To Admins: this one is probably for Bible Accuracy and Inerrancy.
I wish to contest that Paul of Tarsus -and not Jesus of Nazareth- is the true founder of Christianity. Modern orthodox Christianity is based on Paul's doctrines and their subsequent interpretation and expansion. Paul introduced the concepts of:
- The original sin.
"as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all man, because all sinned... "(Rom 5:12)
and punishment of all for the original sin
"death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam... " ( Rom 5:14)
- the atonement sacrifice
"God presented him as a sacrifice of atonement, through faith in his blood. He did this to demonstrate his justice...at the present time, so as to be just and the one who justifies the man who has faith in Jesus." (Rom 3:25-26)
"You see, just at the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for our sins. " (Rom 5:6-8)
- salvation by faith, instead of salvation by works
(Gal 2:16, Gal 3:11, Rom 3:28). In contrast Jesus taught that whoever practices the law will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.(Mat 5:17-20).
Paul was a man who -by his own admission- had never met Jesus but was converted by a vision. He taught doctrines that Jesus never did and some that Jesus directly contradicted.
My questions to Christians (or should I say Paulians !?) are:
A) on what authority was Paul allowed to extend / replace Jesus teachings and the Jewish traditions / interpretations ?
B) Why is Paul's divine revelation accepted as such, while accounts of divine revelation by others are rejected off-hand ?. Joseph Smith is a good example, his account is more recent and better authenticated than Paul's. How can you reject mr Smith's teachings but happily accept Paul's ?
C) What is the most plausible explanation for an orthodox Jew, who claimed he had fought against the new Jesus sect fearing that it represented a danger to Jewish orthodoxy, to renounce it practically overnight and become its cornerstone ?! And once he does, why does he avoid revealing his insight to his fellow Jews, who still shared the 'errors' he now became aware of and who -one would think- would seem the first to be entitled to his new revelation?
This message has been edited by Legend, 04-20-2005 05:50 PM
"In life, you have to face that some days you'll be the pigeon and some days you'll be the statue."
™ Version 4.2