Paul's value?

@fmf said
Paul wrote at least 13 of the 27 books that make up the NT. Losing confidence in that much of the text was, I suppose, the thin end of the wedge.

It comes down to this: do you really believe "Saul" met Jesus? It's a dealbreaker.

Another dealbreaker is the utterly ludicrous Book of Revelation. Do you really accept its alleged source, authorship, meaning and credibility?
...[text shortened]... to self-identify as a Christian has gone. I have described this countless times here on this forum.

I have had the same doubts as a Christian.

Sometimes I feel more like an "Agnostic Christian" than a Christian.

I wanted to reply to your post, but I hope dive doesn't derail what could be a good thread by focusing on my Christianity instead of the OP, and the posts you've contributed.

@chaney3 said
This then is the question of the OP:

Are you implying that only the words of Jesus are to be followed, and that Paul's letters and advice should basically be ignored?

You, and others, seem to think that Paul contradicts Jesus.

The great theologian Soren Kierkegaard, writing in The Journals. Quote:
"In the teachings of Christ, religion is completely present tense: Jesus is the prototype and our task is to imitate him, become a disciple. But then through Paul came a basic alteration. Paul draws attention away from imitating Christ and fixes attention on the death of Christ The Atoner. What Martin Luther. in his reformation, failed to realize is that even before Catholicism, Christianity had become degenerate at the hands of Paul. Paul made Christianity the religion of Paul, not of Christ. Paul threw the Christianity of Christ away, completely turning it upside down. making it just the opposite of the original proclamation of Christ"

Albert Schweitzer, winner of the 1952 Nobel Peace Prize, has been called "one of the greatest Christians of his time." In his The Quest for the Historical Jesus and his Mysticism of Paul he writes: Quote:
"Paul....did not desire to know Christ....Paul shows us with what complete indifference the earthly life of Jesus was regarded....What is the significance for our faith and for our religious life, the fact that the Gospel of Paul is different from the Gospel of Jesus?....The attitude which Paul himself takes up towards the Gospel of Jesus is that he does not repeat it in the words of Jesus, and does not appeal to its authority....The fateful thing is that the Greek, the Catholic, and the Protestant theologies all contain the Gospel of Paul in a form which does not continue the Gospel of Jesus, but displaces it."

Pasted from <http://www.wizanda.com/modules/article/view.article.php/article=52>

@thinkofone said
The great theologian Soren Kierkegaard, writing in The Journals. Quote:
"In the teachings of Christ, religion is completely present tense: Jesus is the prototype and our task is to imitate him, become a disciple. But then through Paul came a basic alteration. Paul draws attention away from imitating Christ and fixes attention on the death of Christ The Atoner. What Marti ...[text shortened]... splaces it.[/b]"

Pasted from <http://www.wizanda.com/modules/article/view.article.php/article=52>

If I understand you correctly, you're saying that Jesus chose Saul/Paul, specifically, to deliver His message......and that Paul failed.....because he, in essence, changed the message?

Then Paul's value is not trustworthy?

@fmf said
A big chunk of "Christianity" is in fact "Paulism".

This seems to be the same opinion of ThinkofOne.

@chaney3 said
I have had the same doubts as a Christian.

There is no reason for you to not stick with Christianity if it floats your spiritual boats and gives you a framework for living your life.

@fmf said
To put Paul, and who he actually was, and what he went on to do, despite never having met Jesus, into context, I suggest you read "Creating Christ: How Roman Emperors Invented Christianity" by James S. Valliant and C. W. Fahy. It's a scholarly work that looks at the Bible very closely, but it's highly readable too. Make of it what you will. If you send me a PM, I can send you som ...[text shortened]... present some interesting theories about Paul's role in the establishment of very early Christianity.

So they believe Jesus and Paul actually existed? I had no idea that nonbelievers were ever to think that.

LOL.


Well sure, Paul went around killing Christians and then had an epiphany. "Why can't I be murdered for Christ instead of them having all the fun?"

LMAO!!

@chaney3 said
This seems to be the same opinion of ThinkofOne.

I'm pretty sure misgivings about Paulism date back to the 1st century.

@whodey said
So they believe Jesus and Paul actually existed? I had no idea that nonbelievers were ever to think that.

Yes, I do think they existed. I have talked about it here hundreds and hundreds - maybe many thousands - of times.

You've never heard of non-believers who believe Jesus existed?

That's an odd admission to make publicly about a pretty big gap in your knowledge.

@whodey said
Well sure, Paul went around killing Christians and then had an epiphany. "Why can't I be murdered for Christ instead of them having all the fun?"

The "epiphany" may have simply been a change in assignment and a change of tactics by the Romans at that time. I sent you that audio book. What did you make of it?

@chaney3 said
If I understand you correctly, you're saying that Jesus chose Saul/Paul

What makes you think "Jesus chose Paul"? Did you get that from what Paul wrote about himself?

@chaney3 said
If I understand you correctly, you're saying that Jesus chose Saul/Paul, specifically, to deliver His message......and that Paul failed.....because he, in essence, changed the message?

Then Paul's value is not trustworthy?

What leads you to believe that "Jesus chose Saul/Paul, specifically, to deliver His message"?

FMF and ThinkofOne:

My mistake, I just looked it up.

This encounter occured in the book of Acts, and I guess we are to believe Paul's version of what took place.

One thing that still doesn't make sense is why Paul would go to his certain death by preaching about Jesus, yet he did it anyway.

@chaney3 said
One thing that still doesn't make sense is why Paul would go to his certain death by preaching about Jesus, yet he did it anyway.

Maybe his employers had their reasons for turning on him. Handlers turning on their operatives as political winds change? Certainly not unheard of.

@chaney3 said
This encounter occured in the book of Acts, and I guess we are to believe Paul's version of what took place.

If you feel you have to believe the "encounter" took place, and believe Paul's version, and believe what he wrote subsequently, then that's your prerogative.

@fmf said
If you feel you have to believe the "encounter" took place, and believe Paul's version, and believe what he wrote subsequently, then that's your prerogative.

I'm not certain that I ever paid attention to the fact that Paul never met Jesus, and that Paul's conversion was basically a story told by Paul himself, which is yet another thing one must believe on faith.

Not sure how I feel about that exactly.