Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Absolutely correct. They could not have believed that and still observed Jewish law. We don't know, and probably will never know, exactly how they viewed Jesus, but the Pillars, at least, did not recognize any new covenant or personal redemption. (missed your edit)

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Absolutely correct. They could not have believed that and still observed Jewish law. We don't know, and probably will never know, exactly how they viewed Jesus, but the Pillars, at least, did not recognize any new covenant or personal redemption.

Originally Posted by dog-on

Cool.

So what do you think the following would signify with regards to this group, considering your position of course:



or this,



or even the ubiquitous:

Again, just wondering.

Originally Posted by Iskander

Galatians 2:6-10 is about the conflict between the Jerusalem church still observing Jewish law and the innovator Paul determined to rewrite the ‘ constitution’ to open the Roman market to the new business.

The Jerusalem church, Paul says, accepted that the gentiles were his patch; the ‘judaizers’ will abstain from interfering in his marketing plan.

In Galatians 2:6-10 , Paul is announcing that the followers of Jesus no longer speak with one voice, nor are they ruled by one law: there is now one apostle for the gentiles preaching what he knows to be right because he heard it from the horse’s mouth, and there is another apostle for the Jews preaching observance of the Jewish law.

Paul says ‘he was given the right’ , but it is clear that he forced the issue; the American people, for example, might say the British gave them the right to govern America.

The Jerusalem church only asked that this new religion Paul was founding should continue to remember the poor by sharing the lord supper with them.

Originally Posted by aa5874

So, who did the Pauline writer PERSECUTE???

The Pharisees?? Jews who OBSEVERVED Jewish Laws????

You put forward the most absurd notion that the Pauline writer PERSECUTED those who observed Jewish Laws when he himself Observed Jewish Laws as a Pharisee.

Philippians 3:5 KJV You need to take a time a time out. Your ad hoc and on-the-fly "explanations" are just getting worse by the minute. At this stage you appear completely confused.

Originally Posted by Diogenes the Cynic

Yes. This is Paul going off on his own. He himself says he got his Gospel from the voices in his head, not from the Jerusalem church.

The "according to scriptures" part is a straight up lie on his part too. There are no such scriptures, and the Pillars would have known that.

Originally Posted by Solo

Something like that. The thing to note that Paul going to Jerusalem after "fourteen years" coincides in time with the writing of sections of 2 Cor (see 2 Cor 12:2) in which Paul struggles against the dissing his apostleship gets at Corinth. The 'revelation' by which he goes to Jerusalem (I don't think there was a 'first' visit) is likely the idea of getting a letter of recommendation from James making him a bona fide 'apostolos' of the assembly in exchange for his collections. It is clear that Paul did not achieve his goal (Rom 15:31 still casts doubt at his standing with the 'saints'), and that he tries to minimize the insult to himself of having to collect for the assembly without explicit recognition.

Best,
Jiri

Originally Posted by Iskander

...The NT says whatever someone has written and corrected over many years...

Originally Posted by Iskander

...That Paul fought with the Jerusalem church is known from a basic knowledge of history. Some of those patristic jabberwocky people you and other academics are so fond of quoting here make that quite clear. The long and cruel repression of the judaizers is confirmed by history...

Originally Posted by Iskander

...Paul made it possible to charge the Jews with the murder of Jesus, he never stopped persecuting them.
What else did Paul do?

Originally Posted by aa5874

And you appear to be ATTEMPTING to do the very same. You appear to want to CORRECT the stories from your IMAGINATION hundreds of years later and become upset because people do not accept your imagination.



There is NO history of a Pauline writer in non-Apologetic sources so you are making stuff up.

Again, how in the world did Paul persecute JUDAIZERS and then become a JUDAIZER like those of the Jerusalem Church???

But, Paul claimed he was a Jew and a Pharisee. This would mean that Paul may have also killed your supposed Jesus.

Your AD HOC suppositions are worthless. You do NOT need to do any research to make up your stories.

Originally Posted by Iskander

Paul is only a name, aa. He is also known as Saul and his wife must have used a family name...

Originally Posted by Iskander

The repression of judaizers is part of the history of Europe..

Originally Posted by Iskander

It is not my Jesus, aa, I wouldn’t take him away from you, but I am grateful for you kind offer.