Sheshbazzar

I didn't in the above post go into what these pre-christian or 'proto-christian' Jewish messianc expectations and beliefs would have consisted of, as my point there was only to establish that differentiation between the 'split personality' of 'Paul' as he is portrayed within our texts.
One person 'Shaul', being a relatively accurate accounting of the actual conduct, speech, and writing of a real Jewish person.
And the other, a fabricated and false persona that is the product of post-Temple christian editing and tampering with these earlier Jewish writings, along with the production of entirely new church writer fabricated and fraudulent 'Pauline epistles'

I have little doubt that the real Shaul the Jew would have expressed his belief in the name יהושע as being the name of Israel's expected messiah, and to have vigorously engaged in establishing it among all believers everywhere as the exclusive shibboleth 'password' above every other.
And to have been opposed to circumcising Gentile believers, or to anyone imposing, requiring, or expecting Gentile believers to abide by Judaisms various ceremonial laws and kosher restrictions.
But this would be a far cry from a Jewish man to be attempting to claim that a man was the G-d of Israel, or that Israel's G-d had assumed a flesh and blood human body, and had sacrificed himself to himself to appease himself.


ששבצר

aa5874

Why are you spreading propaganda? You are supposed to be a moderator and have not at any time identified any allegations that I have made in this thread. Please desist from making unsubstantiated claims or I will report you.

The ALLEGATION that a Jesus in the Pauline writings was crucified in the Sub-Lunar was NOT made by me.

Iskander

Relax aa, we like reading your posts

aa5874

I won't relax until I have UTTERLY destroyed all unsubstantiated claims that Paul wrote letters to churhes before the Fall of the Temple c 70 CE.

The Pauline writings are historically and chronologically bogus and the Pauline writings were NOT known to a single author of the NT Canon--not even the supposed author of Acts.

The authors of the Entire NT Canon, with Philo, Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius and Pliny the younger did NOT make any reference to Pauline letters.

Chili

I don't even think the churches existed. They were philosophical points to get across often presented to liberate truth using Plato's 'Dialogue' method so the reader might understand.

Paul was the Cloak of Peter and never was a preacher at all. And lets not forget that the High Priests knew the story very well, and sure knew what Galilee was all about, and now 'why is that restricted to one location' as that is the place where "the race" is at . . . which really takes place in a person's own mind and so not at a location at all.

You must understand that it must be 'bullet proof' and will drag you to Rome if you dare to go, or it will leave you stranded with holes all over yourself.

Bottom line: can you see Jesus say already before he got crucified: "heads up everybody, I am coming right back" (Mark 14:28). Stupid no?

maryhelena

Shesh - take away the fancy dressing and all that's there is a story about a crucified man. Everything else is top-dressing. Think about the wonder-doer story in Slavonic Josephus. There is nothing un-Jewish about that story. A very Jewish story about a man the people wanted to rule over them:

That's basically a messianic type story - a story ending with hopes dashed when the Roman, Pilate, went for crucifixion.

That's the basic JC storyboard. The rest is theology/philosophy and mythology. How far would early 'Paul' go with top-dressing this story? Perhaps not far enough for the later 'Paul' figure - who went all the way with that JC figure as the Passover Lamb of God and cosmic scenarios and its consequences for the Jewish Law. The enormity of what was being accomplished by the later 'Paul' would indicate that the early 'Paul' was already dead some time. A period of quite contemplation followed by that firebrand of the later 'Paul' figure...The Reformer par excellence....:constern01:

So, an early 'Paul' who got his vision from no man - the originator of the story. And a later 'Paul' figure who is late to the party and wants to throw his weight around - and has a 'fight' on his hands.....Two traditions that are fused to create the NT ahistorical Paul.

Chili

If there is no God 'up there' he must be 'in us' to be known to all (even if only in denial), and so from there it is just 'a game' we play wherein we are sheep and they are the shepherd because we do not even know who we really are. We might think we know, and maybe should, but those guys do not have to think, and that is the difference.

So we can say that thinking is for dummies inside the Cave, and they know us better than we know ourself because they were once also inside this Cave and that is why I call it a game, . . . but note above all that winner is based on Love and not on war, as the light will always be greater than the dark and that is why I compare Cathedrals with warships of our modern day here.

Horatio Parker

Can't remember where I read it, but the idea was that the rise of Xtianity was due to Alexander the Great. Because Alexander's conquest meant the end of the Temple State in the middle east. That vacuum gave rise to the collegia, from which Xtianity arose.

Sheshbazzar

I see this matter the other way around. The JC crucifixion 'story' and fabricated 'Gospels' with all of their lying miracles, visions, and extravagant claims being the unnecessary 'top dressing' upon what would otherwise be the natural story of a ethical Jewish man named Shaul who believed it was improper to demand Gentile circumcision, or obedience to Jewish ceremonial laws by the Gentile ger tosavim ('strangers of the gate' ) believers, for whom that self-same Law had since its inception made specific exemption, and actually barred Gentiles from engaging in those ritual practices that identified 'Jewish' descended persons.
Along with disseminating his knowledge that the Scriptural Promises and blessings were foreordained to be enjoyed by the Gentiles -along with- his chosen people Israel.
A Gentile that underwent circumcision and took on the obligations of observing the Laws of Moses, would no longer be a 'Gentile' but in so doing and joining themselves to that Covenant become one of the Jewish people.
In effect for that person, nullifying that Promise of Divine acceptance and blessing which from the beginning had been promised to the Nations who were without those Laws delivered by Moses.
Jews and Gentiles together according to both Torah and The Prophets were/are to be the inheritors the good promises.
Therefore those born to be Gentiles, should remain as Gentiles, live as Gentiles, and be subject to just Gentile laws, until the Scriptural promises come to pass to Israel -and to the Gentiles (Nations) alike.

By Testimony of both The Law and The Prophets NO ONE who is not a natural born Jew, ever needs to convert to the practices of the Jewish form of religion to reap those blessings -along with- that Israel which is accounted according to fleshly ancestry.
No Gentile need ever become a Jew, or ever act like a Jew to be recieved by the One that made The Law, and said 'I will have mercy'.

Search the Scriptures. read the promises made to Gentiles which believe in the Elohim of Israel.
By the account of Scriptures, Abraham whom was himself a Gentile, one from out of the land of the Chaldees, before them believed, and while he was yet in his uncircumcision, was blessed, and received the good promises, and that he should become the father of many Goyim -'Gentiles' -'Nations', and not to only a nation of circumcised Jews.
"For it shall come to pass Whosoever shall call upon The Name יהוה shall be delivered:" (Joel 2:32, Acts 2:21, Romans 10:13)
NO EXCEPTIONS.


ששבצר




.

maryhelena

Yes, Shesh, all the above is relevant to understanding the Jew and Gentile 'roles' under the Jewish Law. And all that really means is, taking away all the theology, is that living on this earth there is no equality. We are all different; some with great skills or physical beauty, others with lesser skills and ordinary appearance. That's life. But the later 'Paul' is talking about a context in which there is neither Jew nor Greek - all are one in Christ. In other words, in that later Pauline context, earthly physical realities have no significance. Since we know, in this day of modern technology and science, that there is no other physical reality in which we can go and live - we have to look for another context in which to place the theology/philosophy of the later 'Paul'.

In the context of a purely intellectual sphere, a 'spiritual' sphere, we are all nameless and country-less. We are a blank slate until we develop our intellectual comprehension. Yes, some intellects will go further and some will be satisfied with home comforts. The point is that we can all do something about developing what we have been born with. In contrast, on that purely physical plane - we are stuck with the physical circumstances of our birth.

Later 'Paul' shifts focus from the physical reality of living on earth, to the intellectual reality of living on earth. Yes, a 'new heaven', a new intellectual comprehension, will have consequences for living in our physical reality. Miracles can happen.... We can use our intellectual understanding to bring humanistic changes to our social/political environment. Sure, inequalities, Jews and Gentiles, will always be there. But we can change how we view the inequalities - as something to be eradication or something to be celebrated.