How Paul changed the course of Christianity

[Muffled]

Not all Christianity.

I believe that is true. There are a lot of false concepts in Christianity and Mormonism just added its own.

 

[Muffled]

But how can we be sure that those epistles were real letters written by a first century Paul if we have no earlier record of them than texts dating from the second century?

I believe we can rely on tradition for that. No doubt Paul's epistles have been accepted from an early time.

 

[joelr]

Partially agree. There are some events in gospels that are probably (based on) real history e.g. baptism of Jesus by John. These wouldn't be included in a complete myth.

Some things in fiction is based on actual events. The current debate is historicity vs mythicism.
Historicity was assumed until the most recent Jesus study which looked at the evidence and decided it's more like 3 to 1 in favor of full myth.

 

[joelr]

I believe we can rely on tradition for that. No doubt Paul's epistles have been accepted from an early time.

7 of them are considered authentic. The rest are all considered forgeries and later add-ons by all of scholarship.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Some things in fiction is based on actual events. The current debate is historicity vs mythicism.
Historicity was assumed until the most recent Jesus study which looked at the evidence and decided it's more like 3 to 1 in favor of full myth.

So Jesus is still a historical person.

 

[PAUL MARKHAM]

We know nothing of Jesus that isn't second, third or fourth hand, then edited by Emperors, Synods and the likes.

There is no physical or archaeological evidence for Jesus; all existing sources are documentary. The sources for the historical Jesus are mainly Christian writings, such as the gospels and the purported letters of the apostles. All extant sources that mention Jesus were written after his death.

A man called Jesus probably lived approximately at the beginning of the 1st Century. The problem is no one wrote down what he said, did, travelled during his lifetime and it was left to others to come up with their stories.

Then the First Council of Nicaea called together by Constantine. A political move to replace the old Roman gods with a new one. They ignored, left out and went on to destroy other gospels that didn't fit their idea of a new religion. https://www.bbc.co.uk/teach/what-do...several early,included in the Christian Bible.

Messiahs were many.

List of Jewish messiah claimants - Wikipedia

Proposing A Messiah Before Jesus (Published 2000)

Virgin Births weren't unique in myths. https://www.smh.com.au/national/the...rollcall might include,, Nana, on December 25.

Nor was the resurrection. Resurrection - Wikipedia

 

[paarsurrey]

It is worthy of note that there were striking similarities between this Christianity and Islam. Above all in Christology: in the faith of the original community Jesus was the new Moses, the Son of God as ‘testified’ by the adoptive act of baptism. This Christology, which corresponds completely to that of the Qur’an, was considered by the Pauline Church, together with obedience to the ‘Jewish’ law, as characteristic of the Ebionite heresy. These similarities discovered by research are ambiguous, of course. The scholar inclined towards Church dogma, who cannot see Islam as anything but a mixture of Arab paganism, Judaism and Christianity, finds them evidence that Muhammad was ‘bred’ (Schlatter) on the Judeo-Christian tradition, that he had borrowed his creedal ideas from Judeo-Christian thought. On the other hand, the Baha’i, oriented towards the doctrine of cyclically recurring revelation and convinced of the mission of Islam, finds these results of research—in the light of the unity of religions—extremely instructive, because they are a sufficient explanation for the discrepancy between orthodox Church doctrine and the doctrine of the post-Biblical religions, and because they show where the original truth was preserved: not in the pagan Christian Greater Church base on Paul, but in the Jewish Christianity contemptuously branded as ‘Ebionism’. On this point, Islam, according to the divine plan for salvation, was among other things the authoritative new confirmation of the creedal truths preserved in Nazarene Christianity but lost to the Greater Church. (241)

The syncretism which started in Paul’s doctrine (‘I have become all things to all men’) and grew on the soil of irrationality (credo quia absurdum), reached its full elaboration in the time of the Church Fathers and became perpetuated in the hybrid dogma of Nicaea, in which—as pointed out by the Jewish thinker Salomon Ludwig Steinheim— ‘with an amazing intellectual force but also with an almost terrifying stubbornness’, components of Jewish and pagan doctrine ‘were shaken together and combined to form a homogeneous mixture’. (242) The whole of Church history thereafter was, as Steinheim rightly observes, dependent on and decided by the conflict, continuing beneath the unity formula, between elements of the revelation and of paganism. ‘The Church took Paul as its spiritual guide, thereby becoming involved down the centuries in conflicts and schisms, enmity, persecution and bloodshed, as Christians wrestled with the implications and interpretation of Pauline doctrines.’ (243)

The centerpiece then, of Christian creedal doctrine, that of Redemption, is something of which—in the judgment of the theologian E. Grimm (244) --- Jesus himself knew nothing; and it goes back to Paul. This is even admitted by some Catholics: ‘Christianity today mostly means Paul.’ (245) And Wilhelm Nestle stated—as noted also by Sabet—‘Christianity is the religion founded by Paul who replaces the Gospel of Jesus by a gospel about Jesus.’ (246) So also Schonfield: ‘Paul produced an amalgamation of ideas which, however unintentionally, did give rise to a new religion.’ (247)

Jesus conferred authority on Peter, (248) Paul usurped it. The so-called ‘throne of Peter’ is in fact the throne of Paul. (249) And except for the fact that the Papacy claims Matthew 16:18 for itself, what part does the Prince of the Apostles play in Christianity today? He is the janitor at the gates of Heaven, the subject of many jokes. No one makes jokes about Paul! And who is Jesus?— the babe in the cradle and the Redeemer on the Cross! These two images, which come to the Christian’s mind when he thinks of Jesus, show the subordinate part played for him by Jesus’s preaching, teaching and ethics. Another sign demonstrating the deviation of the Christian religion from its Palestinian origins is that Rome, the metropolis of the pagan world at the time, became the seat of the Church; the languages of the pagans, Greek and Latin became the languages of the Church; pagan Roman law became the basis of Church law.

The ‘message of Jesus’ with which conservative theologians confront the Baha’is is not the teaching of Jesus but the message of Paul, ‘the preaching of the Cross’, as he called his Gospel. (250) And if they say that the basic questions of our existence are only grasped in their true depth in ‘the preaching of the Cross’, I reply with Steinbeim who said: ‘It may be a good philosophical idea, a thoughtful myth, a comfortable emotional religion—that I can accept. Only don’t let it be called the teaching and revelation of Christ, but a decline from it—its opposite, in fact. It leads to the gods . . . of Olympus, not to Him who revealed Himself to Moses at Sinai, of whom Christ and the apostles taught the pagans’, (251) nor—I will complete the response—to Him Who speaks in the Quran and Who is proclaimed by Baha’u’llah.

Some may object that I have picked a few results which suit my purpose from the vast amount of recent theological research and have arbitrarily played these cards against the orthodox doctrine. This objection would be a misunderstanding of the situation. The starting-point for my discussion is not a scientific thesis, however formed, but my conviction and faith: if, as Baha’u’llah teaches, all the revealed religions are of divine origin and there is therefore an essential unity between the religions, if the purpose of revelation has always been the same, the education of the human race, (252) then there can be no essential contradictions between the religions on questions about the purpose of their revelations. For God does not contradict Himself.

If religions contradict each other on questions independent of the turn of events on earth and the development of man and society, the contradictions go back to the individual centrifugal developments which all religions have been through, to the erosions of history. The criterion of judgment will always be the most recent revelation of God. For the purification of the past religions is one reason, among others, why whenever it has pleased God, ‘the gates of mercy have been opened’ ‘till the end which has no end’, God Himself reforms, by speaking again to mankind at the end of a cycle of revelation. That is why the revelation of Baha’u’llah is at the same time a judgment on the old religions. It is, as he testifies, ‘the right path’ whereby ‘truth shall be distinguished from error and the wisdom of every command shall be tested’. (253) It separates the thorns and thistles from the grain, the true and authentic from the untrue and false, the pure divine teaching from the human additions and misunderstandings: ‘Verily, the day of ingathering is come, and all things have been separated from each other. He hath stored away that which He chose in the vessels of justice, and cast into fire that which befitteth it.’ (254)

Measured by the standard of Baha’u’llah revelation, the Pauline doctrine of Justification, the doctrine of Original Sin, the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, the sacramentalisation of the Christian religion, the whole Church plan of salvation — which not only contradicts the Jewish understanding of God (255) but was also strongly repudiated by the revelation of God which succeeded Christianity (256) — these are a deformation of Jesus’s teaching. Some critical theological scholars have confirmed that these deformations in Christianity started very early, in fact with Paul, and that the arch-apostle, without whom Marcion would not have been possible, was the arch-heretic in Christianity—as Tertullian very rightly saw. (257) Years ago, when I became acquainted with the founder of the Christian religion in the faith of the original community through H. J. Schoep’s Theologie und Geschichte des Judenchristentums, (258) the standard work on the subject, I was deeply impressed. Here Jesus was not the only-begotten Son of God come down from Heaven, crucified and resurrected, nor the unique Saviour, but the messenger of God to whom the Quran testifies and who is glorified by Baha’u’llah. (259)

241. On the whole subject, see also Adolf von Harnack, Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, vol. I, p. 331 and vol. II, p. 534 ff.; A. Schlatter, Die Entwicklung des judischen Christentums zum Islam, p. 251 ff.; Schoeps, Theologie and Geschichte des Judenchristentums, pp. 71 and 304 ff.; Leonhard Goppelt, Christentum und Judentum im ersten und zweiten Jahrhundert, p. 175. It becomes very clear in this context how heavily Christian theology is based on Paul, not Jesus. Schlatter writes: ‘We tried to understand what the Christianity was like from which Islam grew. What kind of Christianity is superior to Islam and can therefore help it? It must know Paul. With a Christianity based on the formula ‘Not Paul but Jesus, not the Epistle to the Romans but the Sermon on the Mount’, we cannot help Islam. Legalism is not overcome by legalism. The God of might is eclipsed only by the God of Mercy, and the justice which corrupts us [!] is healed only by the justice of Faith. If Christianity knows Paul, then it partakes of the gift of Jesus redeemed from the weakness of mere dependence on laws . . . Thus it has also risen above the opposition between the historical and the eternal Christ, and so the historical Christ sinks into the past and into oblivion . . .’ (op. cit., p. 236)

242. Die Offenbarung nach dem Lehrbegriff der Synagogue, vol. III, p. 243.

243. Schonfield, op. cit., p. 89.

244. Die Ethik Jesu, p. 180.

245. Go. Ricciotti, Paulus, p. 590.

246. Krisis des Christentums, p. 89.

247. Those Incredible Christians, p. 93.

248. Peter’s station is also confirmed by Bahaullah: God caused ‘the mysteries of wisdom and of utterance to flow out of his mouth’ (Quoted by Shoghi Effendi. The Promised Day is Come, p. 114).

249. ‘The church at Rome built on Pauline foundation’ (Schonfield, op. cit., p. 144).

250. I Corinthians 1:18; 2:2.

251. op. cit., vol II, p. xii ff.

252. ‘The purpose of the one true God in manifesting Himself is to summon all mankind to truthfulness and sincerity, to piety and trustworthiness, to resignation and submissiveness to the Will of God, to forbearance and kindliness, to uprightness and wisdom’ (Gleanings, CXXXVII).

253. Baha’u’llah, Tablet of Ahmad.

254. Baha’u’llah, Tablet to Pope Pius IX, The Proclamation of Baha’u’llah, p. 86. See also Matthew 13:24-9, 40-43.

255. It is understandable that the Jews could never accept Christianity in the completely different from produced by Paul, the form that triumphed in the greater Church.

256. See Qur’an 112; 19:88-94; 2:116; 5:72 et seq.; 4:171-2; 5:116; 3:58.

257. Quoted by Deschner, pp. 116 and 629.

258. Theology and History of Jewish Christianity.

259. ‘Know thou that when the Son of Man yielded up His breath to God, the whole creation wept with a great weeping. By sacrificing Himself, however, a fresh capacity was infused into all created things’ (Quoted by Shoghi Effendi, The Promised Day is Come, p. 114). The idea of sacrifice confronts us in every religion, for every messenger of God has ‘offered up His life as a ransom for the redemption of the world’ (Gleanings, CXLVI).

One means:
Udo Schaefer (October 19, 1926 – August 30, 2019) was a German lawyer and a Bahá'í writer.

Right, please?

Regards

 

[Trailblazer]

One means:
Udo Schaefer (October 19, 1926 – August 30, 2019) was a German lawyer and a Bahá'í writer.

Right, please?

Regards

I don't know what you are asking.... one means what?
Yes, I agree with Schaefer, what I posted about Paul changing the course of Christianity.

 

[John D. Brey]

It has long been generally believed that Jesus Christ was a unique incarnation of God such as had never before appeared in religious history and would never appear again. This tenet made the acceptance of any later Prophet impossible to a Christian. Yet there is nothing in Christ’s own statements, as recorded in the Gospel, to support this view, and it was not generally held during His lifetime.

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.​

​

The Holy Bible: King James Version (Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version., Jn 14:6–7). (2009). Logos Research Systems, Inc.​

​

Then Peter, filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them . . . Jesus Christ . . . is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.​

​

The Holy Bible: King James Version (Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version., Ac 4:8–12). (2009). Logos Research Systems, Inc.​

​

And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.​

​

The Holy Bible: King James Version (Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version., Mt 28:18–20). (2009). Logos Research Systems, Inc.​

John

 

[Truthseeker]

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.The Holy Bible: King James Version (Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version., Jn 14:6–7). (2009). Logos Research Systems, Inc.

As to this one, consider this from a Baha'i author:

Modern Christians sometimes use passages from the New Testament as titles or descriptions of Jesus. Perhaps the best example would be John 14:6, '1 am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me'. Bahá'í would not reject this passage from the Gospel of John, but they would interpret it differently than most Christians. Two possible approaches come to mind. One would be to examine the word 'I'; to whom is Jesus referring? To Himself, certainly, but could He not be referring to all Manifestations in general, since, as Bahá'u'lláh explains, one of the stations of the Manifestations is 'pure abstraction and essential unity' (Gleanings 51)? Thus, Jesus's statement would never have been meant to exclude the other Manifestations, especially not Himself when He returned – that is, in the person of Bahá'u'lláh. A Christian theologian, John Cobb, has also recognised the ambiguity of 'I' and has suggested that the 'I' refers not to the historical Jesus, but to the eternal logos manifested in Jesus.[9] In Bahá'í terms, Cobb is suggesting that the 'I' refers to the Holy Spirit common to all the Manifestations, or to their station of unity.

One could also examine the word 'am'. The verb to be has many uses – the Oxford English Dictionary lists twenty four – some of which are normally distinguished from each other only by context. One grammatical usage is the universal present, which is used to make statements that are always true, such as 'triangles are three-sided'. Another usage applies to the present, but may not apply to the future as well, such as 'I am young' or 'I am alive'. Christians usually understand the statement 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life', as a universal present, but could it not be meant to apply only to some period of time in the past? Could not Abraham have been the way, truth, and life for the peoples of the Middle East from 2000 BCE to respect in the English language that is applied the time of Moses; then Moses was the way, truth, and life until the time of Jesus; then Jesus was the way, truth, and life until the time of Muhammad; and so on? Similarly, Bahá'u'lláh is the way, truth, and life until He will be superseded by another Manifestation, which He assures us will occur after a thousand years (Gleanings 346).

Bahá'í Library Online

 

[YoursTrue]

One means:
Udo Schaefer (October 19, 1926 – August 30, 2019) was a German lawyer and a Bahá'í writer.

Right, please?

Regards

Obviously there will not be a consensus of opinion. (right please? said with a smile)

 

[Trailblazer]

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.The Holy Bible: King James Version (Electronic Edition of the 1900 Authorized Version., Jn 14:6–7). (2009). Logos Research Systems, Inc.

Seminar Rules Out 80% of Words Attributed to Jesus : Religion: Provocative meeting of biblical scholars ends six years of voting on authenticity in the Gospels.

“Most scholars, if they had worked through the sayings as we had, would tend to agree there is virtually nothing in the fourth Gospel (John) that goes back to Jesus,” said Robert Fortna of Vassar College. Jesus says in John “I am the good shepherd . . . I am the light of the world . . . I am the bread of life,” but that “is mostly the work of the author,” Fortna said. Jesus rarely refers to himself in the other Gospels.

THE REJECTED SAYINGS

The Jesus Seminar, a six-year project based in Sonoma to assess the historical authenticity of sayings attributed to Jesus, concluded that about half were words put into his mouth by Gospel authors and early believers in reflection of their own hopes and fears. Among the sayings rejected were the following:

John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him may not perish but may have eternal life.”

John 14:6: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

Mark 13:25, 30: (A series of apocalyptic sayings) “Then they will see ‘the Son of Man coming in the clouds’ with great power and glory. . . . Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have taken place.”

Matthew 5:11: “Blessed are you when people revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account.”

Mark 10:32-34: “See, we are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be handed over to the chief priests and the scribes, and they will condemn him to death; then they will hand him over to the Gentiles; they will mock him, and spit upon him, and flog him, and kill him; and after three days he will rise again.”

Seminar Rules Out 80% of Words Attributed to Jesus : Religion: Provocative meeting of biblical scholars ends six years of voting on authenticity in the Gospels.

The provocative Jesus Seminar on Sunday concluded six years of voting on what the Jesus of history most likely said, ruling out about 80% of words attributed to him in the Gospels and emerging with the picture of a prophet-sage who told parables and made pithy comments.

www.latimes.com

 

[Trailblazer]

As to this one, consider this from a Baha'i author:

Modern Christians sometimes use passages from the New Testament as titles or descriptions of Jesus. Perhaps the best example would be John 14:6, '1 am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me'. Bahá'í would not reject this passage from the Gospel of John, but they would interpret it differently than most Christians. Two possible approaches come to mind. One would be to examine the word 'I'; to whom is Jesus referring? To Himself, certainly, but could He not be referring to all Manifestations in general, since, as Bahá'u'lláh explains, one of the stations of the Manifestations is 'pure abstraction and essential unity' (Gleanings 51)? Thus, Jesus's statement would never have been meant to exclude the other Manifestations, especially not Himself when He returned – that is, in the person of Bahá'u'lláh. A Christian theologian, John Cobb, has also recognised the ambiguity of 'I' and has suggested that the 'I' refers not to the historical Jesus, but to the eternal logos manifested in Jesus.[9] In Bahá'í terms, Cobb is suggesting that the 'I' refers to the Holy Spirit common to all the Manifestations, or to their station of unity.

One could also examine the word 'am'. The verb to be has many uses – the Oxford English Dictionary lists twenty four – some of which are normally distinguished from each other only by context. One grammatical usage is the universal present, which is used to make statements that are always true, such as 'triangles are three-sided'. Another usage applies to the present, but may not apply to the future as well, such as 'I am young' or 'I am alive'. Christians usually understand the statement 'I am the way, and the truth, and the life', as a universal present, but could it not be meant to apply only to some period of time in the past? Could not Abraham have been the way, truth, and life for the peoples of the Middle East from 2000 BCE to respect in the English language that is applied the time of Moses; then Moses was the way, truth, and life until the time of Jesus; then Jesus was the way, truth, and life until the time of Muhammad; and so on? Similarly, Bahá'u'lláh is the way, truth, and life until He will be superseded by another Manifestation, which He assures us will occur after a thousand years (Gleanings 346).

Bahá'í Library Online

It was 'assumed' by Christians that Jesus is the way, and the truth, and the life for all of eternity, but Jesus did not say that.

Seminar Rules Out 80% of Words Attributed to Jesus : Religion: Provocative meeting of biblical scholars ends six years of voting on authenticity in the Gospels.

The provocative Jesus Seminar on Sunday concluded six years of voting on what the Jesus of history most likely said, ruling out about 80% of words attributed to him in the Gospels and emerging with the picture of a prophet-sage who told parables and made pithy comments.

www.latimes.com

Even though Jesus did not say that I believe that Jesus was the Way to God during His Dispensation.

Dispensation

- the divine ordering of the affairs of the world.
- an appointment, arrangement, or favor, as by God.
- a divinely appointed order or age:

e.g. the old Mosaic, or Jewish, dispensation; the new gospel, or Christian, dispensation.

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

During the Christian Dispensation, Jesus was the way, and the truth, and the life......

Now that we are living in the Baha'i Dispensation, Baha'u'llah claimed that He is the Way.

“This is the Day when the loved ones of God should keep their eyes directed towards His Manifestation, and fasten them upon whatsoever that Manifestation may be pleased to reveal. Certain traditions of bygone ages rest on no foundations whatever, while the notions entertained by past generations, and which they have recorded in their books, have, for the most part, been influenced by the desires of a corrupt inclination."

Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 169-172

Jesus offered everlasting life and in this new age Baha'u'llah is offering it again.

“The Book of God is wide open, and His Word is summoning mankind unto Him. No more than a mere handful, however, hath been found willing to cleave to His Cause, or to become the instruments for its promotion. These few have been endued with the Divine Elixir that can, alone, transmute into purest gold the dross of the world, and have been empowered to administer the infallible remedy for all the ills that afflict the children of men. No man can obtain everlasting life, unless he embraceth the truth of this inestimable, this wondrous, and sublime Revelation.”
Bahá'í Reference Library - Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, Pages 183-184

Seems to me that it all boils down to what we are willing to believe.
It is worthy of discussion but I see no point arguing about it.

 

[John D. Brey]

As to this one, consider this from a Baha'i author:

Modern Christians sometimes use passages from the New Testament as titles or descriptions of Jesus. Perhaps the best example would be John 14:6, '1 am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but by me'. Bahá'í would not reject this passage from the Gospel of John, but they would interpret it differently than most Christians. Two possible approaches come to mind. One would be to examine the word 'I'; to whom is Jesus referring? To Himself, certainly, but could He not be referring to all Manifestations in general, since, as Bahá'u'lláh explains, one of the stations of the Manifestations is 'pure abstraction and essential unity' (Gleanings 51)? Thus, Jesus's statement would never have been meant to exclude the other Manifestations, especially not Himself when He returned – that is, in the person of Bahá'u'lláh. A Christian theologian, John Cobb, has also recognised the ambiguity of 'I' and has suggested that the 'I' refers not to the historical Jesus, but to the eternal logos manifested in Jesus.[9] In Bahá'í terms, Cobb is suggesting that the 'I' refers to the Holy Spirit common to all the Manifestations, or to their station of unity.

Where interpretation is completely relativized, anything can mean and be anything, so long as it's consistent with the prism or context used to determine meaning. Interpretation and meaning are relativistic unless a transcendental signifier anchors the thought-space so that by anchoring the thought-space to a transcendental signifier a serious exegete is able to determine the truth between two possible interpretations by determining which is anchored by the transcendental signifier that grounds the thought-space.

For me, as for a lot of orthodox Christian thought, Christ Jesus is the transcendental signifier that anchors thought-space. My goal is simple to bring every thought into obedience to Christ Jesus as the transcendental signifier of all thought.

When I accepted Christ Jesus as my personal Savior, I realized instantly that I had a fundamental problem. I accepted Christ Jesus as my Savior parallel to realizing that my faith made him the transcendental signifier for all of my thoughts. If a thought was opposed to Christ Jesus as the transcendental signifier, then it was a thought I couldn't harbor in my epistemology no matter if it was rational, empirically sound, or scientifically justified. Problem being, what kind of thought did I employ to make Christ Jesus the transcendental signifier of all my thought? If it was rational, then it could be rationally refuted. If it was empirically based, then a clearer observation of empirical reality could potentially topple it. If it was logical or scientific, then new information, backed by scientific proofs, could render it inoperative.

Making Christ Jesus the transcendental signifier of my thoughts was neither rational, empirical, logical, nor scientific. Ergo, none of those kinds of thought can have any bearing on what I think of Christ Jesus. Nevertheless, what I think of Christ Jesus can definitely affect how I think logically, rationally, or scientifically. It can be argued that I can use all those auxillary kinds of thought more effectively and efficiently since I have an anchor in the soul that can determine between fatally relativistic forms of logic, or science, or even observations, versus the kind of logic, science, observation, that, because they're anchored by a transcendental signifier, can, the thoughts can, begin to pull all the loose elements together into a cohesive whole because they're not floating in a zero gravity kind of thought-space where they're able to compete utterly relativistically against every other thought with no thought ever being able to prove anything except tentatively.

I'm banking that Christ Jesus is the transcendental signifier of all reality, past, present, and future, such that any thought that's not anchored by Christ Jesus will eventually, like the dinosaurs, come to its end eventually.



John

 

[Trailblazer]

For me, as for a lot of orthodox Christian thought, Christ Jesus is the transcendental signifier that anchors thought-space. My goal is simple to bring every thought into obedience to Christ Jesus as the transcendental signifier of all thought.

I don't do well with very long posts so I picked out the most important elements from what you said that I would like clarified.

What do you mean by this? "Christ Jesus is the transcendental signifier that anchors thought-space."
What is a transcendental signifier?

When I accepted Christ Jesus as my personal Savior, I realized instantly that I had a fundamental problem. I accepted Christ Jesus as my Savior parallel to realizing that my faith made him the transcendental signifier for all of my thoughts. If a thought was opposed to Christ Jesus as the transcendental signifier, then it was a thought I couldn't harbor in my epistemology no matter if it was rational, empirically sound, or scientifically justified.

What do you mean by this? "When I accepted Christ Jesus as my personal Savior? What do you mean by Savior? What do you believe you were saved from? I do not think that Jesus ever claimed to be a Savior. That is Christian theology.

Making Christ Jesus the transcendental signifier of my thoughts was neither rational, empirical, logical, nor scientific. Ergo, none of those kinds of thought can have any bearing on what I think of Christ Jesus. Nevertheless, what I think of Christ Jesus can definitely affect how I think logically, rationally, or scientifically.

I understand, but I still need to know what you mean by "the transcendental signifier of my thoughts."

I'm banking that Christ Jesus is the transcendental signifier of all reality, past, present, and future, such that any thought that's not anchored by Christ Jesus will eventually, like the dinosaurs, come to its end eventually.

I am not banking on that because it is nothing more than a faith-based belief.

What you have done is made Christ Jesus into God, and I understand that is what Christians do. Problem is that Jesus never claimed to be God, and the Bible does not support Jesus being God. It was Christian dogma that developed many years after Jesus walked the earth that made Jesus into God.

I'm banking that God is the transcendental signifier of all reality, past, present, and future, such that any thought that's not anchored by God will eventually, like the dinosaurs, come to its end eventually.

 

[YoursTrue]

Paul didn't change the course of Christianity. God's holy spirit, his active force, did.

 

[Maninthemiddle]

Here are several ways in which Paul significantly influenced the course of Christianity:

1. Missionary Work: Paul undertook extensive missionary journeys throughout the eastern Mediterranean, spreading the teachings of Jesus and establishing Christian communities in numerous cities. His travels and ministries significantly contributed to the spread of Christianity beyond its Jewish origins and into a broader Greco-Roman context.

2. Theologian and Apologist: Paul's prolific writings, particularly his letters (epistles) in the New Testament, are foundational to Christian theology. His theological insights, which explored concepts such as salvation, grace, and the nature of Christ, have profoundly influenced Christian doctrine and the understanding of Christian faith.

3. Gentile Inclusion: Paul's teachings emphasized the inclusion of non-Jewish (Gentile) believers in the Christian community without adherence to certain Jewish customs, contributing to the growth and diversity of early Christianity and challenging early debates about the role of Mosaic Law within the Christian faith.

4. Council of Jerusalem: Paul's advocacy for the inclusion of Gentile believers led to significant deliberations at the Council of Jerusalem, which addressed key questions about the relationship between Jewish and Gentile believers and the observance of Mosaic Law within the Christian community.

5. Christian Ethics: Paul's writings addressed ethical and practical concerns within early Christian communities, offering guidance on moral conduct, social relationships, and ecclesiastical governance, laying the foundation for Christian ethics and the organization of the early church.

Paul's contributions to early Christianity are extensive and profound, shaping the theological, ethical, and social dimensions of the faith and significantly influencing the course of Christian history and the development of Christian thought.

 

[YoursTrue]

Here are several ways in which Paul significantly influenced the course of Christianity:

1. Missionary Work: Paul undertook extensive missionary journeys throughout the eastern Mediterranean, spreading the teachings of Jesus and establishing Christian communities in numerous cities. His travels and ministries significantly contributed to the spread of Christianity beyond its Jewish origins and into a broader Greco-Roman context.

2. Theologian and Apologist: Paul's prolific writings, particularly his letters (epistles) in the New Testament, are foundational to Christian theology. His theological insights, which explored concepts such as salvation, grace, and the nature of Christ, have profoundly influenced Christian doctrine and the understanding of Christian faith.

3. Gentile Inclusion: Paul's teachings emphasized the inclusion of non-Jewish (Gentile) believers in the Christian community without adherence to certain Jewish customs, contributing to the growth and diversity of early Christianity and challenging early debates about the role of Mosaic Law within the Christian faith.

4. Council of Jerusalem: Paul's advocacy for the inclusion of Gentile believers led to significant deliberations at the Council of Jerusalem, which addressed key questions about the relationship between Jewish and Gentile believers and the observance of Mosaic Law within the Christian community.

5. Christian Ethics: Paul's writings addressed ethical and practical concerns within early Christian communities, offering guidance on moral conduct, social relationships, and ecclesiastical governance, laying the foundation for Christian ethics and the organization of the early church.

Paul's contributions to early Christianity are extensive and profound, shaping the theological, ethical, and social dimensions of the faith and significantly influencing the course of Christian history and the development of Christian thought.

Paul wrote of his experiences. It was God who preserved the writings. Similarly, if God did not preserve the writings about Jesus there would be scant to no belief about him. Paul upheld the teachings of Jesus.

 

[YoursTrue]

Here are several ways in which Paul significantly influenced the course of Christianity:

1. Missionary Work: Paul undertook extensive missionary journeys throughout the eastern Mediterranean, spreading the teachings of Jesus and establishing Christian communities in numerous cities. His travels and ministries significantly contributed to the spread of Christianity beyond its Jewish origins and into a broader Greco-Roman context.

2. Theologian and Apologist: Paul's prolific writings, particularly his letters (epistles) in the New Testament, are foundational to Christian theology. His theological insights, which explored concepts such as salvation, grace, and the nature of Christ, have profoundly influenced Christian doctrine and the understanding of Christian faith.

3. Gentile Inclusion: Paul's teachings emphasized the inclusion of non-Jewish (Gentile) believers in the Christian community without adherence to certain Jewish customs, contributing to the growth and diversity of early Christianity and challenging early debates about the role of Mosaic Law within the Christian faith.

4. Council of Jerusalem: Paul's advocacy for the inclusion of Gentile believers led to significant deliberations at the Council of Jerusalem, which addressed key questions about the relationship between Jewish and Gentile believers and the observance of Mosaic Law within the Christian community.

5. Christian Ethics: Paul's writings addressed ethical and practical concerns within early Christian communities, offering guidance on moral conduct, social relationships, and ecclesiastical governance, laying the foundation for Christian ethics and the organization of the early church.

Paul's contributions to early Christianity are extensive and profound, shaping the theological, ethical, and social dimensions of the faith and significantly influencing the course of Christian history and the development of Christian thought.

Paul wrote of his experiences. It was God who preserved the writings. Similarly, if God did not preserve the writings about Jesus there would be scant to no belief about him. Paul upheld the teachings of Jesus.

 

[YoursTrue]

Here are several ways in which Paul significantly influenced the course of Christianity:

1. Missionary Work: Paul undertook extensive missionary journeys throughout the eastern Mediterranean, spreading the teachings of Jesus and establishing Christian communities in numerous cities. His travels and ministries significantly contributed to the spread of Christianity beyond its Jewish origins and into a broader Greco-Roman context.

2. Theologian and Apologist: Paul's prolific writings, particularly his letters (epistles) in the New Testament, are foundational to Christian theology. His theological insights, which explored concepts such as salvation, grace, and the nature of Christ, have profoundly influenced Christian doctrine and the understanding of Christian faith.

3. Gentile Inclusion: Paul's teachings emphasized the inclusion of non-Jewish (Gentile) believers in the Christian community without adherence to certain Jewish customs, contributing to the growth and diversity of early Christianity and challenging early debates about the role of Mosaic Law within the Christian faith.

4. Council of Jerusalem: Paul's advocacy for the inclusion of Gentile believers led to significant deliberations at the Council of Jerusalem, which addressed key questions about the relationship between Jewish and Gentile believers and the observance of Mosaic Law within the Christian community.

5. Christian Ethics: Paul's writings addressed ethical and practical concerns within early Christian communities, offering guidance on moral conduct, social relationships, and ecclesiastical governance, laying the foundation for Christian ethics and the organization of the early church.

Paul's contributions to early Christianity are extensive and profound, shaping the theological, ethical, and social dimensions of the faith and significantly influencing the course of Christian history and the development of Christian thought.

Paul wrote of his experiences. It was God who preserved the writings. Similarly, if God did not preserve the writings about Jesus there would be scant to no belief about him. Paul upheld the teachings of Jesus.