Christianity without Paul

[emmiedahl]

The Golden Rule is fairly universal. Buddhists have it, I am sure most religions do. Atheists seem to follow it as well or better than theists. Human beings have an acute fairness sensor. Try giving a cookie to four children and not to the fifth if you don't believe me :lol:

[fluttershies]

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

These verses are probably the main reasoning for going 'Torah Observant' (quotation marks added as I know their opinion of what constitutes Torah is not the same as what actual Jews believe) for most Christians. Personally, I find it very telling that James (who was you know, the brother of Jesus along with Jude) is much closer to the Gospels in terms of content than Paul's letters are (and I am neither a fundie or 'Torah Observant'). I do believe that Scripture thinkers were inspired by God but since they were around in a less literate time, the content of what they thought got muddled. Certainly Calvinism and other big fundie ideas that are at best not very Gospel-like and at worst very damaging, seem to be from Paul/a writer posing as Paul and not Jesus.

It's certainly a very interesting topic and I'm glad it got brought up.

[Lana]

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

I agree with this. I have always found most of Paul's teachings to be so hateful.

What is the Jesus test?

[chiccy]

Thank you for this thread. I HATE PAUL and I wish he would just butt his fucking head out of Christianity.

I agree that Jesus was super cool and Christianity would be a much clearer force for good if its focus were limited to Jesus' words and work. Obviously the apostles are responsible for many of the retellings of the latter, but in general I think they sort of get in the way...ESPECIALLY PAUL.

[JenniferJuniper]

Human beings have an acute fairness sensor.

So do monkeys. (well, female monkeys)

http://www.primates.com/monkeys/fairness.html

[kpmom]

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.

Ok TXDuck. That makes sense.

[BayLee_10]

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

WTF, it certainly has been proven to my satisfaction that no one knows what the original words God were. That is nonsense, in MHO. 'Inspired words of God' as recorded by humans, translated many times, and then total books were removed. Were those books not the word of God? Believe what you want, it's your head, you can keep it up your ass if you want to.

[2xx1xy1JD]

I'm not going to pretend to be the biggest expert on Christianity, but wouldn't Christianity without Paul be, well, Judaism? Jesus echoed some existing schools of thought within Judaism, including the prophets and certain Pharisees such as Hillel. At most, it might look like some of the Messianic trends within Judaism.

[JenniferJuniper]

WTF, it certainly has been proven to my satisfaction that no one knows what the original words God were.

I'm considerably further back on this. Still looking for someone to explain to me a) how they know there is a God and b) how they've been able to confirm this god used actual words to communicate with humans during a particular time frame in human history in one part of the world. (Why didn't he chat up the Chinese for instance? They were a more advanced culture at the time.)

But the only answer I ever get is the lyrics to an old George Michael song...

As for the picking and choosing what to believe out of the Bible to suit modern sensibilities, well, don't get me started on that.

[kpmom]

I'm considerably further back on this. Still looking for someone to explain to me a) how they know there is a God and b) how they've been able to confirm this god used actual words to communicate with humans during a particular time frame in human history in one part of the world. (Why didn't he chat up the Chinese for instance? They were a more advanced culture at the time.)

But the only answer I ever get is the lyrics to an old George Michael song...

As for the picking and choosing what to believe out of the Bible to suit modern sensibilities, well, don't get me started on that.

"I want your sex"??

[TXDuck]

WTF, it certainly has been proven to my satisfaction that no one knows what the original words God were. That is nonsense, in MHO. 'Inspired words of God' as recorded by humans, translated many times, and then total books were removed. Were those books not the word of God? Believe what you want, it's your head, you can keep it up your ass if you want to.

Is there a reason you're mad at me? No, you can't prove.the Bible is the inspired Word of God. And you can't prove there is a God.It's a matter of faith. As I'm not saying you should believe as I do and I certainly don't want my beliefs codifed into law, I fail to see a problem. Wasn't the topic at hand "Christianity without Paul"? There does seem to be a bit of a consensus that it would be better without him or at least with him in a much lesser position.

[Rosa]

it seems like, without Paul (and similar organizational/then-mainstream leaders inside the movement), Christianity wouldn't have become a legal or institutional force. It would have been just one more little sect, like Mithraism or the patron deities of individual cities or whatever.

[reds]

I was listening to my daughter reading off a prayer for forgiveness on the way to work this morning and i started to think about what it said. (We are ebil catholics.)

The prayer line was, "Forgive me for what i have done and what i have failed to do."

Since this is an important part of our faith and how we choose to live. How do the fundies determine that they will not be judged on what they have failed to do. It is all and good that they have dressed modestly and stayed pure etc. But if they dont serve the poor, or prey on them like what the carlot looks like it is doing, then they are going to hell.

Do unto others is a big lesson in the Bible.

Thoughts?

[TXDuck]

They would probably counter with "justification through faith along". That is, it doesn't matter what they did or failed to do, their salvation rests in accepting Christ as their personal savior.

Also, it's been awhile since Catholic schools, but technically, wouldn't they go to Purgatory? ;)

Not found in any official dogma or doctrine, there is a current movement that suggests that when you die, you are given one final chance. That then if you repent and/or chose to believe, you are admitted into heaven. If not, you are separated from God forever. (Lutherans don't have a fire and brimstone hell. We have eternal separation from God and all that God represents such as love, hope, joy. A little esoteric, I give you.) However, you would still be accountable for all the wrong you did or the good you didn't do. A nun of all people offered this view of judgement, you know that feeling when you're caught doing something really wrong and you've deeply disappointed a loved one? That feeling times 100 or so. Interesting view of Judgement.

In any event, if you really believed, no matter how awful you were, you would get a chance to get into heaven. However, do we really think these fundies really believe? I know they Believe® but their faith seems to go no further than their horrifying ensembles.

[debrand]

I was listening to my daughter reading off a prayer for forgiveness on the way to work this morning and i started to think about what it said. (We are ebil catholics.)

The prayer line was, "Forgive me for what i have done and what i have failed to do."

Since this is an important part of our faith and how we choose to live. How do the fundies determine that they will not be judged on what they have failed to do. It is all and good that they have dressed modestly and stayed pure etc. But if they dont serve the poor, or prey on them like what the carlot looks like it is doing, then they are going to hell.

Do unto others is a big lesson in the Bible.

Thoughts?

I think that, for some Christians, solving the problems with poverty are so overwhelming that they would rather worry about their clothes or purity.

[Swamptribe]

See, as a non-theist, this is the kind of stuff I love to read. Theists, discussing, in an civil and reasonable way, their views on one of their own religious texts. This sort of thing gives me hope.

Plus, I now have a craving for a cookie.

[TXDuck]

I think that, for some Christians, solving the problems with poverty are so overwhelming that they would rather worry about their clothes or purity.

I think you're right. Also, I think there are Christians who take things like "the poor will always be with you" as justification for not doing anything at all. Then you have a(n) (un)healthy dose of Check Box Christians®, the ones that think homeschooling, never showing their knees, holding ridiculous ideas are a legitimate substitute for actually being Christian. I'm pretty sure that covers all the fundies discussed here.

[TXDuck]

See, as a non-theist, this is the kind of stuff I love to read. Theists, discussing, in an civil and reasonable way, their views on one of their own religious texts. This sort of thing gives me hope.

We can start shouting if you want. ;) Also, I heard mention of a cookie?

[AudreyE]

I will reiterate that many of the books claiming to be written by Paul were not. I am under the impression, for example, that few legitimate (i.e. not fundie) scholars will tell your Timothy was written by Paul. It's very accepted that it was not.

So, if we're talking about the complete works of "Paul," then I agree with what some others have said here, according to the way I read the gospel and the epistles: Jesus seems quite clear to me that salvation depends on actions. Paul promotes salvation based on grace. I've always figured we've moved toward the grace idea, because it's the one that allows people to be selfish, lazy, fucks and still be smug about how saved they are.

[reds]

I will reiterate that many of the books claiming to be written by Paul were not. I am under the impression, for example, that few legitimate (i.e. not fundie) scholars will tell your Timothy was written by Paul. It's very accepted that it was not.

So, if we're talking about the complete works of "Paul," then I agree with what some others have said here, according to the way I read the gospel and the epistles: Jesus seems quite clear to me that salvation depends on actions. Paul promotes salvation based on grace. I've always figured we've moved toward the grace idea, because it's the one that allows people to be selfish, lazy, fucks and still be smug about how saved they are.

But isnt that what is going to fuck them over in the long run. It would be interesting to hear PP preaching to Peter at the Pearly gates about all the reasons he should go thru and Peter just staring at him. :shifty:

I dont know when it happened but Purgatory is no longer. I think it became an either/or. I personally would like purgatory.. think it would be quiet there. Like floating in space.

[TXDuck]

There are some key phrases in John that support the doctrine of justification through faith.

John 5:24

Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.

John 11: 25-26

Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; 26 and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?â€

and then finally the ever present John 3:16

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

I know there is some controversy over the Gospel of John. It's been awhile since theology classes so if I'm wrong let me know. I believe the biggest problem was that John was the "newest" Gospel, written closer to 100 years after Christ, rather than the 30-60 years of the other Gospels. Also, there was some concern that the author of John was not fluent in Greek, thus the stilted and simplistic language. Also, it is worth noting that only the Gospel John mentions salvation through belief alone.

[Constance Vigilance]

There are some key phrases in John that support the doctrine of justification through faith.

John 5:24

Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.

John 11: 25-26

Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; 26 and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?â€

and then finally the ever present John 3:16

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

I know there is some controversy over the Gospel of John. It's been awhile since theology classes so if I'm wrong let me know. I believe the biggest problem was that John was the "newest" Gospel, written closer to 100 years after Christ, rather than the 30-60 years of the other Gospels. Also, there was some concern that the author of John was not fluent in Greek, thus the stilted and simplistic language. Also, it is worth noting that only the Gospel John mentions salvation through belief alone.

Logic fail. Those quotes say that one has to believe in Jesus to have eternal life. They do not say that belief alone is enough, and they do not contradict other verses where it is made clear that works (specifically, helping those worse off than you) are essential.

I mean,

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.â€

that is about as direct and obvious as it could possibly be. Feed the hungry, heal the sick, help the poor = salvation. Neglect these duties = eternal punishment.

The fundies, and others, surely neglect this at their peril. If Christianity does turn out to be true, by their own rules they're all screwed.

[emmiedahl]

Has anyone else here seen "The God Who Wasn't There"? I watched it this morning and it was interesting to me. I would be interested in hearing a Christian take on it. The documentary addresses Paul quite a bit, although it is more about issues surrounding Christianity.

[Austin]

I will reiterate that many of the books claiming to be written by Paul were not. I am under the impression, for example, that few legitimate (i.e. not fundie) scholars will tell your Timothy was written by Paul. It's very accepted that it was not.

So, if we're talking about the complete works of "Paul," then I agree with what some others have said here, according to the way I read the gospel and the epistles: Jesus seems quite clear to me that salvation depends on actions. Paul promotes salvation based on grace. I've always figured we've moved toward the grace idea, because it's the one that allows people to be selfish, lazy, fucks and still be smug about how saved they are.

It's interesting that James, the brother of Jesus (IIRC), wrote that "faith without works is dead". ASAIK, Paul and Jesus were not acquainted and Paul was not a disciple. He claims apostleship because of an experience he claims to have had on the road to Damascus, where Jesus supposedly appeared to him, thereby fulfilling one of the requirements to be an apostle in the first place. In any event, I'm going with Jesus' brother knowing what he thought better than Paul.

[Arete]

This is just my impression so anyone please jump in if you think the reality is different. Salvation by grace alone is a lot more emphasized from the time of Martin Luther and after. As a reaction against the catholic church's (and I'm just going to lump in the eastern and oriental orthodox churches with them for the purposes of my impresssion) emphasis on works, thinkers like Luther and Calvin emphasized grace, in Calvin's case election, and the believer's absolute certain knowledge of their own salvation. So Paul and any books attributed to him become more prominent. The catholic church still considers salvation to be a continuum rather than a polarity. Meaning you are working out your salvation till you die and an individual believer can never "assume" they have a place in heaven.