The original Christianity is not what is in the Bible

[Drich]

"Paul did not write an gospel because he taught the gospel with the authority that only an apstole of Christ has. What Paul taught was what seeded his church and what ultimatly his deciples taught. In short, Luke's written account was Paul's gospel. Where else would a gentile doctor get the information he penned down in his Gospel account 20 years after the fact?"

And yet Paul wasn't ever an Apostle - in fact he never even met Jesus. Everything Paul had of Jesus' life therefore came second hand anyway and that would explain why Luke contains so many additional stories above and beyond Matthew and Mark. Paul got bits from many sources and after so many years......the fish got bigger.

Do you not understand what the term "Apstole" Means?

Paul defines His title in Romans 1:
1 Paul, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated to the gospel of God 2 which He promised before through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures, 3 concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh, 4 and declared to be the Son of God with power according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead. 5 Through Him we have received grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations for His name, 6 among whom you also are the called of Jesus Christ;

And then uses it in every opening salutation to each one of the Churches he writes to.

Paul did meet Christ, or rather Saul did. Acts Chapter 9 is a whole chapter dedicated to describing the conversion of Saul to Paul after he meets Christ.

---

Look, Drich and all you other Christians,

Pretend you're a car-salesman, and business is slow. One day some people come in wanting to buy a sports car. Excited, you take them out to your premium model, and show it to them. You know everything about this car, but for some reason, all you talk about it the body of the car, what color it is and how nice the tires are. The people want to know everything about the car, about the seats, about the engine, about what speed it gets, but all you push is the body, color and tires. The buyers leave in disappointment.

Where is the logic in that? Why would you not talk about the best part of the car? The engine! It has 600 horsepower and and do 0-60 in 4 seconds! With info like that, you could have nailed the sale! But you just talked about the outside of the car, not the inside.

And that's how I see the teachings of Paul. If he knew all about the meatiest parts of his new religion, why waste his time just talking about the fundamentals? Why not spread the stories of the birth and the miracles? Those were amazing, divinity-proving things to talk about it, but he just tried to sell Christianity by only scratching the surface?

Theology, methodology or whatever you want to talk about is irrelevant. Paul was trying to get converts by just spreading a few ideas. When the Gospel-writers saw that this wasn't enough, they spiced it up, with miracles and false prophecies. They sold the car. Paul merely raised the buyers' interest, but he just wasn't making the sale.

And that's how I see it.

Do you even know what Paul wrote about? The reasons for His letters? People were either being held down by Christianity with the old Jewish way of service and worship with laws and restrictions out the wazoo, Some of them made new members first convert to judaism and then to Christianity. They had them go through all of the Jewish rights and cermonies first... or they got too carried away by their freedoms, Drinking too much wine at communion (that why we have the little cups now ) Sleeping around, stealing from widows and orphans to support the church, Church officals telling others not to marry, and a whole chapters of stuff like that. then there were those so bound and determined to follow Christ they neglected their own families, to support the church. How could Paul ignore these problems? These people needed the Meat of the word, not the milk that new or non believers need.
(That is why you want to hear more about Christ, You need Milk.) While someone who has heard and taught about Christ for the last 20 or 30 years needs the Meat of the word. Meaning information on how to live our lives under Christ.

[max-greece]

"Paul did meet Christ, or rather Saul did. Acts Chapter 9 is a whole chapter dedicated to describing the conversion of Saul to Paul after he meets Christ."

Now that's a stretch and a half isn't it - he never met Jesus, he never saw Jesus - all he got was a voice from the heavens (could have been anyone really):

"Saul, Saul why do you persecute me?"

and

"I am Jesus whom you are persecuting. Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do."

Doesn't really seem to be enough to base a gospel on now does it.

Therefore - everything Paul got was indeed second hand, thank you for confirming it.

[Beta Ray Bill]

Do you even know what Paul wrote about? The reasons for His letters? People were either being held down by Christianity with the old Jewish way of service and worship with laws and restrictions out the wazoo, Some of them made new members first convert to judaism and then to Christianity. They had them go through all of the Jewish rights and cermonies first... or they got too carried away by their freedoms, Drinking too much wine at communion (that why we have the little cups now ) Sleeping around, stealing from widows and orphans to support the church, Church officals telling others not to marry, and a whole chapters of stuff like that. then there were those so bound and determined to follow Christ they neglected their own families, to support the church. How could Paul ignore these problems? These people needed the Meat of the word, not the milk that new or non believers need.
(That is why you want to hear more about Christ, You need Milk.) While someone who has heard and taught about Christ for the last 20 or 30 years needs the Meat of the word. Meaning information on how to live our lives under Christ.

I have read the Bible more than once. Am I an expert? No. Far from. But I think I learned enough to understand what it all means.

I think some of what Paul wrote about was great. Christianity spread because it favored the lower-class, those who had been told they could not earn the rewards that the aristocracy were promised by their religions. And as time went on, and Christianity incorporated more pagan ideas and turned its back further on the Jews and favored the Gentiles, it spread even faster.

But as I said, if Paul knew great things that would convince people of Jesus' holiness (he was not considered God until John wrote his Gospel) why would he only talk about guiderules for life? Why say almost nothing about Christ's great powers? He mentions the resurrection, was nothing else of importance to him?

When I read through the Epistles, I see a lot about "uncircumcision" and how women are not to be allowed to talk in church. Is that a guideline that Jesus taught? I hope not, because it has no place in my sense of morals.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35
"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted for them unto speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

Funny how Christians always seem to forget the bad stuff. But it's there.

[Minimalist]

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+9&version=NIV


Read it and weep, Drippy. Your boy had a "vision." Or rather the asshole who wrote Acts said he did which is a totally different thing. Today, we'd shoot the motherfucker up with thorazine and lock him up in a rubber room for a while.

Sadly, they didn't have thorazine back then. Would have saved us all a whole lot of trouble.

[Godscreated]

Look, Drich and all you other Christians,

Pretend you're a car-salesman, and business is slow. One day some people come in wanting to buy a sports car. Excited, you take them out to your premium model, and show it to them. You know everything about this car, but for some reason, all you talk about it the body of the car, what color it is and how nice the tires are. The people want to know everything about the car, about the seats, about the engine, about what speed it gets, but all you push is the body, color and tires. The buyers leave in disappointment.

Where is the logic in that? Why would you not talk about the best part of the car? The engine! It has 600 horsepower and and do 0-60 in 4 seconds! With info like that, you could have nailed the sale! But you just talked about the outside of the car, not the inside.

And that's how I see the teachings of Paul. If he knew all about the meatiest parts of his new religion, why waste his time just talking about the fundamentals? Why not spread the stories of the birth and the miracles? Those were amazing, divinity-proving things to talk about it, but he just tried to sell Christianity by only scratching the surface?

Theology, methodology or whatever you want to talk about is irrelevant. Paul was trying to get converts by just spreading a few ideas. When the Gospel-writers saw that this wasn't enough, they spiced it up, with miracles and false prophecies. They sold the car. Paul merely raised the buyers' interest, but he just wasn't making the sale.

And that's how I see it.

If Paul was that bad then Christianity would have never spread as it did, like Drich said Paul established a following of believers in Gentile cities. So how do you think he did that, his writings were to the leaders of each church he established, instructing them how to teach the greater meaning of Christianity in a persons daily life. He preached the Gospel (life of Christ) of Christ to the people, he did not use what he wrote to bring people to the saving grace of Christ, Paul says his writings are a revelation from Christ and he addresses them to Church leaders. As your analogy would put it, Paul sold the inner workings of the car to the Church leaders, so they could pass it on to the Christian community.

GC

[Bad Writer]

You make it sound like the spread of Christianity was supposed to be good. I liken it more to how a disease spreads, but to each his own I suppose.

[Minimalist]

If Paul was that bad then Christianity would have never spread as it did

Xtianity spread at the point of a sword because it was in Constantine's interest to do so.

Try not to forget that again.

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Roman_Cultu...ristianity

While many people tend to exaggerate the growth of Christianity before the 4th century, ninety percent of the empire was not Christian, and there is no evidence that Christianity could have continued to grow. It was the support of the emperor Constantine that transformed Christianity into a driving force in the Roman Empire. “Most authorities agree that by 300 A.D., between seven and ten percent of the population of the Roman Empire were Christian.”

Note, though, that it does not specify what "kind" of xtians. It was a fragmented doctrine split by a number of heresies and it took a while for the state and their chosen xtian allies to stamp out the others.

You really have much to learn and you'll never find it if you keep reading and repeating the same old sorry shit.

[Cyberman]

Don't you see how it works? If Paul was that bad then xtianity would never have spread as it did. Xtianity did spread as it did (obviously), therefore Paul couldn't have been that bad. The logic is as watertight as any circle can be.

[Drich]

I have read the Bible more than once. Am I an expert? No. Far from. But I think I learned enough to understand what it all means.

I think some of what Paul wrote about was great. Christianity spread because it favored the lower-class, those who had been told they could not earn the rewards that the aristocracy were promised by their religions. And as time went on, and Christianity incorporated more pagan ideas and turned its back further on the Jews and favored the Gentiles, it spread even faster.

But as I said, if Paul knew great things that would convince people of Jesus' holiness (he was not considered God until John wrote his Gospel) why would he only talk about guiderules for life? Why say almost nothing about Christ's great powers? He mentions the resurrection, was nothing else of importance to him

How could Paul ignore these problems? These people needed the Meat of the word, not the milk that new or non believers need.
(That is why you want to hear more about Christ, You need Milk.) While someone who has heard and taught about Christ for the last 20 or 30 years needs the Meat of the word. Meaning information on how to live our lives under Christ.
1 cor
3 :1And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual people but as to carnal, as to babes in Christ. 2 I fed you with milk and not with solid food; for until now you were not able to receive it, and even now you are still not able; 3 for you are still carnal. For where there are envy, strife, and divisions among you, are you not carnal and behaving like mere men? 4 For when one says, “I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos,” are you not carnal?

Heb 5:12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. 14 But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.

This solid food analogy us used by Paul through out His ministry. Paul Feed the Spiritually mature Solid food to nourish the Spirit. The tentament of basic salvation are very important, but in of themselves can not sustain an on going faith. again the reason you do not like or understand the need for Paul's efforts is because you need the basics of salvation. Maybe once you spent a few decades on the basics you will understand the need to move past them, and apply christianity to your whole life.
When I read through the Epistles, I see a lot about "uncircumcision" and how women are not to be allowed to talk in church. Is that a guideline that Jesus taught? I hope not, because it has no place in my sense of morals.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35
"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted for them unto speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

Funny how Christians always seem to forget the bad stuff. But it's there.
[/quote]

---

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+9&version=NIV


Read it and weep, Drippy. Your boy had a "vision." Or rather the asshole who wrote Acts said he did which is a totally different thing. Today, we'd shoot the motherfucker up with thorazine and lock him up in a rubber room for a while.

Sadly, they didn't have thorazine back then. Would have saved us all a whole lot of trouble.

so your in your best estimation it is your belief that The one who raised himself from the dead could not communicate to Paul?

[Minimalist]

Evidence that your fucker "raised himself from the dead?"

Drippy, haven't you fucking learned by now that you will never get away with putting this horseshit out as if it is fact when it is nothing more than a figment of your imagination.

You can't even provide evidence that your boy ever lived...let alone that he came back from the dead or will return at some unspecified time in the future.

Truthfully, there isn't one reasonable assertion anywhere in that asinine religion of yours.