Metacrock

Yea, ok Vork I see a certain irony in my comments. Sorry buddy. :notworthy

Metacrock

It's the frustation. You just go on saying the same stuff year after year, it never makes any difference. The other guys just go on making their usual campy ideological assumptions. Why bother?

Metacrock

yea that's what makes the a tangent. Don't you speak English anymore?

Thread clalims Paul is liar.

Your argumetn is that Acts is a liar.

So Paul didn't lie, "Luke" lied.So how does that prove Paul is a liar?

Vorkosigan

Yes, Meta, that's quite true in your case. It's very frustrating to see you keep repeating ideas and posts long-ago refuted.

If you don't like the forum, there are plenty of forums full of Christbots who will fawn all over you. Nobody around here makes "campy ideological assumptions" as everyone here has different views. Please explain what "campy ideological assumptions" unite Andrew Criddle, spin, and Jay Raskin. Or what "campy ideological assumptions unite Don G, Toto, and CX. Your constant division of the forum into "us" and "them" -- a division which I note is not made either by mods or by admins or by any of the regular theist or non-theist posters -- simply serves to produce sterile, and stereotyped, comments that do nothing to push the conversation forward.

Note also that the only time the Christ Myth is discussed is when someone opposed to it brings it up; the regulars here spend most of their time discussing nuts-and-bolts aspects of the early Christian writings. It's you who is the ideologically obsessed ones.

Vorkosigan

Vorkosigan

The most recent topic of the thread is: "Did Paul study under Gamaliel?" So far, the answer has been "no."

johntheapostate

Please keep in mind that this question is coming from someone who at one time believed in the literalness of The Bible and has suffered psychological damage from that belief.

but can you explain how you and other non theist scholars can immerse yourself in the study of the nuts and bolts of Christianity when you know that the whole basic premise is false.

It has taken me many years to control the strong negative emotions that I have for Christianity. Do you or have you ever felt animosity toward Christianity.

Keep in mind that I was indoctrinated in fundamentalist Christianity, but I could never cultivate a love for god, so I spent my time as a Christian trying to suppress hatred for him and what I perceived (correctly) was a horrible injustice, which lead to real fear that I would end up in hell.

How are you able to maintain an emotional distance.

Peter Kirby

Johntheapostate,

A very good question. Perhaps it needs its own thread in a separate forum?

best,
Peter Kirby

Diogenes the Cynic

I also think this is a great question and that it deserves a thread of its own.

johntheapostate

Since the subject has turned to the Book of Acts, I thought I would illustrate a story from that book that sheds some light on the testimony of Paul.

It seems that Paul really could not make up his mind about the Law. In Galatians he is very clear that the law was abolished by the death of Christ.

Galatians 2:15-16 “ We who are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners know that a man is not justified by observing the law, but by faith in Christ. So we to have put our faith in Christ Jesus that we may be justified by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified.�

Galatians 2:21 “ I do not set aside the grace of God, for if righteousness could be gained through the law, Christ died for nothing�

It should be clear from these passages that Paul considered the Law useless and would have discouraged anyone including Jews from observing it. For by observing the Law that person would be indicating that he believed that the death of Jesus was not sufficient for his salvation.

Of course we find Paul waffling on this point in his Epistles, but the most telling incident that reveals the integrity of Paul is recorded in the book of Acts.

Acts 21:17-26 “ When we arrived in Jerusalem, the brothers received us warmly. The next day Paul and the rest of us went to see James, and all the elders were present. Paul greeted them and reported in detail what God had done among the Gentiles, through his ministry. When they heard this, they praised God. Then they said to Paul, You see brother how many thousands of Jews have believed, and all of them zealous for the law.

So much for them being a tiny persecuted sect.

“They have been informed that you teach all the Jews who live among the Gentiles to turn away from Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children, or live according to our customs�.

From his Epistles we could deduce that this accusation was most certainly true

“ What shall we do? They will certainly hear that you have come, so do what we tell you. There are four men with us who have made a vow .Take these men, join in their purification rites and pay their expenses, so they can have their heads shaved. Then everybody will know there is no truth in these reports about you, but that you yourself are living in obedience to the law. As for the Gentile believers we have written to them our decision that they should abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality.�

Here Paul has an opportunity to declare what he so boldly declares in his letter to the Galatians, that he considers the Law dead for Jew and Gentile alike and that he personally felt no obligation and did not in fact observe the Law. Here is what he does.

“The next day Paul took the men and purified himself along with them. Then he went to the Temple to give notice of the date when the days of purification would end and the offering would be made for each of them�

The man who declared that he was not under any obligation of the Law as he had been purified by the superior atonement sacrifice in the death of Christ meekly goes to the Temple and undergoes the ritual purification as prescribed by the Law and all this to show that he was not guilty of the offenses ( although he certainly was) that he was accused of

Was Paul a liar?

Toto

When you find a conflict between the Epistles and Acts, you have found more evidence that Acts is not based on history, and that the person who wrote Acts either did not know very much about Paul or deliberately intended to write a alternative version of Paul.