Evolutionist

originally posted by jonty:

leaving aside Bush and Carter- what do you mean by followers of jesus nd followers of paul?

or can anyone else answer? i've just nenver heard this expression before.

variant 13

Well Paul was the first pope of sorts, founder of the church.

Though that doesn't fit in with bush though, so....

Evolutionist

this is the thread btw:

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.p...threadid=73681

just in case you want some context.

sharon45

I don't know why that was said, you should ask the one who posted it.

As far as with concern to jesus and paul:

Jesus was the 'founder' of the christian belief and spoke from his own point of view, while paul talked also about his own point of view as well, but also within thinking he was speaking for jesus.
Paul writings and actions would be more closely fitted into matt. 7:21-23, since he was talking about what he only 'thought' or only wanted others to 'think', he really knew what he was talking about. As I've pointed out elsewhere, jesus himself would have fit easily inside of matt. 7:21-23 as well. Both jesus and paul did a 'good job' of making sure they were in contradiction with each other, and within themselves. That's what happens though when the writers of the NT didn't think seriously about there works enough to send in a real 'pro' editor, to somehow bring all these very varied statements into one, so that everything and everyone involved was on the same 'page'.

Adora

There is no difference since Paul was the main creator and starter of the Jesus legend. If you follow 'Christ' you do, in some way, follow Paul, since all theories and ideas about Christ are influenced by Paul.

I think, instead, the poster is refering to the people's focus on Righteousness (Paul) and humanist qualities (Christ).

Magus55

Actually, based on Catholicism, Peter was the first pope not Paul. Paul never started the church ( Peter didn't either but Catholics like to believe He did). Papal authority is not given in the Bible, nor was the Catholic church. It comes from a skewed interpretation of one verse.

Rational BAC

Paul eh?

This could be a great thread.

Personally I think Paul was just a little bit loony tunes. I as a cherry picker Christian have a LOT of problems with what Paul wrote in his letters.

Was Paul divinely inspired in what he wrote? I doubt that seriously.

Was Paul divinely inspired as far as what he wrote expanded Christianity to the Gentiles?------to the point now that there are about 2 billion Christians on this planet? Maybe so.

But I think God's will in this was that all those 2 billion Christians later on would end up looking at Paul's letters very skeptically. Which I do.

Paul was just a means to an end. I can't see how any Christian nowadays should take what he wrote in his letters as any kind of divine truth.

sharon45

Well on that matter, no one in the NT speaks anywhere near as though they were inspired by their 'god', they all have far too many of they own personal opinions, many being very unwise, and they far and away, make too many mistakes.

And the biggest one, no one of them truely understood the subject matter of which they wanted to rebel against and they weren't too very sure either of the brand new belief they wanted to start in its place.

On the OP, both paul and jesus did what they thought could get them a place in history. They both had power and control in mind with their catering toward the 'underclass'. Even though neither one ever really existed in real life as they were written, that is again, proven inside the NT.

Rational BAC

But then again--

What Jesus is purported to have said was divine. Now whether we have today what He really said is problematic.


What Paul said was just the sayings of a very human man with all of his own personal biases and insecurities. Possibly he was struck by divine inspiration for the rest of his life after having that very strange experience on the way to wherever the hell he was going.

Or maybe not--------maybe the poor bastard had some kind of problem with dehydration and the "mystical" effects of that. And that affected his thinking.

In any event we can thank Paul for spreading Christianity worldwide. And we can also damn Paul for corrupting the sayings of Jesus.

sharon45

It does not really matter what and if he said about anything. A 'Jesus', (if he ever existed), could have made it over and over again clear, that of course, he was not the expected Jewish Messiah and that of course, he was not divine. The damage is already done because christians already believe that he was.

Christians can also 'thank' the NT's jesus for his corrption as well. If not for his brash, vain, ignorance, there would never have been such a very huge following as christianity, along with the other 'me too' religions to come like islam, etc and the great destruction they would do to this earth and its peoples.