The Pauline Paradox

[Ben Avraham]

The Pauline Paradox

When Paul started preaching about Jesus as the Messiah and son of God, he never realized that he had created a huge paradox.

You see, for Jesus to be the Messiah, he had to be a biological son of Joseph's, who was the one from the Tribe of Judah, whose Tribe the Messiah was supposed to come from. Mary was from the Tribe of Levi. She was of the family of Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron the Levite. (Luke 1:5,36)

Since Jesus is also claimed to be the son of God, he could not be the Messiah, because God is not subject to human genealogies.

On the other hand, if Christians decided to grab the chance of at least to make of Jesus the Messiah by agreeing to drop the tale of the virgin birth, and to admit that he was indeed Joseph's biological son, he could not be son of God; and here the situation would get worse because even the doctrine of the Trinity would collapse.

That's indeed a huge paradox that can be accepted only by faith, which requires no explanation. But then again, where faith begins, knowledge ends. And for lack of knowledge, People perish. (Hosea 4:6)

Now, if there is anyone out there with enough wisdom to unriddle this paradox, I'll be more than happy to take my hat off to him or her. If not, the Sphynx will keep waiting patiently beside the Egyptian pyramids for the passers-by.

Good luck!

 

[Brickjectivity]

The Pauline Paradox

When Paul started preaching about Jesus as the Messiah and son of God, he never realized that he had created a huge paradox.

You see, for Jesus to be the Messiah, he had to be a biological son of Joseph's, who was the one from the Tribe of Judah, whose Tribe the Messiah was supposed to come from. Mary was from the Tribe of Levi. She was of the family of Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron the Levite. (Luke 1:5,36)

Since Jesus is also claimed to be the son of God, he could not be the Messiah, because God is not subject to human genealogies.

On the other hand, if Christians decided to grab the chance of at least to make of Jesus the Messiah by agreeing to drop the tale of the virgin birth, and to admit that he was indeed Joseph's biological son, he could not be son of God; and here the situation would get worse because even the doctrine of the Trinity would collapse.

That's indeed a huge paradox that can be accepted only by faith, which requires no explanation. But then again, where faith begins, knowledge ends. And for lack of knowledge, People perish. (Hosea 4:6)

Now, if there is anyone out there with enough wisdom to unriddle this paradox, I'll be more than happy to take my hat off to him or her. If not, the Sphynx will keep waiting patiently beside the Egyptian pyramids for the passers-by.

Good luck!

That is reasonable, but Paul seems aware of the paradox rather than unaware of it. Paul's world is like the Schroedinger's Cat paradox. He's claiming "No, we aren't destroyed. Judaism lives on, and everything about the messiah will be completed in the church." As long as Paul's disciples persevere on he can't be disproved, but if they quit and fail then his messiah is proven to be a fake (his cat is dead) -- or if somebody else fulfills all the messianic promises first. That also disproves him. As long as the disciples don't quit and no other messiah comes forward, Paul's cat remains unseen in the box.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

The Pauline Paradox

When Paul started preaching about Jesus as the Messiah and son of God, he never realized that he had created a huge paradox.

You see, for Jesus to be the Messiah, he had to be a biological son of Joseph's, who was the one from the Tribe of Judah, whose Tribe the Messiah was supposed to come from. Mary was from the Tribe of Levi. She was of the family of Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron the Levite. (Luke 1:5,36)

Since Jesus is also claimed to be the son of God, he could not be the Messiah, because God is not subject to human genealogies.

On the other hand, if Christians decided to grab the chance of at least to make of Jesus the Messiah by agreeing to drop the tale of the virgin birth, and to admit that he was indeed Joseph's biological son, he could not be son of God; and here the situation would get worse because even the doctrine of the Trinity would collapse.

That's indeed a huge paradox that can be accepted only by faith, which requires no explanation. But then again, where faith begins, knowledge ends. And for lack of knowledge, People perish. (Hosea 4:6)

Now, if there is anyone out there with enough wisdom to unriddle this paradox, I'll be more than happy to take my hat off to him or her. If not, the Sphynx will keep waiting patiently beside the Egyptian pyramids for the passers-by.

Good luck!

I'm not totally certain of these events,
but this is how I currently see the paradox:

A 'virgin' birth simply means that Mary was a virgin up to the point of conception.
She was chaste and virtuous. Kinda like getting a hole-in-one the first time you go onto a golf course.

But I think you err here:

because God is not subject to human genealogies.

The point of God being incarnated into a human form is to reveal the essence of the human condition.
Thus He would have to go through all the troubles and difficulties of being human so as to see why it
is that humans commit so much sin. Which of the 10 commandments do we suffer from the most?

That someone who did so much good was crucified, shows that it was the 10th commandment
which is so vital, and so ignored. His detractors were jealous of him.

 

[wizanda]

First off sorry for not replying earlier to the other thread, had started to this morning, then been thinking about it.....

The Pauline Paradox

It isn't only Paul's paradox, we find the same in the gospels.

he had to be a biological son of Joseph's

The text says he isn't in multiple accounts.

whose Tribe the Messiah was supposed to come from.

Yeshua never said the Messiahship had come, yet will be seen on the right hand-side of God, with the Messianic age still to come.

Paul and John muddy the water, as they're saying it had come.

because God is not subject to human genealogies.

God is beyond form.

The idea of the soul being planted like a seed is normal; it is the virgin births that are rare.

the doctrine of the Trinity would collapse.

If Yeshua was Joseph's... There were early schools of thought, that believed he reached divinity due to his fulfilling of Isaiah 53....

Which is why he said, "take this cup a way from me"; yet still fulfilled the plan, for the will of God.

 

[Ben Avraham]

That is reasonable, but Paul seems aware of the paradox rather than unaware of it. Paul's world is like the Schroedinger's Cat paradox. He's claiming "No, we aren't destroyed. Judaism lives on, and everything about the messiah will be completed in the church." As long as Paul's disciples persevere on he can't be disproved, but if they quit and fail then his messiah is proven to be a fake (his cat is dead) -- or if somebody else fulfills all the messianic promises first. That also disproves him. As long as the disciples don't quit and no other messiah comes forward, Paul's cat remains unseen in the box.

If Paul seemed aware of this paradox, he would have caused more damage to his credibility than by not being aware. You must try to understand that Jesus was no longer around when Paul started preaching his gospel.
It means Jesus had never even dreamed that Paul would ever rise. In was in absentia that Paul made of Jesus of the lineage of David by making of him the Messiah and claimed him to be the son of God as an individual.
(Acts 9:20; II Timothy 2:8)

 

[Desert Snake]

The Pauline Paradox

When Paul started preaching about Jesus as the Messiah and son of God, he never realized that he had created a huge paradox.

You see, for Jesus to be the Messiah, he had to be a biological son of Joseph's, who was the one from the Tribe of Judah, whose Tribe the Messiah was supposed to come from. Mary was from the Tribe of Levi. She was of the family of Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron the Levite. (Luke 1:5,36)

Since Jesus is also claimed to be the son of God, he could not be the Messiah, because God is not subject to human genealogies.

On the other hand, if Christians decided to grab the chance of at least to make of Jesus the Messiah by agreeing to drop the tale of the virgin birth, and to admit that he was indeed Joseph's biological son, he could not be son of God; and here the situation would get worse because even the doctrine of the Trinity would collapse.

That's indeed a huge paradox that can be accepted only by faith, which requires no explanation. But then again, where faith begins, knowledge ends. And for lack of knowledge, People perish. (Hosea 4:6)

Now, if there is anyone out there with enough wisdom to unriddle this paradox, I'll be more than happy to take my hat off to him or her. If not, the Sphynx will keep waiting patiently beside the Egyptian pyramids for the passers-by.

Good luck!

Jesus speaks of the one to come after Him. Now, that is obviously the 'Messiah', that matches your ''definition''. The thing is, ''Messiah'', merely means ''a'' Messiah, and Jesus /fulfilled those /specific/ Messianic actions that are attributed to Him.
The coming Messiah that Jesus spoke of, may or may not be ''Jesus'', so that is going to depend on your belief.

 

[metis]

A 'virgin' birth simply means that Mary was a virgin up to the point of conception.

As was my mother. Now, you believe that, right, since you read it here.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I'm not totally certain of these events,
but this is how I currently see the paradox:

A 'virgin' birth simply means that Mary was a virgin up to the point of conception.
She was chaste and virtuous. Kinda like getting a hole-in-one the first time you go onto a golf course.

But I think you err here:


The point of God being incarnated into a human form is to reveal the essence of the human condition.
Thus He would have to go through all the troubles and difficulties of being human so as to see why it
is that humans commit so much sin. Which of the 10 commandments do we suffer from the most?

That someone who did so much good was crucified, shows that it was the 10th commandment
which is so vital, and so ignored. His detractors were jealous of him.

HaShem, the Creator of the universe did not have to incarnate as a human being in order to know why humans sin so much.
He knows without having to do something just because we wish He did or should have done. That's not how the Lord works.
IMHO, you are simply speculating; no offense meant.

 

[metis]

HaShem, the Creator of the universe did not have to incarnate as a human being in order to know why humans sin so much.
He knows without having to do something just because we wish He did or should have done. That's not how the Lord works.
IMHO, you are simply speculating; no offense meant.

And that really is my point in #7. If I say "My mother was a virgin and she impregnated by the Holy Spirit and our son is literally God", what's your or anyone else's reaction? If Jesus said or implied that, does anyone seriously think he people back then would believe him? And who was there to see Mary getting pregnant in the first place besides some man-- I hope Joseph.

Some do not understand the heavy symbolic use of words especially found in early Jewish literature, so they believe it at the literal level instead of putting it into perspective.

 

[fantome profane]

Did Paul actually preach the virgin birth?

 

[Brickjectivity]

If Paul seemed aware of this paradox, he would have caused more damage to his credibility than by not being aware. You must try to understand that Jesus was no longer around when Paul started preaching his gospel.

Credibility is a problem for you, too. You object to Paul's separation of around 30 years, but you are separated by thousands of years from Paul. All that matters is if you feel Christianity is evil and must be destroyed or not. Is it a rotten dead thing or is it a struggling plant. A. Paul B. no Paul . That is the only argument that affects Paul.

It means Jesus had never even dreamed that Paul would ever rise. In was in absentia that Paul made of Jesus of the lineage of David by making of him the Messiah and claimed him to be the son of God as an individual.
(Acts 9:20; II Timothy 2:8)

This is an argument in absence, because Jesus refuses to witness to his own characteristics. You have chosen a Jesus you find convenient to use against Paul, but your Jesus is like some guy you paid 5$ to appear in a rented tuxedo. Your argument does not impact Paul who deals with Christ, not so much with Jesus and is a much better established character. He constantly talks about Christ which is not limited to the characteristics of a man. There is the story and then there is the church, which is really Paul's argument rather than historical details about Jesus.

 

[Brickjectivity]

So you're waiting for a messiah to arrive for Judaism? /non-Christianity?

Right now, /current reality/, no messiah has arrived for Judaism, so that is currently the ''paradox''.

We're discussing Paul not me. I'm just a platypus in a hurricane. Judaism's messiah is apparently in no hurry.

 

[Desert Snake]

No. We're discussing Paul not me. I'm just a platypus in a hurricane.

Not really,, we're discussing Jesus, the nature of Jesus, so forth, as far as I can tell. The thread context is actually about Jesus

 

[psychoslice]

I always say it over and over, if you take the bible literally you'll always find problems.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Not really,, we're discussing Jesus, the nature of Jesus, so forth, as far as I can tell. The thread context is actually about Jesus

Sorry. I thought you were asking about me personally. Let me try again.

So you're waiting for a messiah to arrive for Judaism? /non-Christianity?

Right now, /current reality/, no messiah has arrived for Judaism, so that is currently the ''paradox''.

Judaism by itself is pretty good and accomplishes things. Waiting for the messiah is not terrible, and the faithful are not just waiting, no. Just waiting would be bad, yes. We aren't just talking about Jesus but about Paul, particularly about his mystery of "Christ in you, the hope of glory." Christianity is all about that.

Yes that is paradoxical as well as the destruction of the 2nd temple, which was a terrible judgment against Rome and by proxy against all of the great civilizations of that age, perhaps against all civilizations in every age before or since. It might even have meant (or mean today) that humankind was doomed and all beauty and all culture would be forever in jeopardy. Otherwise how could such a thing happen when Rome was so advanced, more beautiful and more interesting than anything previous, more powerful, more educated, more emotional, more everything. It was the best civilization that human kind had ever produced, yet it was nothing more than a child killer. All it had to do was not oppress the weak, not destroy the temple of peace, but it couldn't even get that right. It was a monumental disgrace.

 

[Thief]

The Pauline Paradox

When Paul started preaching about Jesus as the Messiah and son of God, he never realized that he had created a huge paradox.

You see, for Jesus to be the Messiah, he had to be a biological son of Joseph's, who was the one from the Tribe of Judah, whose Tribe the Messiah was supposed to come from. Mary was from the Tribe of Levi. She was of the family of Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron the Levite. (Luke 1:5,36)

Since Jesus is also claimed to be the son of God, he could not be the Messiah, because God is not subject to human genealogies.

On the other hand, if Christians decided to grab the chance of at least to make of Jesus the Messiah by agreeing to drop the tale of the virgin birth, and to admit that he was indeed Joseph's biological son, he could not be son of God; and here the situation would get worse because even the doctrine of the Trinity would collapse.

That's indeed a huge paradox that can be accepted only by faith, which requires no explanation. But then again, where faith begins, knowledge ends. And for lack of knowledge, People perish. (Hosea 4:6)

Now, if there is anyone out there with enough wisdom to unriddle this paradox, I'll be more than happy to take my hat off to him or her. If not, the Sphynx will keep waiting patiently beside the Egyptian pyramids for the passers-by.

Good luck!

how about....being a son of God is a matter of personal declaration

 

[Desert Snake]

Sorry. I thought you were asking about me personally. Let me try again.

Judaism by itself is pretty good and accomplishes things. Waiting for the messiah is not terrible, and the faithful are not just waiting, no. Just waiting would be bad, yes.

But that isn't my point; and in my understanding of 'christian' beliefs, ''we'' are ''waiting'', for the return of Jesus. some might believe that it won't be Jesus, but generally it's considered the Second coming of Jesus.
So, not really sure what you're trying to say,

 

[Brickjectivity]

But that isn't my point; you are not waiting for the return of Jesus?

You are but don't take it literally. Remember that Jesus dies and is resurrected? Paul says Christians have been resurrected (past tense) too, yet we can go and look at their graves. (Eph 2:6, Col 2:12) They have also been seated in heavenly places with him. Now tell me, do you see Christians sitting in the sky? No, you don't; because its not talking about that. Do you see Christians crawling out of graves? No you don't, because that isn't what its talking about. When Jesus says "He that believes in me though he dies yet he lives" what does he mean? Possibly not what you are thinking he means, and when Revelation says Jesus is coming on the clouds of heaven, possibly that also does not mean that you are expected to wait for a man to fly down out of the sky.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

HaShem, the Creator of the universe did not have to incarnate as a human being in order to know why humans sin so much.
He knows without having to do something just because we wish He did or should have done. That's not how the Lord works.
IMHO, you are simply speculating; no offense meant.

Oh, I am speculating, but so are you.
He incarnated into human form to reveal to us our sin.
If omnipotence was universal there would be no sin.
If there was no sin, there would be no process of overcoming: the universe would be in a stagnant state of glory.

 

[Jonathan Ainsley Bain]

As was my mother. Now, you believe that, right, since you read it here.

I know Christ is the redeemer as I have communed with him.
The rest is analysis, speculation and contemplation.