Did Paul Corrupt Christianity?

[Muffled]

Joh.15:19 "If ye were of the world, the world would love his own"

Matt.22:14 "For many are called, but few [are] chosen."

Joh.10:27 "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me:"

Rev.17:14 "and they that are with Him [are] called, and chosen, and faithful."

I believe those are nice verses but they do not pertain to the issue.

 

[Muffled]

Jesus tells us point blank whose words we are to believe. In His prayer to the Father, He prays for His Discipled Apostles, which were given to Him by the Father. And Jesus says that He prays for those who will believe THEIR WORD.

John 17:20
"Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on Me through their word"

What word is that, you ask?

Matthew 28:19
"teach all nations ... to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you"

Anyone who is teaching contrary to what Jesus taught His 12, is not a disciple of Jesus. And the only records we have, given to us from people who walked with Jesus the whole time of His earthly ministry, are the books of Matthew and John.

Luke wasn't there, and tells you he pretty much acted like a journalist, picking and chosing who to talk with, and what to believe from their accounts... at best. For all we know, Luke talked with people who had an axe to grind.

Hearsay isn't even good enough in a court of law... hopefully, still. The same thing can be said about Mark... Mark wasn't a Discipled Apostle, either.

And if you think Jesus was correct in saying that by the witness of two or more people is anything established... Paul's entire account falls to the ground. In fact, much of what Paul said is either commentary ripped out of context, or plainly restated from the Prophets themselves. What does Paul say that the OT hasn't already said, or that Jesus hasn't confirmed from the OT?

By Paul's own account, he fits the description of the woe'd Pharisees who would persecute from place to place, scourge to make them blaspheme, and murder outright... having fit the Prophecy of Matthew 23, Paul stood condemned.

People want to think that no matter what they do, they can be forgiven by God, and that's why they believe Saul of Cilicia's completely unverified claim.

God doesn't break His own rules. Saul had no witnesses to bring. And it's ludicrous to believe his circular argument, that his story of witnesses validates the story itself. If God had wanted Saul as a witness of 'undeserved grace', He wouldn't have always said repent THEN believe.

Saul was still cursing the Son of God, when he was supposedly saved by grace alone through faith alone... Nonsense! faith in Jesus is required FIRST. That never happened to Saul.

And the people who think that Jesus left things undone and unsaid... or that everything changed when Jesus was murdered for His inheritance by the Pharisees... well, THESE are the ones who take the Pharisees word over that of Jesus Himself. They don't see at all what differences exist between the Gospel of the Kingdom and that blasphemous gospel of 'grace unearned', because the blind led the blind.

Grace unearned is anomia=without law, iniquity... "all things are lawful" to Saul.

Jesus says He will give to us according to our works, in Revelation... in Matthew, He says to observe whatsoever He taught and commanded us... these are our works.

And the Holy Spirit's job, according to Jesus, is to remind us of WHAT JESUS SAID, and to teach us what Jesus meant... What place has Saulianity's 'gifts'? NONE AT ALL.
Jesus says to go unto all the Nations and teach them... What job does that leave the self-annointed 'apostle to the gentiles'? ZERO.
Jesus says He is the good shepherd... What does that make Saul? A HIRELING... at best.

I believe that would include Paul's words and mine as well.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I believe they heard but did not see which makes it less likely to be physical. God is all powerful and can produce the sound of a voice and a vision of Jesus.
Acts 9:7 .... hearing the voice but seeing no one

How did Paul know who it was? You could argue he never heard Jesus's voice before and could not have known who was talking to him. Also voice could be argued as being physical since it would affect the atoms in the air to transmit sound to Paul's ears.

 

[Fool]

I believe they heard but did not see which makes it less likely to be physical. God is all powerful and can produce the sound of a voice and a vision of Jesus.
Acts 9:7 .... hearing the voice but seeing no one

maybe a still small voice from within. are you listening to what the Spirit says? are you listening?


be still and know I AM god.


i will be exalted among the nations
i will be exalted in the earth.



now it's time for nataraja, cernunnos, saquasohuh to dance

“I searched for brahman and found only myself. I searched for myself and found only god.”

― Rumi

 

[Kenny]

Paul claims that Adam is forgiven, but says the reverse about Eve. I forget who it was that called this the "Oriental contempt of women"... but, spot on!

Where?

Paul says imputed righteousness by his faction's murder of Jesus. Jesus says the Pharisees killed Him to steal His inheritance.

Where?

Jesus says ye are my disciples if ye continue. Paul says confess Christ and believe the resurrection et viola!
.

They are not contrary one to another and it omits those place where Paul said "continue in the word" using other words

 

[Marcion]

did paul corrupt the original christianity as some believe?


He called the Apostle Paul the “first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus.”

This question cannot be answered because it makes all sorts of faulty or doubtful assumptions.

* That there lived an apostle Paul in the first century who wrote all or part of the epistles now found in the New Testament
* That all of these epistles were written by a so-called apostle Paul from the first century and not by the Christian Church
* That there was a religion called Christiany before the epistles or the oldest (parts) of them were written
* That you can know the teachings of Jesus by simply reading the New Testament
* That the (genuine or original) teachings of Jesus have anything to do with Christianity

The development of Christianity was a complicated process of the merging of teachings of different sects and their syncretic blending and adjustment.
You cannot simplify this process by assuming that there was a "pure" type of Christianity that was later corrupted by one or more influences such as by the influence of (a mythical) Paul who was in fact largely created by the Christian Church itself.

Whether the historical Jesus would have liked the end-result is an entirely different question, in my eyes more relevant.

 

[Kenny]

* That there lived an apostle Paul in the first century who wrote all or part of the epistles now found in the New Testament

Too much evidence to think otherwicse

* That all of these epistles were written by a so-called apostle Paul from the first century and not by the Christian Church

Most of them are irrefutable

* That there was a religion called Christiany before the epistles or the oldest (parts) of them were written

Correct... Christianity is a term given to those who believed in Yeshua

* That you can know the teachings of Jesus by simply reading the New Testament

You can grasp a lot of it, but it is based in the TaNaK - and they preached Jesus from its inception

* That the (genuine or original) teachings of Jesus have anything to do with Christianity

I think it does

The development of Christianity was a complicated process of the merging of teachings of different sects and their syncretic blending and adjustment.

I don't think so.

 

[j1i]

did paul corrupt the original christianity as some believe?


He called the Apostle Paul the “first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus.”

The most important doctrines of Paul preached are the doctrine of crucifixion and redemption, and the doctrine of crucifixion and redemption is based on the idea of criticism of the law, I mean the criticism of the Old Testament, the system based on the importance of following the commandments and canons and judgments And judgments

Christ told us a person whom people would call young, and the meaning of the name Paul who would teach the criticism of the law
In the Gospel of Matthew chapter five of the 17th to 19th covenant

The Fulfillment of the Law
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

 

[Fool]

This question cannot be answered because it makes all sorts of faulty or doubtful assumptions.

* That there lived an apostle Paul in the first century who wrote all or part of the epistles now found in the New Testament
* That all of these epistles were written by a so-called apostle Paul from the first century and not by the Christian Church
* That there was a religion called Christiany before the epistles or the oldest (parts) of them were written
* That you can know the teachings of Jesus by simply reading the New Testament
* That the (genuine or original) teachings of Jesus have anything to do with Christianity

The development of Christianity was a complicated process of the merging of teachings of different sects and their syncretic blending and adjustment.
You cannot simplify this process by assuming that there was a "pure" type of Christianity that was later corrupted by one or more influences such as by the influence of (a mythical) Paul who was in fact largely created by the Christian Church itself.

Whether the historical Jesus would have liked the end-result is an entirely different question, in my eyes more relevant.

very good

 

[Fool]

The most important doctrines of Paul preached are the doctrine of crucifixion and redemption, and the doctrine of crucifixion and redemption is based on the idea of criticism of the law, I mean the criticism of the Old Testament, the system based on the importance of following the commandments and canons and judgments And judgments

Christ told us a person whom people would call young, and the meaning of the name Paul who would teach the criticism of the law
In the Gospel of Matthew chapter five of the 17th to 19th covenant

The Fulfillment of the Law
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.
18 For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.
19 Therefore anyone who sets aside one of the least of these commands and teaches others accordingly will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches these commands will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 For I tell you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the Pharisees and the teachers of the law, you will certainly not enter the kingdom of heaven.

love fulfills the whole of the law.

covers all 10 commandments and then some

 

[j1i]

love fulfills the whole of the law.

covers all 10 commandments and then some

The idea of the crucifixion and redemption contradicts the Ten Commandments of Moses

This puts Paul in trouble
In the box of predicaments

 

[Kenny]

The idea of the crucifixion and redemption contradicts the Ten Commandments of Moses

This puts Paul in trouble
In the box of predicaments

Not really. The crucifixion of Jesus is an Adamic and an Abrahamic Covenant before the 10 Commandments even existed.

 

[Sand Dancer]

did paul corrupt the original christianity as some believe?


He called the Apostle Paul the “first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus.”

I think the followers of Constantine corrupted it far more. Then the "Moral Majority" finished the job.

 

[Kenny]

I think the followers of Constantine corrupted it far more. Then the "Moral Majority" finished the job.

I think your position may have some truth as far as Constantine. But from there, it is just your political position.

 

[Sand Dancer]

I think your position may have some truth as far as Constantine. But from there, it is just your political position.

Well, there is the Religious Right and Christian Left and they are different.

 

[Kenny]

Well, there is the Religious Right and Christian Left and they are different.

People are people. Neither are bad. Christians are Christians and if love is their motivation... they are great Christians! Likewise there could be non-loving Christians on both sides which give Jesus a bad name.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Since all we know of either Paul or Jesus are the preserved writings, and since Paul's writings are generally earlier than the gospels, I don't see how one can extrapolate that Paul corrupted Jesus' teachings.

Yeah, I guess technically Jesus corrupts Paul.

Joh.10:27 "My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me:"

This is from a God who needed people to paint blood on a door because He can't tell a Hebrew from an Egyptian.

From the perspective of the NT, if Jesus knows his sheep, why is he shocked when gentiles come to him for help?

"teach all nations ... to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you"

But then the bible says the apostles didn't understand Jesus and were failing the class.

Anyone who is teaching contrary to what Jesus taught His 12, is not a disciple of Jesus.

But we don't have any of their writings.

For all we know, Luke talked with people who had an axe to grind.

John sounds like a fanboy with little anime hearts in his eyes for Jesus. He has serious bias issues.

Saul was still cursing the Son of God, when he was supposedly saved by grace alone through faith alone... Nonsense! faith in Jesus is required FIRST. That never happened to Saul.

Why have faith in any man? The Way doesn't need a mascot. Anyone can do it.

And the Holy Spirit's job, according to Jesus, is to remind us of WHAT JESUS SAID, and to teach us what Jesus meant

But God told me He didn't write the bible. Men did. God doesn't seem to care much for the bible. Prove me wrong?

Jesus says He will give to us according to our works, in Revelation

While I agree that we will get what we pay for, so to speak, take some guy's bad trip with a grain of salt.

Jesus says to go unto all the Nations and teach them

I think I'm not getting paid to do God's job for Him.

Jesus says He is the good shepherd..

The problem is that shepherds fatten up the lambs for slaughter.

Jesus says in John 17 that these men belonged to His Father, that He prays for them and for those who believe on Him because of their word. THEIR word.

But we only have John saying that and John has "issues". Hell, they all do, but John's "special". NEVER trust some random person, or do you go around believing every Christ, Messiah, angel, prophet, and god on the internet as well?

Jesus told Peter to feed His flock... feed means teach, here, of course.

Didn't Jesus? Wasn't he supposed to give his flock everlasting water? Then what did they need Peter for?

Peter and John and their brothers were the first and favored 4... they were witness to crucial events.

Which of them witnessed stuff when Jesus was alone?

How did Paul know who it was?

Paul had all of Jesus' podcasts on his iPod.

Not really. The crucifixion of Jesus is an Adamic and an Abrahamic Covenant before the 10 Commandments even existed.

Got some Genesis quotes for this crucifixion thing?

 

[Kenny]

Got some Genesis quotes for this crucifixion thing?

וּדְבָבוּ אֵישַׁוֵי בֵּינָךְ וּבֵין אִתְּתָא בֵּין זַרְעֲיַת בְנָךְ וּבֵין זַרְעֲיַת בְּנָהָא וִיהֵי כַּד יְהוֹן בְּנָהָא דְאִתָּא נַטְרִין מִצְוָתָא דְאוֹרַיְיתָא יֶהֱוְיַן מְכַוְונִין וּמַחְיָין יָתָךְ עַל רֵישָׁךְ וְכַד שַׁבְקִין מִצְוָותָא דְאוֹרַיְיתָא תֶּהֱוֵי מִתְכַוֵין וּנְכִית יַתְהוֹן בְּעִקְבֵהוֹן בְּרַם לְהוֹן יְהֵא אָסוּ וְלָךְ לָא יְהֵי אָסוּ וַעֲתִידִין אִינוּן לְמֶעֱבַד שְׁפִיוּתָא בְּעִיקְבָא בְּיוֹמֵי מַלְכָּא מְשִׁיחָא

And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between the seed of thy son, and the seed of her sons; and it shall be when the sons of the woman keep the commandments of the law, they will be prepared to smite thee upon thy head; but when they forsake the commandments of the law, thou wilt be ready to wound them in their heel. Nevertheless for them there shall be a medicine, but for thee there will be no medicine; and they shall make a remedy for the heel in the days of the King Meshiha. Targum Jonathan.

Does Genesis 3:15 Really Point to Jesus?
John Gill
The person spoken of in Genesis 3:15 is called the seed of the woman - and not of the man - which can agree with no other than the Messiah, who was to be born of a virgin, which was afterwards more clearly revealed by Isaiah 7:14 ("Behold, the virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel"). This was fulfilled in Jesus, who was truly the seed of the woman and of her only, being made of a woman and not begotten by man. He was conceived in the womb of the virgin by the power of the Holy Spirit.

The work he was to do deserves consideration and proves the person spoken of to be the Messiah, which was to bruise the serpent’s head - that is, to destroy Satan and all his works, set aside all his craft and cunning, crush all his machinations and designs, and overturn his whole empire. Now, this is frequently spoken of in the Old Testament, as the Messiah’s work. In some places, a peculiar reference seems to point to this original prophecy, as in Psalm 110:6, which belongs to the Messiah and thus prophesied of him. "He shall wound the heads over many countries" may also be rendered as "he shall wound the head," that is, him that is the head, or ruler, over a large country, which is no other than Satan, the god and prince of this world. In Habakkuk 3:13 it is said, "You went out for the salvation of your people, for the salvation of your anointed. You crushed the head of the house of the wicked, laying him bare from thigh to neck."

This promise was given after God had killed animals to cloth Adam and Eve. He shed blood in this covenant and Abel continued with the sacrifice of a lamb. Jesus is the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world.

 

[paarsurrey]

did paul corrupt the original christianity as some believe?


He called the Apostle Paul the “first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus.”

"He called the Apostle Paul the "first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus" "

Thomas Jefferson rightly made the above comments.

Regards

 

[Kenny]

"He called the Apostle Paul the "first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus" "

Thomas Jefferson rightly made the above comments.

Regards

Yes, you can find a quote saying just about anything,

But, since he isn't God, he is just as wrong.