IamJoseph

How could Paul have advocated to Jews - when he negated most binding Jewish laws? I refer to such smart alecky advocations, ITS NOT WHAT GOES INTO ONE'S MOUTH BUT WHAT COMES OUT - thereby negating all the dietery laws? This says Paul believed in the Mosaic laws - but also that he was able to correct it - that it was decificient and wanting!

These are blatant indicators that what is ascribed to Paul - was from Europea - they negated anything which was unacceptable to their culture and tradition - and brought in all that was cherished. Paul, or his alledged advocations, would never have succeeded had the Jewish laws not been negated. This has precedence from 300 years before, and the cause of enemity between Jews and pre-christian Greece and Rome: circumsizion, forbiddence of pork and shell fish, the Sabbath - were totally disdained by Europe; a worship without an image was seen as barbaric.

aa5874

From what source did you get your information about Saul/Paul? Acts of the Apostles appears to be a book of fiction.

In Acts of the Apostles, the author claimed Saul/Paul was blinded by a bright light and heard from the resurrected Jesus who was witnessed, by his apostles, going through the clouds.

The author of Acts is a blatant fiction writer, I cannot accept anything he wrote without some external credible non-apologetic corroboration.

Johnny Skeptic

But what did Paul really write? Consider the following Scriptures from the NASB:

1 Corinthians 15:3-8

"For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that He appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep; then He appeared to James, then to all the apostles; and last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also."

What evidence do you have that Paul wrote those Scriptures?

If Paul did not write those Scriptures, wouldn't that make the rest of his writings much less credible?

IamJoseph

From historical, non-religious writings. Which bit of info do you refer to? Paul was sent to Rome for his trial, and was released from a dungeon he was imprisoned in Cesaerea by Agrippa II and his sister Berenice [relatives of Paul, and the grandchildren of Herod]. Paul was killed by Rome because he was seen as a Jew - which is equal to the later charge of a hidden jew adopted by the Catholic Roman church.

This makes the charge of a trial of Jesus an anomoly: there was a decree of Heresy hovering in Judea - and nothing could deflect this decree - 2 million Jews died by it, regardless of which Jewish group they belonged to: this was exactly like the Nazi Germans did. Why would Rome not have applied their Heresy laws to Jesus - why does the Gospels blame Jews here and came up with the grotesque premise of Deicide? It defies all coherence and smacks of the Protocols.

IamJoseph

It is insufficient to cite one part of the Gospels to prove another part of it. Saul of Tarsus had a vision problem - he never wrote anything; also he was prone to epilepsy and kept changing his mind: in Jerusalem, when the Nazerite group expelled him and a riot occured because of his new slants on the Mosaic laws - he was taken to Ceseara by the Romans as a rebel rouser and inciter. In Prison he recanted what was seen as basphemous advocations, and agreed to renounce them and uphold all the Mosaic laws. Paul spoke in the name of Jesus but never met Jesus, visiting Jerusalem some 35 years after Jesus' death.

We have no writings from Jesus and not a shred of a contemporary writings - and it is stretching the fabric to assume any Jewish apostle would uphold what appears came from Europe, in a different space time than it gives. This becomes totally blatant with the war between Rome and the Jews 5 years after Paul was sent to Rome: 1.2 million Jews challenged Mighty Rome to uphold their right of belief. The stiff necked Jews would never accept what the Gospel proposes - but Europe would - this was their religion even without the Gospels.

aa5874

What historical, non-religious writings have information about Saul/Paul of the NT? When and who wrote those historical writings?

donothesitate

aa5874, have you ever taken a Humanities course and read about the people whom the Humanities textbook states to have actually Existed? Seriously, what Humanities textbook does not mention that there was a Paul?

donothesitate

Jesus's crucifixion was not in the Jewish Scriptures???

Then how about Isaiah 53? He was bruised, and wounded for our iniquities (the sin propitiation of Christ's sacrifice)

Read Psalm 22 and see if it does not sound like Christ, or what happened to Christ.

donothesitate

Read 2 Peter 3; it considers Paul's writings to be scriptures... Mentions Paul's writings being wrested (twisted) just like the other scriptures.

IamJoseph

Jesus and nothing contained in the Gospels alligns with anything in the Hebrew scriptures. Isaiah has been discredited even by christian scholars, notwithstdning there are 1000s of verses there which cannot be alligned with the Gospels and negates it with no possibility of allignment. The notorious claims made of Isaiah were based on intentionally wrong translations of a stray verse, distorting the criteria for a Messiah forever, and thereby distorting otherwise sincerely believing christians. Isaiah alligns only with the Mosaic Laws.

A tragedy occured within humanity here of biblical proportions when the church alligned with Rome and adoped its heresy, using different names only. It culminated in the worst crime within humanity, and there is no end in sight of its debacles.