical figures that are revered by many. Do you really expect that they should go unchallenged? Suppose that someone posted a statement that Mother Theresa was not the saintly person that most of us believe her to be but, rather, a conniving woman who cared for the sick and the dying only for the sake of her own ego and bribed reporters to write favorable stories about her. Would you be surprised if many did not take offence and challenged you to back up this statement with facts from reliable sources? The accusations you made concerning Peter and Paul are hardly less slanderous. In the case of Mother Theresa, it is not likely that many would believe you because for one thing her memory is fresh in all of our minds. Paul and Peter are not so lucky. It is highly likely therefore that a number of people may take your statement as fact and go about merrily spreading more such misinformation in the world. If your statements are true, fine, we all want the truth -- but my point stands that if you make statements that you must know are bound to be offensive, you should be prepared to properly back them up. You still have not done that.
I do regret that you have taken offence and have no wish to see you depart from this forum. Nor would it be my place to ask you to leave even if I did want you to. Nevertheless, the point remains that you should be more responsible -- especially when you make statements insulting persons living or dead who are revered and respected by many. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/2/2006 6:11:14 PM | Actually Artandsoul...you bring up a very good point about verification statements...
I've always wondered how people could take on faith that Paul seen Jesus in a vision....he was one of the few (if only) who hadn't ever met Jesus in person and who said he had a vision of him...Which he then accorded himself as having authority to speak in his name...
Kytasau | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/2/2006 9:16:46 PM | Nooo....Artandsoul ....not offended at all,...saddened...deeply and profoundly saddened...you are not listening to me nor I think even to yourself... You are defending a person dead two millenia (or so) as tho you personally had a stake in "How" that person was now being precieved,...you are insisting that I provide "proof" (which I already explained I was looking for) to something I was told...(which I did state) and besides,...you are not providing any "proof" of your own other than the bible.. so not only are we at a standstill here we are not even on the same page...you asked about "our thoughts" on a subject...I provided those and along with those provided extra that as I explained was told me ...(not my research,not my words, Not Mine)...and that is the point where you began to take exception all that I said...fine and so be it...I am not offended, you have misunderstood the meaning of my sentence stating that I "respected your opinion of what I posted , but did not understand it",...you are misunderstanding pretty much everythinhg Ive posted here and to make it worse, ascribing it to me...that will be as it may, I have no further wish to tread on this lopsided biased thread...If you did not actually wish to entertain another's thoughts but were looking to rumble ...perhaps it would suit you better in the future to say that up front...
I was only sharing information, and will continue to do so ...but not here...on this thread...
It seems curious to the extreme that the people who claim to be "searching" are the most close minded and unaccepting of new ideas...sad really...such a big universe....soo much information..soo many different ideas and thoughts about...all of it.. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/3/2006 6:09:13 AM | | Esaress, I was hardly "looking to rumble". We were having a rather cordial conversation until you decided -- for reasons that one can only guess at -- to throw in what I consider to be an unsubstantiated slander on the character of two historical personages that are revered by many, myself among them. The worst part -- and the part that I really took issue with -- is that you originally presented this "information" not as opinion but as fact. That these people have been dead for centuries is irrelevant. Why sully the memory of the dead with wild conjecture? If you intend to slander anyone living or dead you should be prepared to back it up. As far as your accusations about my having a "closed mind" are concerned, they are obviously without foundation and have already been dealt with. I really don't care to "open my mind" to baseless rumours. Since the characters of Peter and Paul are only marginally relevant to the topic of this thread, let's just drop it and get back to the subject of the thread. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/3/2006 6:33:05 AM | I've always wondered how people could take on faith that Paul seen Jesus in a vision....he was one of the few (if only) who hadn't ever met Jesus in person and who said he had a vision of him...Which he then accorded himself as having authority to speak in his name...
Kytasau, the abrupt transformation of Paul from Saul the Pharisee who violently persecuted Christians to Paul who turned his back on his own former social status to become an apostle of Christianity was probably pretty compelling evidence in itself. In addition, Paul was blinded for three days and was cared for by a leading member of the Christian community in whose home he stayed and who no doubt reported the change in Paul to others. Did Paul put on an Oscar winning performance? If so, for what? What did he gain but a life of hardship and persecution? It wasn't exactly fashionable or particularly safe to be a Christian in those days. He didn't have the opportunity to go on television and act like some hotshot televangelist. What was really "in it" for Paul to perpetrate this kind of fraud? Esaress mentioned something about him becoming the "de facto Pope". Even if this were true -- which it isn't -- why would anyone in those days want the job unless they were truly dedicated to the Church and to their mission as a servant of God? There were no perks involved in being a Pope until Constantine declared Christianity the official religion of Rome centuries later and finally ended their persecution -- unless one considers the constant threat of imprisonment, torture and sudden violent death to be a perk. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/3/2006 9:38:08 AM | ArtandSoul
A lot of people profess to speak for God...and suffer for it. But it doesn't mean that they are any more valid than the next one. Cult leaders, fringe leaders, whacked out, waaaaaaaaay out there leaders (ever heard of David Eiche?), have all had visions, have suffered in some way for speaking out, have their followers and detractors. Just like Paul. Just like the other Messiah's who were also present in Yeshuva ben Joseph's time. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/3/2006 11:03:57 AM | | Nope, never heard of David Eiche (I doubt that millions have) but millions have heard of Paul. Controversy still rages about Paul and his philosophy, whereas controversy does not rage about the philosophy of the cult leaders, fringe leaders and the average whacko. Their philosophy is dismissed for what millions recognize it to be ... rubbish. People recognize the validity in the philosophy of Paul .... he was no dummy. | |
|
| The worst Christian heresy of all
Posted: 1/3/2006 11:14:45 AM | River loon:
You speak from a perspective in which you can look back 2000 years at a view that has had time to soidify and become mainstream.
If you were to zoom back 2000 years, you would find Paul to be in the middle of a controversy no less than what cult/fringe leaders today face with.
Movements rise and change over time. | |
|
Home
login 
