Freethought & Rationalism Archive

starling · 11-04-2003, 09:42 AM

I saw an interesting book mentioned on kuro5hin today. The author claims it has evidence indicating that the apostle Paul may have co-opted and bastardized the original teachings of Jesus to something more friendly to the less savory side of humanity. Was Paul the first televangelist?

Starling
Who doesn't usually post here for good reason (ignorance) so be kind... :winces:

PCenfuego · 11-04-2003, 11:34 AM

Please try to verify that with some sort of scripture reference. Have you even read the epistles?

Toto · 11-04-2003, 11:56 AM

The idea that Paul hijacked Christianity from the original Jesus is very widespread, especially among religious liberals who don't like Paul's fulminating against women in the church.

After Guttenberg printed the Bible and people actually started to read it, they noticed how different the corrupt, established church was from the simple morals ascribed to Jesus in the New Testament. They figured that someone had corrupted Jesus' original message, and looked around for someone to blame, so Paul became the fall guy, or the apostles.

You will find more than a few threads on this already. (Sorry I don't have time to track them down now - maybe later.)

Mageth · 11-04-2003, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by PCenfuego
Please try to verify that with some sort of scripture reference. Have you even read the epistles?

Starling appears to have been asking a question, not making an assertion. So if you disagree with the points of the cited book or the question, I'd suggest it's up to you to provide the scripture references refuting them.

(And I think you'll find many around here have indeed read the Epistles and most if not all the rest of the bible.)

As to the OP: IMO, Paul established the basic foundation for the Christian religion, and some of the tenets of which as expressed in his writings aren't particularly in tune with Jesus' teachings. It is not clear from the Gospels that Jesus intended to establish a religion at all. Heck, Paul, in his epistles, really doesn't refer very much to the legend of "historical" Jesus as portrayed in the Gospels. Paul had such a strong influence on the establishment of the Christian religion that I sometimes refer to Christianity as Paulianity.

PCenfuego · 11-04-2003, 12:23 PM

First of all, I would like to make the point that Paul started all of his letters with "...servant of Christ Jesus...apostle of Christ Jesus..etc." He gave glory to Christ in every one of his letters. He also included the gospel message in all of his letters. The reason his writings are so different from other books is that there was a need for it. The epistles are meant to show how to live by examples. This was soon after Jesus' death so these were instructions for the new church. There had been no sort of "church" as they knew it before the death of Christ, so God chose Paul to give these instructions.

I understand how women can dislike the part about "women submit to your husbands" when I first read it I thought it was harsh as well, but its a misunderstanding. I do not want anyone to get the idea that I am saying men are superior in any way but this is my explanation. Men are biblically the leader of the household, so women are supposed to submit to the men (cringe). But it also says men are commanded to love our wives as Christ loved the church. That means that men should love their wives as much as to give their lives for them. That is a huge command. It seems just like chivalry to me. I really hope I haven't offended anyone, you may commence tearing me apart if i did.

(commence beating)

Radcliffe Emerson · 11-04-2003, 12:56 PM

I not only think that, I think Paul invented Jesus to suit his own ends. Paul's writings are the earliest to mention Jesus, everything else about Jesus comes decades later. And most of what the later writings include (risen from the tomb, virgin birth for example) are never mentioned by Paul. He was making it up as he went, and later writers tacked onto it.
I think Paul came onto an easy way to live, sponge off of people, making them think he was following some great ideal he made up himself.
His comments are the only proof of him being a persecutor of Christians prior to his 'conversion.'
He also makes vague statements similar to "there are several living who saw these things, ask them', without saying who these people are. No names, no places, no dates, no way to verify what he is saying in his letters.
Reeks of a god being invented by Paul to me.

PCenfuego · 11-04-2003, 01:08 PM

Why then do you think the apostles were martyred. People don't die for a lie.

Mageth · 11-04-2003, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by Radcliffe Emerson
I not only think that, I think Paul invented Jesus to suit his own ends. Paul's writings are the earliest to mention Jesus, everything else about Jesus comes decades later. And most of what the later writings include (risen from the tomb, virgin birth for example) are never mentioned by Paul. He was making it up as he went, and later writers tacked onto it.
I think Paul came onto an easy way to live, sponge off of people, making them think he was following some great ideal he made up himself.
His comments are the only proof of him being a persecutor of Christians prior to his 'conversion.'
He also makes vague statements similar to "there are several living who saw these things, ask them', without saying who these people are. No names, no places, no dates, no way to verify what he is saying in his letters.
Reeks of a god being invented by Paul to me. [/QUOTE]

Yep, I pretty much agree with all of the above.

Mageth · 11-04-2003, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by PCenfuego
Why then do you think the apostles were martyred. People don't die for a lie.

Why do you think they were martyred? The tales of the apostles' martyrdoms are largely church tradition with little or no evidence that they happened as described. Certainly, mentions of martyrdom are scarce in the Bible. And there's no evidence that any apostles that may have been martyred knew they were dying for a "lie" - if the accounts are true, they apparently believed in what they were dying for.

And people demonstrably choose to die for all sorts of weird beliefs. Look at the Jim Jones kool-aid fiasco and various other cult suicides in recent years for examples.

Demigawd · 11-04-2003, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by PCenfuego
Why then do you think the apostles were martyred.

That's just a traditional notion of the eventual fates of the apostles. Where does it state what happened to them in the bible?

People don't die for a lie.

Then how do you explain from your Christian perspective the terrorists who made the date 9/11 special for the U.S?

11-04-2003, 09:42 AM	#1
starling Veteran Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Central Valley of California Posts: 1,761	Interesting book: Jesus != Paul ? I saw an interesting book mentioned on kuro5hin today. The author claims it has evidence indicating that the apostle Paul may have co-opted and bastardized the original teachings of Jesus to something more friendly to the less savory side of humanity. Was Paul the first televangelist? Starling Who doesn't usually post here for good reason (ignorance) so be kind... :winces:

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-04-2003, 11:34 AM	#2
PCenfuego Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 35	Please try to verify that with some sort of scripture reference. Have you even read the epistles?

11-04-2003, 11:56 AM	#3
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	The idea that Paul hijacked Christianity from the original Jesus is very widespread, especially among religious liberals who don't like Paul's fulminating against women in the church. After Guttenberg printed the Bible and people actually started to read it, they noticed how different the corrupt, established church was from the simple morals ascribed to Jesus in the New Testament. They figured that someone had corrupted Jesus' original message, and looked around for someone to blame, so Paul became the fall guy, or the apostles. You will find more than a few threads on this already. (Sorry I don't have time to track them down now - maybe later.)

11-04-2003, 12:23 PM	#5
PCenfuego Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 35	First of all, I would like to make the point that Paul started all of his letters with "...servant of Christ Jesus...apostle of Christ Jesus..etc." He gave glory to Christ in every one of his letters. He also included the gospel message in all of his letters. The reason his writings are so different from other books is that there was a need for it. The epistles are meant to show how to live by examples. This was soon after Jesus' death so these were instructions for the new church. There had been no sort of "church" as they knew it before the death of Christ, so God chose Paul to give these instructions. I understand how women can dislike the part about "women submit to your husbands" when I first read it I thought it was harsh as well, but its a misunderstanding. I do not want anyone to get the idea that I am saying men are superior in any way but this is my explanation. Men are biblically the leader of the household, so women are supposed to submit to the men (cringe). But it also says men are commanded to love our wives as Christ loved the church. That means that men should love their wives as much as to give their lives for them. That is a huge command. It seems just like chivalry to me. I really hope I haven't offended anyone, you may commence tearing me apart if i did. (commence beating)

11-04-2003, 12:56 PM	#6
Radcliffe Emerson Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: the dark side of Mars Posts: 1,309	I not only think that, I think Paul invented Jesus to suit his own ends. Paul's writings are the earliest to mention Jesus, everything else about Jesus comes decades later. And most of what the later writings include (risen from the tomb, virgin birth for example) are never mentioned by Paul. He was making it up as he went, and later writers tacked onto it. I think Paul came onto an easy way to live, sponge off of people, making them think he was following some great ideal he made up himself. His comments are the only proof of him being a persecutor of Christians prior to his 'conversion.' He also makes vague statements similar to "there are several living who saw these things, ask them', without saying who these people are. No names, no places, no dates, no way to verify what he is saying in his letters. Reeks of a god being invented by Paul to me.

11-04-2003, 01:08 PM	#7
PCenfuego Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Texas Posts: 35	Why then do you think the apostles were martyred. People don't die for a lie.

11-04-2003, 01:13 PM	#8
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Originally posted by Radcliffe Emerson I not only think that, I think Paul invented Jesus to suit his own ends. Paul's writings are the earliest to mention Jesus, everything else about Jesus comes decades later. And most of what the later writings include (risen from the tomb, virgin birth for example) are never mentioned by Paul. He was making it up as he went, and later writers tacked onto it. I think Paul came onto an easy way to live, sponge off of people, making them think he was following some great ideal he made up himself. His comments are the only proof of him being a persecutor of Christians prior to his 'conversion.' He also makes vague statements similar to "there are several living who saw these things, ask them', without saying who these people are. No names, no places, no dates, no way to verify what he is saying in his letters. Reeks of a god being invented by Paul to me. [/QUOTE] Yep, I pretty much agree with all of the above.

11-04-2003, 01:16 PM	#10
Demigawd Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: On a sailing ship to nowhere, leaving any place Posts: 2,254	Originally posted by PCenfuego Why then do you think the apostles were martyred. That's just a traditional notion of the eventual fates of the apostles. Where does it state what happened to them in the bible? People don't die for a lie. Then how do you explain from your Christian perspective the terrorists who made the date 9/11 special for the U.S?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.