• 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!

The "Paul" that anti-Christians invented

Eli G

Well-Known Member
Just for your info most of this began with a book by a talmudic scholar, and a lot of people read the book then took the ball much further. The book was titled The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity. I read most of it, and it actually does not conclude Paul invents Christianity, despite the title. While the title is a teaser it is technically passive using no verbs. The book explores an imagined Paul who invents Christianity but does not conclude anything this way or that, leaving it to the reader. However this is perhaps something to look into if you want to find out what people are getting their ideas from. The author's name is Hyam Maccoby. Its been a long time since reading it, so I cannot tell you a lot about it, now.
Wow! I had never heard that before. Thanks for sharing.

I knew that there are many anti-Christians who defend this pseudo-Paul, but I didn't know that it had all started with a speculative novel by a Jew.

Jews, of course, are anti-Christians. Could it be that all the defenders of pseudo-Paul take sides with the Jews in their anti-Christianity?

PS: I am not anti-Semitic. I want to clarify that in this post I am referring to religious Jews who resent Christians and not Jews due to nationality or any other aspect.
 

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Wow! I had never heard that before. Thanks for sharing.

I knew that there are many anti-Christians who defend this pseudo-Paul, but I didn't know that it had all started with a speculative novel by a Jew.

Jews, of course, are anti-Christians. Could it be that all the defenders of pseudo-Paul take sides with the Jews in their anti-Christianity?

PS: I am not anti-Semitic. I want to clarify that in this post I am referring to religious Jews who resent Christians and not Jews due to nationality or any other aspect.
In the case of this book its less about framing Paul and more about distancing Jews from the perceived negative aspects of Christianity. During the time of its writing Jews were getting a lot of blame for things that had nothing to do with them such as evangelical displays on television. They also were questioning whether they had brought the holocaust upon themselves somehow, and Maccoby's book, while it failed to frame Paul, did show that Jews were not the originators of Christianity.

I think to be anti-christian one must be directly opposed to churches, but I take your meaning to be that Jews do not acknowledge Jesus as the final messiah. They do not. On the other hand they mostly ignore Christianity unless it has something to do with them like in this case.

As you say you are not antisemitic, so Jews would say they are not antichristian. I also don't consider Hyman Maccoby to be anti Christian or even anti Paul. He writes in a scholarly, not a confident, style. He never accuses, just tries to spin the conversation away from Jews.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Thanks for telling us. Can you tell us more about this, if you don't mind?
I just need to understand what it's inside the head of those who defend the pseudo-Paul.
A real Christian would never say this kind of things about the real Paul.
Thanks in advance.
I'm only pointing out the narrative as it stands. It would be a disservice to not do otherwise of my former faith , so others can see the discrepancies and inconsistencies that are associated with the Bible, and can judge for themselves as it is presented to them in a reasonable and logical manner reflecting the writings as they are being layed out.
 

Eli G

Well-Known Member
In the case of this book its less about framing Paul and more about distancing Jews from the perceived negative aspects of Christianity. During the time of its writing Jews were getting a lot of blame for things that had nothing to do with them such as evangelical displays on television. They also were questioning whether they had brought the holocaust upon themselves somehow, and Maccoby's book, while it failed to frame Paul, did show that Jews were not the originators of Christianity.

I think to be anti-christian one must be directly opposed to churches, but I take your meaning to be that Jews do not acknowledge Jesus as the final messiah. They do not. On the other hand they mostly ignore Christianity unless it has something to do with them like in this case.

As you say you are not antisemitic, so Jews would say they are not antichristian. I also don't consider Hyman Maccoby to be anti Christian or even anti Paul. He writes in a scholarly, not a confident, style. He never accuses, just tries to spin the conversation away from Jews.
That makes a lot of sense. The International Bible Students Association (Jehovah's Witnesses by the time) were also sentenced to concentration camps by the nazis for their conscientious objection.

What does not make any sense at all is that based on the previous Jew's writing, anti-Christians take the opportunity to lie about Paul and Christianity.

That is outrageous not only for real Christians, but also for serious scholars of biblical themes and even for anyone who is willing to defend the true intentions of the author of that book, which perhaps were not to invent a character but to write some defense of Jew's situation... but not with the intention of distorting the image of Paul as the anti-Christians who use the idea from that book do.

And now I wonder how much of the blame that Jew really has?
 

Brickjectivity

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
That makes a lot of sense. The International Bible Students Association (Jehovah's Witnesses by the time) were also sentenced to concentration camps by the nazis for their conscientious objection.

What does not make any sense at all is that based on the previous Jew's writing, anti-Christians take the opportunity to lie about Paul and Christianity.

That is outrageous not only for real Christians, but also for serious scholars of biblical themes and even for anyone who is willing to defend the true intentions of the author of that book, which perhaps were not to invent a character but to write some defense of Jew's situation... but not with the intention of distorting the image of Paul as the anti-Christians who use the idea from that book do.

And now I wonder how much of the blame that Jew really has?
We have (as Jesus says) in Christianity a mixture of wheat and tares and no way to tell them apart. If I borrow from Jesus that his disciples are sent out like sheep among wolves, I then use those two figures from Jesus to understand Paul's comments about ravening wolves that arise from within the church. I don't worry so much that some goofball or educated stranger on the outside is going to cause problems. They aren't the wolves you're looking for. Its people inside. Its the one who runs off with the treasury funds or who blackmails another person in the church. That's more like a ravening wolf. They use the church as a tool. Nobody on the outside can do the damage of someone on the inside.
 

Eli G

Well-Known Member
Thanks, but we are in a debate religious forum where some people may read whatever is written here and think it could be true.
I will do whatever I need to do so no honest truth seeker be deceived by these liars. Their lives are at stake.

Internal affairs in my community have those who are in charge of them. Everyone has their role, and one that we all have is to correctly inform everyone who we can help about biblical truth.

I need to do other things. Thanks for participating in the topic.
Have a good one.
 

Spice

StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
@Spice so, are you one of the defenders of the pseudo-Paul? Those who think that Paul was a false Christian?
I don't consider Paul a false anything. I do, as stated previously, take aaccepton to his sainthood and his elevated importance in modern Christianity.
Firstly I would like to ask you if you are a Christian in the normal sense of the word. Do you belong or did you belong to a self-proclaimed "Christian" religion/community, where a group of people meet under the guidance of a pastor and recognize baptism, etc?
I was raised very devoutly in a Congregational Christian Church that joined the United Church of Christ about half way through my youth. I was extremely vested in my church life.

I was baptised twice, since as a young adult I began going to a Southern Baptist church that did not recognize the "sprinkling" of my youth, even though I was baptised in this manner due to the trauma of a near downing experience.

In a way you could say that experience brought the Holy Spirit on me, because I soon discovered -FOR ME- I was on the very wrong path.
I already know that even an atheist can consider himself a "Christian" in some weird sense. I do know also that some Bahais identify themselves as "Christians" in some false identity ... Ironic, isn't it? how people often pose as some type of identity for the sole purpose of undermining that community and trying to subvert what it really is.
I no longer subscribe to the title of Christian. Not because of my lack of belief in God, the Father, nor the Christ, but because of my lack of faith in the dogma and restrictions placed by the churchES. For nearly a decade I have followed the path of Omnist. I am open to learning about all theological and philosophical schools of thought, and with prayer (SPEAKING TO) and meditation (LISTENING TO) the Comforter, I grow closer to God with peace and understanding.

One of the absolutes in my faith journey has been God reaches out to us wherever we are if we stop trying to slap His hand away. Therefore I can respect, learn from, and appreciate all views that do not attempt to tie me down.
So, I am NOT asking you if you consider yourself a "Christian" in any of those senses. That may help me understand you point of view. ;)
Helpful? The ONLY tenent for an Omnist is believing no religion has all truth, but every religion has some truth. For me personally, I also live by the "reminders" of the Society of Friends, thus my RF username, as well as "Let Go, and Let God" and the heart felt meaning behind the Hindu "Namaste."
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
There are many things that can be said in favor of Paul and all of them can be demonstrated with biblical passages that support them. We could not assure things about a person who lived in 1st century AD without showing documents proving that those things really happened like that.

I opened this topic because there are many anti-Christians who are dedicated to spreading lies about a "Paul", coming from their own imagination. Clearly, if you invent a character out of nothing, you can impute sayings and actions to him as you like to develop the character... but Paul was a real Christian, who died for the Christ and did many things for the truth.

Whatever a defender of the truth wants to say about Paul, it would be excellent if he/she provided the biblical passages from which he gets the information, and thus we demonstrate to the lying inventors of that pseudo-Paul that they cannot replace a real person with a invented character just because.
Jesus taught about a future of love and a return to paradise. Paul job was more practical in the sense that he was spreading the word, knowing law was still widely supported. Things were stuck at step one, and not ready for the future, as predicted by Jesus.

In Luke 12:51 Jesus said, “Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division. From now on there will be five in one family divided against each other, three against two and two against three.” In Matthew 10:34 Jesus states, “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to earth.

Paul was a very intelligent person who could reason the law like a lawyer and was heard by the Roman Senate. The Book of.Romans summarizes the philosophy of Paul, explaining the nature of law and sin, and the difference with the Law of God that Jesus spoke of and hoped others could accept.

Romans 7:1-6 7 Do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives? 2 For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. 3 So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man.
When Jesus died on the cross he was released from the law. The Resurrection of the same man, made him a new man released from the law; legal double jeopardy.

4 So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5 For when we were in the realm of the flesh,[a] the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. 6 But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code.
Romans 7; 21 So I find this law at work: Although I want to do good, evil is right there with me. 22 For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; 23 but I see another law at work in me, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within me.24 What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body that is subject to death? 25 Thanks be to God, who delivers me through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in my sinful nature[d] a slave to the law of sin.

Paul makes a distinction between God's law and law of sin. Law of sin comes from knowledge of good and evil; Satan. Law of God, comes from the Spirit which is not learned from the outside like the law of sin. It is more like good innate behavior like a mother and child.

As an analogy of the difference, a young couple meet and fall in love and wish to be married. This desire to unite came from within both of them. It is written in their hearts; innate connection. The law of sin is more like the woman needs to marry someone who is chosen by her Father or Mother. This is based on a learned cultural code or ordinance. If she refuses to marry her appointed husband, she sins against that law. If accepts her fate, she sins against her heart. The law of sin makes sins.

For example, I never would have even thought about making a law of sin, connected to the improper use of pronouns, where one is dammed if they don't. Yet one was forced to obey this nonsense, and ignore your common sense; Law of Jesus. The law of sin has this angry fearful addendum while the law of God is upbeat and positive like a natural animal.

Paul is not talking much about loving each other and forgiveness of sins, since that is God's law. He has to address the conflicted via laws of sin. These people are motivated by fear and desire, and self righteous indignation keeps it honest. That angry and nasty world is not what Jesus spoke of, but that was still practical reality. Paul jobs was to peck away at law of sin, so more would die to that law; old way based on fear, and be released so they could receive Gods law of love.

This may have made sense, to the Roman Senate, but it challenged the power of Rome since they were very old school; fear orientated. How can you control an empire without law and fear? Can you expect people to happily go along?

Romans is Paul's Philosophy which was to help people be released from law of sin, so they could accept the promise of the Spirit, which is like an inner voice that can act similar to law, but in a more natural way, like instinct. It would be like Adam and Eve before the fall, when there were no laws yet, and the inner spirit moved them as they happily explored paradise. Jesus is called the second Adam; paradise restored.
 
Last edited:

Spice

StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
So, we already have two of the defenders of the pseudo-Paul: @Spice and @Twilight Hue ... I don't remember reading the last of them identifying as a Christian, nor does it seem to me that he is, which it's Ok. Not because someone is not a Christian it means he/she can't give his/her own opinion about Biblical issues. The real point is not what you are, but where you get your version of the pseudo-Paul you defend. Do you take it from the internet? The only book that tells us about the real Paul is the Bible. I don't think that if someone has never read the Bible, they can have any idea who Paul really was.
It makes little difference in whether one has read the Bible to make a determination on Paul, as long as one knows the teachings of Christ and have read what Paul wrote without fear of disagreement with the "church" or others. The only "judge" is God Himself, so with a true desire to follow His will, and FAITH, we are led where we need to go to become closer to Him.

But to reassure you, or anyone who idolizes (my apologies if you find this word offensive) the Bible, I have read, from cover to cover, three different translations and returned to my childhood edition with all my markings and notes, which is the Revised Standard Version of 1952.
Some people think that it's enough to read a few articles on the Internet, written by people who are very interested in giving a false idea about any biblical topic. In some social networks we already have censors that delete videos with fake information.
"Fake" information is often determined with great bias.
Unfortunately, that cannot be done with much of the information disseminated on the Internet, especially false information related to biblical matters, which many talk about but
The true test for biblical matters is to have faith in discerning what you read, hear, and see. Paul did much for the "church" but I will take his words with a grain of salt, as I do anyone elses, and to date, he's right up there with Pat Robinson, IMO. Hey, but that's a huge step above Joel Olsen!
 

Eli G

Well-Known Member
Thanks for all the speech. I see you like writing too much.

In short all that you wrote would be somehting like: I follow a religion invented by me, because I believe I have the right to invent my own way to follow Jesus. Paul is not part of it, because, as the Jew said in that book, he deviated and invented his own religion apart from him.

I think it is you who are doing what you accuse Paul of. :oops:

But, lest I make you think I need more speeches on what you think about yourself ... Internet is full of the same stories and none of them move a nerve in me.

Let's get to the serious stuff:
in a trial, even if it is a personal one, we have to have bases to judge another. And what the pseudo-Paul defenders do is judge Paul and condemn him as a false Christian. What exactly are you accusing Paul of? Why don't you share with us your complaints against him? Why you think you are a better Christian than him? and when it started that hatred against him?

And when exactly did your rejection of the Paul we read in the Scriptures begin? Maybe you discovered you're gay and you don't like what he wrote about it?
 
Last edited:

Spice

StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
M
Thanks for all the speech. I see you like writing too much.

In short all that you wrote would be somehting like: I follow a religion invented by me, because I believe I have the right to invent my own way to follow Jesus. Paul is not part of it, because, as the Jew said in that book, he deviated and invented his own religion apart from him.

I think it is you who are doing what you accuse Paul of. :oops:

But, lest I make you think I need more speeches on what you think about yourself ... Internet is full of the same stories and none of them move a nerve in me.

Let's get to the serious stuff:
in a trial, even if it is a personal one, we have to have bases to judge another. And what the pseudo-Paul defenders do is judge Paul and condemn him as a false Christian. What exactly are you accusing Paul of? Why don't you share with us your complaints against him? Why you think you are a better Christian than him? and when it started that hatred against him?

And when exactly did your rejection of the Paul we read in the Scriptures begin? Maybe you discovered you're gay and you don't like what he wrote about it?
My dear friend, you need to reread my posts and reconsider your comprehension of it. Then take your troubles to the Spirit in faithful honesty, however you practice your devotions, and ask for guidance. You follow your path and I'll follow mine, both per Jesus's prophecy of John 4:23,24 23But the hour is coming, and is now here, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father is seeking such people to worship him. 24God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.”
Namaste
 

Spice

StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
Its exactly in context. The apocalypse hasn't occurred yet making it valid.

Paul claimed when he was warned not to believe.

The narrative seems pretty obvious to me.
I had not made that connection, prior. Very interesting. Jesus did tell his Apostles not to believe anyone claiming to have seen him, for he was not going to be seen again until the end. Thanks for sharing.
 

Spice

StewardshipPeaceIntergityCommunityEquality
Just for your info most of this began with a book by a talmudic scholar, and a lot of people read the book then took the ball much further. The book was titled The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity. I read most of it, and it actually does not conclude Paul invents Christianity, despite the title. While the title is a teaser it is technically passive using no verbs. The book explores an imagined Paul who invents Christianity but does not conclude anything this way or that, leaving it to the reader. However this is perhaps something to look into if you want to find out what people are getting their ideas from. The author's name is Hyam Maccoby. Its been a long time since reading it, so I cannot tell you a lot about it, now.
Interesting. I've never heard of it. I do occasionally read books with insightful ideas, but I still investigate on my own. I'm currently reading _The Misunderstood Jew_, by Amy-Jill Levine and it is very inspiring to view Jesus as a devout, passionate Jewish man in a time his people were building up an explosive resistance to Roman occupation. He desperately wanted to instill caution.
 

Ajax

Active Member
It may seem strange, but the truth is that some anti-Christians have invented a character called "Paul" to replace the real Paul we learn about in the Scriptures.

That pseudo-Paul, they say, is an enemy of Jesus Christ who invented a new religion different that the one Jesus and his apostles taught, and they say that this "Paul" dedicated himself to gaining followers of his own.

In this topic we are going to review with you the things that the Bible says about the true Paul, the servant of Jesus Christ, who worked so much for the kingdom of Christ and because of which he suffered so much.

Stay close, because those who are dedicated to pseudo-Paul's propaganda are not going to stay calm when they begin to realize that someone deceived them... or perhaps they already knew it? :oops:
Did Paul admit that he lied (for God) and that in his view, that's not a sin? Yes he did, Romans 3:7.
Was Paul accused of lying? Yes he was, 1 Tim 2:7, 2 Tim 1:15.
Did Paul became like a chameleon changing his views depending on the converts? Yes he did, 1 Cor 9:20.
Did Paul present three different ways of salvation? A) works, B) faith alone and C) predetermined? Yes he did, Rom 2:13, Rom 3:28, Eph 1:4.
Did Paul change the Law in complete contrast to Jesus sayings? Yes he did, Rom 7:8-9, 1 Cor 15:56, Matthew 5:17.
Did Jesus say that anyone who sets aside one of the least of these (law) commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven? Yes he did, Matthew 5:19.
Did Paul lie when he said that he was taught by Jesus? Yes he did, Acts 9:19-22.
Did Paul curse anyone who taught a different gospel than his? Yes he did, Gal 1:8.
Does scripture photograph Paul as liar and false apostle? Yes it does, Rev 2:1-2.

Nobody is anti-Christian. You are blinded by your faith in Paul and therefore you can not have a true and unbiased opinion.
 
Last edited:

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
Did Paul admit that he lied (for God) and that in his view, that's not a sin? Yes he did, Romans 3:7.
Did Paul became like a chameleon changing his views depending on the converts? Yes he did, 1 Cor 9:20.
Did Paul present three different ways of salvation? A) works, B) faith alone and C) predetermined? Yes he did, Rom 2:13, Rom 3:28, Eph 1:4.
Did Paul change the Law in complete contrast to Jesus sayings? Yes he did, Matthew 5:17.
Did Jesus say that anyone who sets aside one of the least of these (law) commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven? Yes he did, Matthew 5:19.
Did Paul lie when he said that he was taught by Jesus? Yes he did, Acts 9:19-22.
Does scripture photograph Paul as liar and false apostle? Yes it does, Rev 2:1-2.

You are blinded by your faith in Paul and therefore you can not have an unbiased opinion.

If Jesus fulfilled the law and sin is not imputed where there is no law, then there is no sin, if the law is fulfilled.
1 CORINTHIANS 10:23 All things are legitimate [permissible—and we are free to do anything we please], but not all things are helpful (expedient, profitable, and wholesome). All things are legitimate, but not all things are constructive [to character] and edifying [to spiritual life]. All things are lawful but I will not be mastered by anything [addiction and obsession].

Paul's difficult challenge was how do you get that message across; new dispensation, so people can accept the Living Spirit, in place of their learned law, especially when each group had its own laws, that divide each group from the others. The easiest way was to go along with the rules/laws/traditions of each group, to show you are one of them, so he could build trust and explain the change that occurred in a way they can see. Walking a mile in the shoe of others helps you understand why they are, as they are; cultural education since childhood.


1 Corinthians 9:19-23; 19Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. 20 To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. 21 To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law. 22 To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all people so that by all possible means I might save some. 23 I do all this for the sake of the gospel, that I may share in its blessings.

A major change in the heavens had occurred at the time of Paul. Here we are today about 2000 year later with more laws, for sin, than ever. The US IRS has over 70.000 pages of laws and sins. People follow the lessons of Jesus; love and caring, but still act like they are under law. This means many still do not get the Spirit, beyond a social tradition that has group rules.

The tree of knowledge of good and evil; sin and law, was occupied by Satan and was made taboo by God. Law and sin was taboo. Why still violate the taboo; accept knowledge of good and evil and claim you are pro-God, instead of pro-Satan? Original sin is this propensity to do the Adam and Eve approach, generation after generation; follow new and evolving law of man made sin. One is encouraged to accept the laws of your culture. Those with the Spirit are persecuted, since they appear to disobey the rules carved in stone.

The other tree that was in Eden was the tree of life. This is the approach that Jesus saw; law of the Spirit. Jesus is the second Adam. Like life, each entity, from bacteria to elephants have innate DNA knowledge of its purpose and the innate instincts needed to serve that purpose. There is no need to teach a seed, the human proper way to sprout, by setting a isn and punishment if it deviates; force to sprout one way, via learned fear and sin.

The children of the bondwomen are like slaves to law and sin. Like a slave you have to follow the rules of the master ands are not allowed to deviate. You have no choices. The children of the promise are free and not obligated to the law, because they are children of God and like children their received blessings from their Father, as part of their inheritance; living spirit of life and evolution.

Paul was spirited and followed his inner voice and his innate ingenuity in law, rather than check with the law to make sure he was not sinning by man made or obsolete rules, that no longer applied to him, due to the fulfillment of the law. However, many still judged the living and spontaneous spirit, by their memory of learned law and rules and condemned it as sin. They try to void the promise of the Spirit; keep the tree of life sealed and the Spirit in heaven. so law and Satan can rule the earth.

Revelation12-8 But the dragon was not strong enough, and no longer was any place found in heaven for him and his angels. 9And the great dragon was hurled down— that ancient serpent called the devil and Satan,the deceiver of the whole world. He was hurled tothe earth, and his angels with him. 10And I heard a loud voice in heaven saying: “Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ. For the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down—he who accuses them day and night before our God.…

The law was sanctioned by God in heaven up to the time of Jesus and Revelations 12. But after fulfillment of the law, there is a war in Heaven and Satan and his his knowledge of good and evil is no longer condoned by Heaven, but is thrown to earth. Paul understood that many people were still under the impression that what had been sanctioned by Heaven for centuries, was still in effect, and that the heavens had not change the rules. Satan was still in charge of law, but no longer serving the purposes of Heaven. One has to get past the noise created by knowledge of good and evil, law and sin, fear, to hear the quiet inner voice of the spirit. They are no longer both condoned on earth or heaven.
 
Last edited:

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
The Neural Impact of Law

Let me explain the psychological effect of law of good and evil with some basic neural science. When memory is written by human brain onto the cerebral matter, the core region of the brain; thalamus and limbic system, will also add emotional tags to the memory. Our fixed memories have both sensory content and feeling tones. This is why our strongest memories can induce strong feelings; first kiss, graduation, marriage, loss and death and trauma, etc.

This composite memory writing is useful to the animal brain, in that similar experiences, that triggers memory, will also trigger the same feelings allowing an animal to act on the feeling. If the animals finds a similar food and this feels good, it will eat, without having to think too deeply. Compulsions, addictions and even depression act on feelings, often without analyzing the pros and cons.

The problem with law, is law is a binary memory; good and evil. Law and knowledge of good and evil tells us the evil path as well as the good path; directly or implied, with the good and the evil paths each needing a different feeling tag; calm/good and fear/evil. The net effect is law memory is actually stored in two locations based on the feeling tones added to each of the binary parts.

Law is loosely like a magnet that has two poles; good and evil or north and south. Science has never found an isolated monopole or just a magnetic north or south. They only exist in pairs. Same is true of law and law memory. If I say an evil, you can tell me the good; or the other pole of the good and evil pair, and vice versa.

An animal can feel calm or it can feel fear, based on the circumstances. This is one tag per memory. Instinct was not designed to feel two conflicting emotions at the same time. The double feeling tag of law memory creates two opposing impulses. A good analogous example of the effect; two emotional tags for one thing, is a love and hate relationship. The love aspect wishes to approach, while the hate aspect wishes to get away. However, since both are pulling in different directions; same person of interest, one is stuck sort of in an orbit, where you can circle but not too close. You cannot fully embrace or fully run away. This causes repression of the neural energy. Law has the same type of effect. It games the natural brain and adds a repression. Instant is left or right and not left and right.

The brain partially resolves this natural conflict; alleviate the state of suspension, for most people, by repressing the dark side of law; all forms of evil we have learned. This allows us to live in the image of being good; good side of law. However, since law of good and evil is one connected thing, like the magnet, these still remain connected; orbit, albeit in an unconscious way.

What can and does happen, can be seen via the example of the Preacher, who preaches good, but becomes compelled by their own repressed evil; greed and lust. The repressed evil comes to the surface as compulsions, opposite of your choices and common sense, since they are connected like a magnet.

There appears to be a subroutine that forms, based on the dark side of law that is repressed. Freud called it the ID. I call it the Satan Subroutine.
The most primitive part of the human mind, the id is the source of our bodily needs, wants, desires, and impulses. Freud believed that the id acts according to the “pleasure principle” – the psychic force that motivates the tendency to seek immediate gratification of any impulse.

The law and knowledge of good and evil, the Satan Subroutine, is like AI, but its data base is the dark side of law combined with animal impulses; dark animal impulses. It can give the ego strong urges, that are opposite to its will to be good by the law. Law feeds the subroutine, by more law adding more sin data; new ways to express the ID and impulses. Once a new law appears, the ID also learns.

The strategy of Jesus and Paul was to reduce law to a minimal set so the ID is weaker. This can work easiest for the youngest people; children, whose ID are empty to begin with. However, those who know the most law; lawyers. have the strongest Satan subroutine that wants to become conscious; knowledge of the criminal mins. They add more laws to keep it down, which only makes it stronger, due to more sin data. Most people would not figure things out for themselves but learn sin from others such as lawyers.

It is not easy to get rid of all law, all at once. Satan thrown from heaven to the earth is implicit of the autonomous Satan Subroutine becoming a second inner voice that competes with the Spirit. Historically, it was difficult to know one from the other, so both were suspect. The promise of the Spirit of Truth stayed in limbo, for most, due to Satan Subroutine; thrown from heaven to the earth.

Years ago I did unconscious mind experiments on myself and learned about the brain. As I went deeper into the unconscious mind beyond my personal unconscious, I did hit a wall that appears to be the Satan Subroutine. One has to get past it, to have shot at removing it. The way that happened was through an update process that led to amnesia. It erased the memory grid so the ID became empty and basic. Science can help fulfill the promise of the Spirit, through knowledge of some neural science.
 

Ajax

Active Member
................
.....The law was sanctioned by God in heaven up to the time of Jesus and Revelations 12. But after fulfillment of the law, there is a war in Heaven and Satan and his his knowledge of good and evil is no longer condoned by Heaven, but is thrown to earth. Paul understood that many people were still under the impression that what had been sanctioned by Heaven for centuries, was still in effect, and that the heavens had not change the rules. Satan was still in charge of law, but no longer serving the purposes of Heaven. One has to get past the noise created by knowledge of good and evil, law and sin, fear, to hear the quiet inner voice of the spirit. They are no longer both condoned on earth or heaven.
I'm sorry, I don't believe in a scary imaginary spiritual entity that is used as an excuse for our bad choices and therefore there can be no serious discussion between us. Thank you.
 

Eli G

Well-Known Member
Paul did many powerful works through the holy spirit in him. You haters of Paul are mocking the work of the holy spirit; belittling the miracles performed through Paul and the inspired letters he wrote.

Luke wrote:

Acts 19:11 And God kept performing extraordinary powerful works through the hands of Paul, 12 so that even cloths and aprons that had touched his body were carried to the sick, and the diseases left them, and the wicked spirits came out. 13 But some of the Jews who traveled around casting out demons also tried to use the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had wicked spirits; they would say: “I solemnly charge you by Jesus whom Paul preaches.” 14 Now there were seven sons of a Jewish chief priest named Sceʹva doing this. 15 But in answer the wicked spirit said to them: “I know Jesus and I am acquainted with Paul; but who are you?” 16 At that the man with the wicked spirit leaped on them, overpowered them one after the other, and prevailed against them, so that they fled naked and wounded out of that house. 17 This became known to all, both the Jews and the Greeks who lived in Ephʹe·sus; and fear fell upon them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus went on being magnified.

Acts 14:8 Now in Lystra there was sitting a certain man disabled in his feet, lame from his mother’s womb, and he had never walked at all. 9 This man was listening to Paul speak, who, on looking at him intently and seeing he had faith to be made well, 10 said with a loud voice: “Stand up erect on your feet.” And he leaped up and began walking. 11 And the crowds, seeing what Paul had done, raised their voices, saying in the Lyc·a·oʹni·an tongue: “The gods have become like humans and have come down to us!”

... 28:3 But when Paul collected a bundle of sticks and laid it on the fire, a viper came out because of the heat and fastened itself on his hand. 4 When the foreign-speaking people caught sight of the venomous creature hanging from his hand, they began saying to one another: “Surely this man is a murderer, and although he made it to safety from the sea, Justice did not permit him to keep on living.” 5 However, he shook the creature off into the fire and suffered no harm. 6 But they were expecting him to swell up or suddenly to drop dead. After they waited for a long time and saw that nothing bad happened to him, they changed their mind and began saying he was a god.
 

Ajax

Active Member
Paul did many powerful works through the holy spirit in him. You haters of Paul are mocking the work of the holy spirit; belittling the miracles performed through Paul and the inspired letters he wrote.

Luke wrote:

Acts 19:11 And God kept performing extraordinary powerful works through the hands of Paul, 12 so that even cloths and aprons that had touched his body were carried to the sick, and the diseases left them, and the wicked spirits came out. 13 But some of the Jews who traveled around casting out demons also tried to use the name of the Lord Jesus over those who had wicked spirits; they would say: “I solemnly charge you by Jesus whom Paul preaches.” 14 Now there were seven sons of a Jewish chief priest named Sceʹva doing this. 15 But in answer the wicked spirit said to them: “I know Jesus and I am acquainted with Paul; but who are you?” 16 At that the man with the wicked spirit leaped on them, overpowered them one after the other, and prevailed against them, so that they fled naked and wounded out of that house. 17 This became known to all, both the Jews and the Greeks who lived in Ephʹe·sus; and fear fell upon them all, and the name of the Lord Jesus went on being magnified.

Acts 14:8 Now in Lystra there was sitting a certain man disabled in his feet, lame from his mother’s womb, and he had never walked at all. 9 This man was listening to Paul speak, who, on looking at him intently and seeing he had faith to be made well, 10 said with a loud voice: “Stand up erect on your feet.” And he leaped up and began walking. 11 And the crowds, seeing what Paul had done, raised their voices, saying in the Lyc·a·oʹni·an tongue: “The gods have become like humans and have come down to us!”

... 28:3 But when Paul collected a bundle of sticks and laid it on the fire, a viper came out because of the heat and fastened itself on his hand. 4 When the foreign-speaking people caught sight of the venomous creature hanging from his hand, they began saying to one another: “Surely this man is a murderer, and although he made it to safety from the sea, Justice did not permit him to keep on living.” 5 However, he shook the creature off into the fire and suffered no harm. 6 But they were expecting him to swell up or suddenly to drop dead. After they waited for a long time and saw that nothing bad happened to him, they changed their mind and began saying he was a god.
Omg!! Are you leaving in the middle Ages, believing in demons and talking wicked spirits? ...Honestly! There is no hope for some people...
Oh.. and it was very ..thoughtful of Paul to ...burn the little viper..:mad:
 
Top