• 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!

No Evidence for 1st Century Nazareth

godnotgod

Thou art That
The Early Church

In the days after Yeshua's death and resurrection, there was no Christian Church as we think of it today. The followers of Yeshua were with James, the brother of Yeshua in Jerusalem, Peter, and the other apostles. Some suggest they were there with the Essenes, in whose movement they may have been a part, although there is considerable disagreement about that, and the author of Luke, the only history of the early church we have, did not mention them. Outside of the core group were followers who were not willing to convert to Judaism and were simply "believers."

Then Paul, formerly Saul, a Roman citizen and persecutor of the early followers of Yeshua, began publicizing Yeshua widely. Paul never met Yeshua and knew about him only through the stories that were being circulated. Paul and the leaders of the Jerusalem church, Peter and James, the brother of Yeshua, were at odds over whether converts must first convert to Judaism before becoming followers of Yeshua.

Paul's teachings about Yeshua were very different from those of James, Peter, and the others in the Jerusalem group. It is striking that Paul's letters never quote Yeshua, rarely refer to Yeshua's teachings, and never mention Yeshua's life. Paul taught his own version of Yeshua's teachings and created his own rules. The Christian Church throughout the 2,000 years since Yeshua has been formed by Paul's teachings, not the teachings of James, the brother of Yeshua, and, some say, not the teachings of Yeshua himself.

The fact that Paul did not present Yeshua's teachings in his epistles or his own preaching has been acknowledged for centuries. Only the Church, built around Paul, fails to admit that fact.

Pauline Christianity

to be continued.....
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
Please don't continue this ignorant, poorly researched dribble. Paul does quote Jesus. James supported Paul which is why they allowed Paul to continue his mission. Peter and Paul even spent time together where Peter taught Paul. If you even took time to read Acts or Paul you would see that what you are saying is delusional.
 

Shermana

Heretic
Please don't continue this ignorant, poorly researched dribble. Paul does quote Jesus. James supported Paul which is why they allowed Paul to continue his mission. Peter and Paul even spent time together where Peter taught Paul. If you even took time to read Acts or Paul you would see that what you are saying is delusional.

Paul quotes Jesus? This would be new, please show exactly what verse is a quote from Jesus or even a reference to his specific teachings I must have missed it.
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
Paul quotes Jesus? This would be new, please show exactly what verse is a quote from Jesus or even a reference to his specific teachings I must have missed it.

I am away from Home right now so I can't give you exact verses but Paul quotes Jesus on divorce.
 

Shermana

Heretic
I know what you're referring to,

To the married I give charge, not I but the Lord, that the wife should not separate from her husband ... and that the husband should not divorce his wife. To the rest I say, not the Lord, ... But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. For God has called us to peace. (1 Corinthians 7:10-15, RSV)
That's about the only example I suppose. More of a review than a quote.
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
"The person of Paul was that of someone who believed that God was now revealing secrets or mysteries; these terms arise frequently in Paul's letters, eg. l Cor 2:7, l3:2, l4:2,, l5:51, with 'revealed' or similiar arising frequently also, eg. Rom l:l7,l8, 8:l8, l6:25, l Cor 2:l0,l3, 3:l3, 2 Cor 12:l. Paul believed that he had seen the risen Jesus (l Cor l5:8) and he had spoken directly to him (2 Cor l2:8-9); he had experienced ecstatic states (2 Cor l2:l-4, l Cor l4:l8) and God was now revealing previously-hidden information (1 Cor 2:l0,12-13, 7:40). A question therefore arises, did Paul's rather scant knowledge about Jesus arise through his belief that the risen Lord was now communicating with and through him, alongwith other Christian prophets, or from information gleaned from earthly companions and eyewitnesses of the earthly Jesus. One passage in which Paul clearly refers to a historical event in Jesus' earthly life, ie. the last supper, is 1 Cor 11:23-26. However even this passage begins "For I received from the Lord...." and again, suggests this information was transmitted directly from the risen Christ, rather than from the apostles."

The Historicity Of Jesus

*****
"For Paul , Christ was a cosmic experience, not a real person. Perhaps he was dragging a lot of his Hellenistic upbringing into the story. Paul would have grown up in Tarsus with the mythology of Mithras the dying savior god who was also crucified on a Friday, and descended into "hell" and rose three days later. The Gospel story of Jesus, written AFTER Paul had lived, written and died is not a new story... It is , it seems a retelling of the Osiris-Dionysis myth so well known in the cultures of those times. If you are not easily shaken theologically, read The Jesus Mysteries. The pagan origins of literalist Christianity is a more amazing story than we may have once thought! And the duplicity and complicity of the Literalist Church in bringing this mindset into the lives of millions with its threats and fear inducing control, is appalling. "To dare to question a received history is not easy. It is difficult to believe that something that you have been told is true from childhood could actually be a product of falsification and fantasy." (Jesus Mysteries p. 12)

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/98517
 
Last edited:
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
I am away from Home right now so I can't give you exact verses but Paul quotes Jesus on divorce.

Matthew 5 (Jesus)

31 h“It was also said, n‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ 32 oBut I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery, and pwhoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery.

Mark 10 (Jesus)

11 And he said to them, k“Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery against her, 12 and lif she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery.”

1 Corinthians 7 (Paul):
10 To the married give this charge (not I, but the Lord): the wife should not separate from her husband 11 (but if she does, she should remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband), and he husband should not divorce his wife

As a side note, Jesus may have been the only person in the ancient world to actually prohibit divorce without exception (in Mark) - it's one of the few sayings of Jesus that are unquestionably his becuase it is so original. There can be no mistake that Paul is referring to Jesus in 1 Corinthians.
 

godnotgod

Thou art That
Matthew 5 (Jesus)



Mark 10 (Jesus)



1 Corinthians 7 (Paul):


As a side note, Jesus may have been the only person in the ancient world to actually prohibit divorce without exception (in Mark) - it's one of the few sayings of Jesus that are unquestionably his becuase it is so original. There can be no mistake that Paul is referring to Jesus in 1 Corinthians.

As my sources stated: PAUL NEVER QUOTED JESUS.

What we have here, at best, is Paul merely putting words into Jesus's mouth, and the pattern of the Jesus Paul is talking about is the one associated with Paul's COSMIC experience of who he THINKS is Jesus revealing himself in secret to him.

It is impossible for Paul to quote Jesus since Jesus never spoke to Paul directly and in person. At best, Paul could have quoted another author who had quoted Jesus, but never directly.
 
Last edited:
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
No, no. Jesus was referencing Hulk Hogan, but Paul had an affinity for Lady Gaga.

So Paul mutilated Jesus's teaching here to fit Lady Gaga's sense of meter.
 
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
As my sources stated: PAUL NEVER QUOTED JESUS.

What we have here, at best, is Paul merely putting words into Jesus's mouth, and the pattern of the Jesus Paul is talking about is the one associated with Paul's COSMIC experience of who he THINKS is Jesus revealing himself in secret to him.

It is impossible for Paul to quote Jesus since Jesus never spoke to Paul directly and in person. At best, Paul could have quoted another author who had quoted Jesus, but never directly.

Yes! I figured it out.

Paul wasn't quoting Jesus. He was referring to the teachings of an eggplant named Suzi who grew up in the Bronx. She did attend Coloumbia, then Union Theological Seminary. After a bad experience in ministry, she's now a crack whore in LA.

Again, if you're going to make something up - at least make it interesting.

Polish that terd, godnotgod. You can put a dress on it, but it's still spam.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
A

angellous_evangellous

Guest
I have to believe that as well

paul created allot of theology and was strict

Do you think, then, along with our friend, that Paul was just imagining what Jesus was saying to him?

If so, Paul did a dang good job because Jesus taught what Paul said he did -- according to the Gospels, of course -- which came after Paul.

What Paul does with it is simply downright weird, but this is the only time that Paul references the teachings of Jesus - and the teaching is highly specific because no one else taught it. It really is difficult to get clearer than this, except maybe a specific letter to godnotgod in perfect English with perhaps a cattle prod.

(And a tattoo on the top of the hand that says "thou shalt not believe everything thou seest on a website. I shall smite thee with carpal tunnel syndrome if thou failest to think")
 
Last edited by a moderator:

outhouse

Atheistically
Do you think, then, along with our friend, that Paul was just imagining what Jesus was saying to him?

I have never trusted or liked paul

I think he created everything


he never knew or met jesus, there was very little oral tradition at that time and what he did know came from what I guess a very limited source of oral tradition.


(And a tattoo on the top of the hand that says "thou shalt not believe everything thou seest on a website. I shall smite thee with carpal tunnel syndrome if thou failest to think")

that I agree.






I wouldnt have posted if it wasnt for my views on paul
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
he never knew or met jesus, there was very little oral tradition at that time and what he did know came from what I guess a very limited source of oral tradition.
.
But Paul was in an excellent position to know about Jesus. He was associated with James and Peter and in fact spent time with Peter. Paul had access to those closest to Jesus and from what we can gather, they tolerated if not supported the mission Paul was doing. So he really was in an ideal position.
 

fallingblood

Agnostic Theist
As my sources stated: PAUL NEVER QUOTED JESUS.

What we have here, at best, is Paul merely putting words into Jesus's mouth, and the pattern of the Jesus Paul is talking about is the one associated with Paul's COSMIC experience of who he THINKS is Jesus revealing himself in secret to him.

It is impossible for Paul to quote Jesus since Jesus never spoke to Paul directly and in person. At best, Paul could have quoted another author who had quoted Jesus, but never directly.

Do you see how ridiculous that statement is? I doubt it. First, your source is shoddy. A burning piece of toilet paper would be better than your source. Especially when it disagrees with actual scholarship. More so, as A_E pointed out, Paul does quote from Jesus or at the very least paraphrases which should be good enough.

Finally, the simple fact that I can quote Jesus even today shows just how ignorant your statement is. You don't need the person you are quoting from to be alive even and they definitely do not have to even be speaking to you. The fact that you imply such shows that you have no idea what the word means. Really you should just quit.
 
Top