Steven Carr

I see.

When you are dealing with the emissary of an infinite, omniscient being, whose knowledge vastly outweighs all of mankinds, then all you need is a bit of commonsense to interpret the message.

No need at all to build a gigantic supercomputer to try to intepret the engimatic reply to the answer to the question of Life, the Universe and Everything....

Humans are more than capable of intepreting teaching of astonishing, almost supernatural wisdom if they apply a bit of commonsense.

The one thing they cannot do is take what is said at face value. That makes them look like idiots.

Steven Carr

No wonder the Romans killed him, as they knew that you stopped a popular uprising by removing the leader.

Mind you, it was well known that the Jews cursed Him, hated Him, despitefully used Him and tried to kill him.

As Paul writes in Romans 3
What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? Much in every way! First of all, they have been entrusted with the very words of God.
What if some did not have faith?

'Some did not have faith' - a remarkable euphemism for trying to kill the Son of God.

Somehow, I expected something a little more about plans to murder Jesus than 'some did not have faith'

steamer

Take care of your own is a replacement policy for let god take care of you. They are contradictory. Jesus would not have enjoyed this contradiction. Paul did not know Jesus.

aa5874

Even if Jesus of the NT did exist and died, it is most unlikely that a dead man could have taught Paul anything.

Paul most likely made stuff up about Jesus.

You won't find dead people who taught anything once they were buried but you don't know that.

rhutchin

It would make sense that Paul understood that which he wrote although this is not required.

I don't see where it was an anti-Jewish church unless you only mean that it differed from the Jewish religious system. Why does this have to be explained by anyone?

rhutchin

I think Paul addressed an obvious point of confusion. Given that Christ said, "Give to him who asks," one might reasonably ask whether one should give away that which he would use to pay the mortgage, buy food for the family, or meet other needs of one's family. Paul's obvious answer is that Christ never intended for a person to deprive his family in order to give to others. Paul would have pointed to Jesus' complaint against the Pharisees.

Mark 7
10 For Moses said, ‘Honour your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.’
11 But you say that if a man says to his father or mother: ‘Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Corban’ (that is, a gift devoted to God),
12 then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother.
13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that.”

rhutchin

Thus, the argument by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15.

12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?
13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised.
14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith.
15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised.
16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either.
17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins.
18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost.
19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all men.

Huon

Sorry, I was not clear enough :
Paul wrote about what he wanted to write. But his writings do not necessarily represent the original ideas of Jesus Christ. Paul had a vision.

The christian churches have been anti-jewish during a long time.

aa5874

But, why would the Romans kill a man who hated the Jews and paid his taxes?

Why would the Romans kill a man who goes in to the Temple and beat up Jews and called them sons of the Devil and Vipers?

Why would the Romans kill a man who told the Jews to accept persecution and ALL manner of evil against them?

Why would the Romans kill a man who told Jews to forgive SEVENTY times seven?

Why would the Romans kill a man who claimed the Jewish Messiah was not the true Messiah?

The Romans would not have killed Jesus based on the story in the NT Canon.

It was the Jews who would have wanted Jesus dead, and in the story it was because of the Jews why Jesus was killed. Pilate found no fault with Jesus.

JESUS was a model Jewish citizen to the Romans. If all Jews were like Jesus there would not be a Jewish War around 70 CE.

rhutchin

Perhaps as an accommodation to the Jews, a political appeasement.

Should not, perhaps, but still they did.

The Jews wanted Jesus dead. It was because of the Jews that Jesus was killed.

Probably right.