Christianity without Paul

[emmiedahl]

(Feel free to move this to Chatter if it belongs there, but since Paul comes up so much, I thought it was relevant to snark.)

I am not a Jew who has a problem with Jesus himself, although I understand why some do. Jesus seems to me like a proto-Reform Jew; he advocated for acting with love and ignoring the minutia of Jewish law when it was contrary to the values of love and compassion. I have never heard a Jesus quote that offended me. In fact, many are inspiring. I consider him a great figure like Gandhi and some of the Jewish thinkers.

There is a theory that Paul was a plant by the Pharisees (STATE!!! to quote JesusFightClub), sent to separate Christianity from Judaism and even from the compelling figure of Jesus before it became a major movement. He succeeded, and Paul's words seem to be generally held in the Christian community as having more weight than anything else in the Bible.

Another consideration is that there are Gospels in which Jesus denies being God, and I believe even the Messiah. The belief that Jesus was not divine was legitimate in the early Christian church. The Gospels supporting this were thrown out of the New Testament during the Nicaea thing. They can still be found and read, and they provide an interesting counterpoint to the rest of the narrative.

What would Christianity be without Paul? How might things have been different? I imagine a Christianity free of hate. Maybe still bound up in legalism because this is the tendency of organized religion, but free of misogyny. Free of a voice that directly counters Jesus's message of equality and compassion. Maybe there would be no Christianity at all; Paul was certainly effective in creating distance between Christ's followers and the Jewish religion at the time. I can almost imagine Jesus as a major Jewish thinker if not for Paul and also not for subsequent attempts to repaint the man as a Messiah and/or God. Who knows what he wrote, what has been destroyed in the attempt to keep a Paulian Church. I would love to hear Jesus's take on the Binding of Isaac, for example.

Any thoughts on this?

[ladypuglover]

I as a Christian would like to see a lot less of Paul but then again I'm only woman so what do I know.

[emmiedahl]

I am curious, how do you reconcile Paul with the rest of Christianity? Was he just wrong, or misquoted, or misinterpreted? If you believe the Bible is infallible, that is.

[pfamilygal]

Here's a great book dh and I are studying, reconciling Paul with egalitarianism and women in ministry.

http://www.amazon.com/What-Paul-Really- ... 558&sr=8-1

[TXDuck]

I am curious, how do you reconcile Paul with the rest of Christianity? Was he just wrong, or misquoted, or misinterpreted? If you believe the Bible is infallible, that is.

Well, there's a lot of people's first mistake. The Bible is not infallible. It's bad theology to say that it is. It is the inspired word of God recorded by humans. As such, it can be tainted with human failing. So you need to look at the Bible with a critical eye, keeping in mind the time and culture specific passages may have been meant for. And ultimately, everything needs to run through the "Jesus Test". What did Christ say about something? Did he say anything? What can we infer from His other teachings? If you do that, Paul becomes a much less damaging figure to modern Christianity.

[JenniferJuniper]

The Bible is not infallible. It's bad theology to say that it is. It is the inspired word of God recorded by humans.

How has it been confirmed that "it is the inspired word of God"?

[TXDuck]

How has it been confirmed that "it is the inspired word of God"?

I don't think I quite get what you meant. Would "revealed word of God" be better? I don't think you can confirm something is of God. You'd have to act on faith, wouldn't you? If I'm missing your point, I do apologize.

[JenniferJuniper]

I don't think I quite get what you meant. Would "revealed word of God" be better? I don't think you can confirm something is of God. You'd have to act on faith, wouldn't you? If I'm missing your point, I do apologize.

No, you're not missing anything. You emphatically stated that "the Bible is the inspired word of God".

I disagree. Stated using your emphatic format:

"The Bible is not the inspired word of any God; it's merely a collection of the ancient writings of human beings with varied political agendas.â€

[TXDuck]

Ok, I believe the Bible to be the inspired word of God. Better? However, even from a purely academic standpoint, if you filter everything in the Bible through the Jesus Test, Paul would still lose significance. Well, if you were doing it honestly. However, freely admitting Paul may have been talking out of his ass in many cases isn't terribly popular in a lot of Christian circles. I suspect fundies would rather throw out what Christ said rather than admit Paul wasn't Christ.

[Arielkay]

I have always said the Church of Christ should be called the Church of Paul. About all they do is quote Paul. One church I went to (my husband is cradle CoC) had the old "women shuddup in church" sermon at least once a month. I heard that the preacher kept getting anonymous pissed off notes so I guess he thought he had to keep people in line.

I didn't realize other Protestants were as crazy about Paul - then again, I guess it would make sense for the fundies of any branch to adore the guy. Even if they aren't even sure he wrote all the letters. If he did, he certainly contradicted himself a lot. Also, they fail to realize it is just a letter to one congregation, not all of Christianity.

But then again, never heard of a Fundie that didn't cherry-pick what fit his own preconceived notions.

[kpmom]

Ok, I believe the Bible to be the inspired word of God. Better? However, even from a purely academic standpoint, if you filter everything in the Bible through the Jesus Test, Paul would still lose significance. Well, if you were doing it honestly. However, freely admitting Paul may have been talking out of his ass in many cases isn't terribly popular in a lot of Christian circles. I suspect fundies would rather throw out what Christ said rather than admit Paul wasn't Christ.

If you believe the Bible is the inspired word of God doesn't that include Paul too?

[NurseNell]

I as a Christian would like to see a lot less of Paul but then again I'm only woman so what do I know.

Same here. So much of the misogny in Christianity is rooted in Paul. I think Jesus was a much different kind of man, someone who loved people. Paul hated himself and therefore couldn't love others.

[TXDuck]

If you believe the Bible is the inspired word of God doesn't that include Paul too?

Yes, and at times, it seems clear he was inspired by the Holy Spirit.* Other times, well, see the Jesus test. Additionally, there has always been controversy about the authorship of many of Paul's letters. So you have to take all that into account when reading him. And then you do need to reconcile what Paul appears to be saying against what Christ taught.

*To me. If you're not Christian, then obviously, this is a completely academic endeavor and "inspired word of God" is a pointless phrase.

[reds]

I dont have alot to add but I wanted to say that i think that the Gospels trump all other words in the bible. We should be doing as Jesus did, not as someone else may have written later.

Also i believe that the bible is not infallible, even if it is only on basis that the translators are human and words can mean many different things.

[Anise]

What the Bible says on Paul:

2 Peter 3: 16 "His [Paul] letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."

;)

[kpmom]

Yes, and at times, it seems clear he was inspired by the Holy Spirit.* Other times, well, see the Jesus test. Additionally, there has always been controversy about the authorship of many of Paul's letters. So you have to take all that into account when reading him. And then you do need to reconcile what Paul appears to be saying against what Christ taught.

*To me. If you're not Christian, then obviously, this is a completely academic endeavor and "inspired word of God" is a pointless phrase.

I guess I'm not understanding how you can feel the Bible is the inspired word of God on the one hand, yet feel Paul is talking out of his ass at times, on the other. You didn't say you believed parts of the Bible are the inspired word of God, so I'm assuming you believe all of it is?

[Arete]

I think Paul was a tormented man capable of both great insight and great hate. There is a lot of controversy over which epistles he actually authored and which were authored in his name (i.e. Corinthians seems to be agreed on as Paul's, 2nd Timothy and Titus not so much) He was also very much the product of a 1st century middle eastern background. Jesus is the exceptional thinker and spirit.

[TXDuck]

I guess I'm not understanding how you can feel the Bible is the inspired word of God on the one hand, yet feel Paul is talking out of his ass at times, on the other. You didn't say you believed parts of the Bible are the inspired word of God, so I'm assuming you believe all of it is?

No, why would you assume that? Sometimes he was talking out of his ass. Sometimes he did seem to be inspired. Also, I believe in God. I read the Bible. ;)

Ok, perhaps this is too brief. You shouldn't swallow everything in the Bible hook, line, and sinker. Some of it was clearly never meant to be taken literally. Some of it needs to be studied keeping in mind who the original audience was supposed to be. All of it is meant to be read with the understanding that humans wrote it all down and because of that, some passages are in error.

ETA: Furthermore, it is necessary to know that the Bible wasn't written at one time and the authorship for many passages is in grave doubt. As in, some passages were mostly likely added around 800-1000 AD in order to forward a Pope's or a religious order's specific agenda.

[emmiedahl]

My personal beliefs about the Tanakh is that it is a second-hand message from God. So some parts are quite accurate, some are not-so-much, most are in-between, and all was filtered through the lens of Bronze Age people from one small tribe on a huge planet. A tribe I happen to belong to. I don't expect anyone to agree and I feel no need to legislate my beliefs on this matter.

It's hard to think of a Torah figure who is given as much air-time as Paul gets in Christianity, and especially hard to think of one who gets the air-time AND was a misogynist asshole. So I am really interested in Paul.

[kpmom]

No, why would you assume that? .

Um, this;

Ok, I believe the Bible to be the inspired word of God. .

[TXDuck]

I should have elaborated at the time. Sorry for that. Much of it, some of it isn't. Some of the inspired part is more inspired than other inspired parts.

[Witsec7]

For those that do feel the bible is their religious tome, what do you think of the gnostic gospels?

[debrand]

This is weird but I find I enjoy discussing the gospel more now that I am no longer a Christian. Perhaps not believing that my existence in eternity is dependent on my interpretation is behind my enjoyment.

Paul's view on salvation seems to contradict Jesus'. Jesus spoke of things that one must do to be saved.

Notice many Christians speak about the verses that deal with salvation, they mainly quote Paul not Jesus. When they do quote Jesus it is only what is written in the book of John. I think that this is because Jesus spoke about works which contradits the view of faith alone.

Jesus said that in order to be saved someone must believe and be baptised. That isn't faith alone. He also spoke against those that don't help the poor. When Jesus spoke on the Good Samaritan, he didn't tell the questioner to just believe, he gave him concrete instructions. Love god, love your neighbor.

Luke 10:25-37

New International Version (NIV)

The Parable of the Good Samaritan

25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,†he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?†26 “What is written in the Law?†he replied. “How do you read it?â€

27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’â€

28 “You have answered correctly,†Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.â€

29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?â€

30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35 The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?â€

37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.â€

Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise

There are other verses that are similar.

edited

[Witsec7]

When we read the words of Jesus, the great teacher, there are only two moral commandments as Debrand has outlined. If Christians measure acts/behaviors against those two commandments thats all that is needed. The problem comes in when the words of the teacher were politicized by Constantine and a religion was established. Then the Jesusists (my word) had to pick one side or the other, and each side was defined by man, not the Christ.

I have friends who are Jesusists, they aren't religionists, they follow two commandments. We have very little disagreement on any of the larger social topics like welfare, gay marriage, single parents, or acts of charity.

[debrand]

When a heathen who wished to become a Jew asked him for a summary of the Jewish religion in the most concise terms, Hillel said: "What is hateful to thee, do not unto thy fellow man: this is the whole Law; the rest is mere commentary" (Shab. 31a). With these words Hillel recognized as the fundamental principle of the Jewish moral law the Biblical precept of brotherly love

I"ve often wondered if Jesus knew about Hillel. Their golden rules are very similar