OK Thank you. I see that perhaps the article should be THE. The eminent apostles because at 2 Corinthians 2:11 it is clear to me that he os speaking of the real apostles.
I stand corrected. I can do that. haha
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Do Some Believe that Christianity was "Founded" By St. Paul?
- Thread starter Coder
- Start date
I stand corrected. I can do that. haha
You don't believe the story of Paul being picked by Christ to be an Apostle?
Did I say that? I am sorry. I didn't say that. I said that I think in each instance of what they say "superfine apostles" (I think eminent is more fitting, but who am I?) he was referring to the real apostles of which Paul was one imho. If he isn't, the world should be in BIG, BIG trouble!
Now I get it. (I am slow). They had to write those because he is one. LOL
Though, I think those others is most correct. God is RIGHT writing just plain "the" I think.
Though, I think those others is most correct. God is RIGHT writing just plain "the" I think.
Coder
Active Member
New Testament Scholar, Robert Price (apparently in agreement with some other scholars) indicates that in looking only at the Epistles such as St. Paul's writing, that once cannot conclude that Jesus was a historical figure since Jesus can be thought of as having always lived in a heavenly realm. I find this fascinating including based on my thoughts about possible influences of Roman god beliefs (e.g. Ju-piter "sky father") on Christian externals.
Can others find in the Epistles discussion of Jesus' earthly life? Galatians 4:4 refers to Jesus as being born of a woman (hardly any mention of Mary unlike her prominence in Roman Catholicism). So I'm not sure how this scholar comes to the "heavenly realm" theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory#Robert_M._Price
Still, it is curious/interesting how little discussion of Jesus' earthly life is mentioned in the Epistles compared to the Gospels, especially if the Epistles generally preceded the Gospels!?
Can others find in the Epistles discussion of Jesus' earthly life? Galatians 4:4 refers to Jesus as being born of a woman (hardly any mention of Mary unlike her prominence in Roman Catholicism). So I'm not sure how this scholar comes to the "heavenly realm" theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory#Robert_M._Price
Still, it is curious/interesting how little discussion of Jesus' earthly life is mentioned in the Epistles compared to the Gospels, especially if the Epistles generally preceded the Gospels!?
There's more to a religion than just doctrine.
To use the analogy with McDonald's again: McDonald's today is a worldwide chain with thousands of locations because it followed the business model put in place by Ray Kroc.
BTW: Shakespeare did invent huge chunks of English: https://www.grammarly.com/blog/how-the-english-language-is-shakespeares-language/
BSM1
What? Me worry?
What? You think Jewish humor is something new?
Forever_Catholic
Active Member
Christianity began as the one universal Church established by Jesus Christ himself. He made Saint Peter the first visible head of it. "Thou art Peter (Petros, rock) and upon this rock I will build my Church" (Matthew 16:18). Jesus founded a world-wide Ecclesia, but he did not establish Christianity as a general faith subdivided into tens of thousands of disjointed denominations with varying theologies. Men established all the variants of Christ's one Church. "There shall be one flock and one shepherd," as he says in John 10:16, and that is the reality in heaven.
Christ chose twelve apostles initially, corresponding in number to the twelve tribes of Israel. He chose Saint Paul later to serve as the apostle to the gentiles. Saint Paul may have had such a great influence on certain Protestant believers that they think he formed Christianity in some way, but he is only a servant of the founder.
Christ chose twelve apostles initially, corresponding in number to the twelve tribes of Israel. He chose Saint Paul later to serve as the apostle to the gentiles. Saint Paul may have had such a great influence on certain Protestant believers that they think he formed Christianity in some way, but he is only a servant of the founder.
Coder
Active Member
Hi,
I suggest see my thread about the Trinity Doctrine and please feel free to discuss/debate there.
http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/the-oneness-of-god-non-trinitarian-view.191734/
I know where you are coming from - more than you can imagine. I propose that men of the Roman Empire established the Roman Catholic "variant". Research just how much the word "Roman" in Roman Catholicism means. I propose that much of Scripture including some of St. Paul's writings were under Roman influence: "slaves obey your masters", obey the government as they were ordained by God, pay taxes...
I suggest see my thread about the Trinity Doctrine and please feel free to discuss/debate there.
http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/the-oneness-of-god-non-trinitarian-view.191734/
Last edited:
Ben Avraham
Well-Known Member
Do some believe that Christianity was founded by Paul! Yes, I do. I found that out when I read Acts 11:26. There was a wave of expelling-Jews from Rome and many of them went to Antioch. Once in Antioch, the synagogue of the Nazarenes founded by Peter was thronging with Jews from Rome. As a result of that, James the head of the Nazarenes had to assign Barnabas to take care of the synagogue of Antioch. Since Barnabas and Paul were two bachelors very fond of each other, instead of having gone straight to Antioch, Barnabas went after Paul in Tarsus and brought him to work together in the synagogue of the Nazarenes in Antioch. Paul found that to be the chance he was always after and, at the end of a whole year, the disciples started being called Christians for the first time. Why? Because of the gospel of Paul about Jesus as the Messiah, son of God and that he had resurrected. (Acts 9:2; and
II Timothy 2:8) That's where and when Paul founded Christianity.
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
Robert Price is on the fringe of scholarship. There really are no other scholars who agree with him on his conclusion, besides Richard Carrier, and they even differ on the details, and differ quite a bit.
Looking at just the Epistles of Paul (and only the ones that are truly written by him), what we get about Jesus is little, but it is stated he was born of a woman, was crucified here on Earth, born of the law, had a brother named James, and his apostles, who directly knew him, still lived.
The Heavenly idea requires one to take Paul out of a Jewish context, to ignore portions that contradict the idea, and read the Epistles for that goal.
Paul doesn't talk about an early life of Jesus because it didn't really matter to him. And he may have in fact talked much more about Jesus, but we really don't know what he wrote, as we are left with only a small portion of that, and that is only a portion of what he would have taught.
To Paul, the key was the resurrection. The idea was of a general resurrection, where Jesus was just the beginning. For Paul, what mattered was the risen Jesus, the risen Christ, and thus that is what he talks more about.
However, even then, most of his writings dealt with other topics. They are reactionary. He's addressing issues that have cropped up in the congregations he connected to, or he's answering questions.
It isn't so much that Paul came first, more that the church we see today is based on his Pharisaic principles; not on the teachings we find within the gospels or by the early movements....
Personally find the Ebionites (Poor ones) having more in common with Yeshua's teachings, believing that by giving up wealth, and following the commandments, this was how we gained eternal life... It said James was at their head, and then we see James, the brother of Yeshua arguing with Paul about faith and works in the text...
James the just of the Ebionites, and head of church of Jerusalem,argued that Yeshua was not an atoning sacrifice and this defiled the law.
The Pharisaic oral tradition, "the death of the righteous can atone for the sins of that generation", has gone a long way to influencing both Pauline's, and Johannine's theology....
So Christianity seems to be the child of Paul and Simon the stone's (petros's) in Antioch according to Acts; with the gospel of John giving its power, by claiming to be by Yeshua, when it isn't anything like him within the synoptic gospels.
Augustus
…
That's probably a fair enough analogy.
He certainly didn't invent the religion, but he probably 'mass marketed' it by teaching that the law was written on the heart, rather than via the Jewish covenant.
I would imagine that Jesus was a lot more Jewish, and someone had to have universalised his teachings. Paul seems the primary candidate for this.
It is a fact that Paul wrote before the Gospels (and Acts) were written.
Much more interesting is how much Paul differs from the Gospels in quite important ways. Paul, for example, never mentions the virgin birth, nor any miracles, nor an empty tomb. In fact, Paul teaches ONLY a spiritual resurrection, never a physical one.
On the other hand, Paul brought up the idea that led to the doctrine of Original Sin (really first alluded to by Irenaeus and further developed by Augustine much later) in Romans 5:12-21 and 1 Cor. 15:22), which does not appear in anything Jesus is supposed to have said, nor in anything that the Gospelers wrote. So clearly this is an idea entirely of his own making, abetted by Irenaeus and Augustine. Never one of Jesus's or his apostles.
Much more interesting is how much Paul differs from the Gospels in quite important ways. Paul, for example, never mentions the virgin birth, nor any miracles, nor an empty tomb. In fact, Paul teaches ONLY a spiritual resurrection, never a physical one.
On the other hand, Paul brought up the idea that led to the doctrine of Original Sin (really first alluded to by Irenaeus and further developed by Augustine much later) in Romans 5:12-21 and 1 Cor. 15:22), which does not appear in anything Jesus is supposed to have said, nor in anything that the Gospelers wrote. So clearly this is an idea entirely of his own making, abetted by Irenaeus and Augustine. Never one of Jesus's or his apostles.
Coder
Active Member
Some say that about parts of the Bible
I would be interested to hear more from Dr. Price as to his "Heavenly Realm" theory - maybe I'll send him an email.Interesting, one of my theories is that the Roman Empire was very much "editor-in-chief" of some parts of the New Testament.
The far extension of that reasoning is that Jesus was a figure made up by either the Roman Empire to unify the empire under one religion (combination of Judaism and paganism) and/or some Jewish people wanted to promote Judaism by cleverly competing with Greek/Roman gods (who sometimes had god-human children) and Roman Emperors who were titled "son of god" (Divi Filius). St. Paul speaks of making Jews "jealous" of belief in Jesus but maybe some Jews were very disenchanted living in an empire where the emperor had the gall to call himself "son of god". I could see that this could motivate Jews to say "I'll show you who a real Son of God is". (The Bible shows to how the disciples often asked Jesus when He was going to deal with the Roman Empire.) I'm not saying that I myself believe that Jesus is a mythical figure but it does lead one to wonder about the essence and truth of Christianity and what we might learn if we can peel away some of the religio-political layers of that time. Scholars often agree with you that there may be much we don't know.
Last edited:
Coder
Active Member
Very interesting Ben, and the word "Christ" is in fact the Greek word for Messiah. If there was already a synagogue of Nazarenes who believed in Jesus, then didn't they already believe that Jesus was the Messiah? If not, what was the synagogue at Antioch (pre-St. Paul) about?
Ben Avraham
Well-Known Member
As Jesus left the conclave of his Apostles, these in the name of Jesus organized the Sect of the Nazarenes and anointed Peter to work among the Gentiles. (Acts 15:7) All the Gentiles converted to the Sect of the Nazarenes were converted to Judaism for all purposes according to Halacha. (Isaiah 56:1-8) The Sect of the Nazarenes was a homage paid to the memory of Jesus for being from Nazareth. "Christ" is the English form from the original "Christus" in Greek. The definition of the term "Christ" is the anointed one. The same as Mashiach aka Moshiach in the Hebrew. The meaning is the same, the anointed one of the Lord. The problem with definitions is not the point here but the definition of Moshiach. The Majority of Jews still expect an individual Moshiach but, the number of those who have adopted the collective concept of Moshiach is growing.
Indeed yes...read some of the Classical Roman oration and debate, or consider their plays. Not to mention the Greeks!
Of course, their humour isn't always immediately translatable to modern times.
Hmm...I think it's probably more a matter of fact, but trying to determine the actual impact through the distance of time is tough. In that sense, all history is interpretive to some degree.
Funny though, I hear this discussion as it pertains to Paul, but rarely similar discussions about Constantine. Even more rarely his mother!