(February 29, 2016 at 1:39 pm)abaris Wrote:Yep Paul's letters have a doctrinal war in the background. In Romans he writes a church in Rome he hadn't visited in hopes they will give him money. He has to be careful there because he doesn't always agree with Rome. In his other letters, it's churches he's visited or started. The difference in tone is palpable as in one he must establish his credentials with the internal opposition, and the others he's talking to his own. The united church is like a unicorn, sought but never found. That elusive beastie has never existed. Paul's letters and Acts are both about doctrinal fights and come to think of it, the Gospels document Jewish schisms as does much of the OT. The unified Hebrew religion is just as elusive.(February 29, 2016 at 1:31 pm)Jenny A Wrote: The church was the last authority until it choose the Bible as the last authority. And in the case of some sects the church remained the last authority. Catholicism is one such sect.
Yet there wasn't even one church before 325, with the council of Nicea. And there wasn't even one bible nbefore very much later in the 4th century. They kept bickering about what to leave out, what to edit and what to take. Only in 385 they became the church of Rome and had the power to crunch all the other disagreeing factions within their reach. And, as you already pointed out, it has always been much more the church of Paul than the one of Jesus. A misogynist and supporter of everyone knowing their place. Including slaves.
If there is a god, I want to believe that there is a god. If there is not a god, I want to believe that there is no god.