Comments
1 - 12 of 12 Comments Last updated May 20, 2012

Since: Dec 07

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
May 19, 2012
 
Dan,

I believe you start from a sound base when you point out the irreconcilable differences between Paul's "Christ-movement" and James' "Jesus-movement".

But I feel that your rationale from that point on is highly suspect, assigning Satanic influences and thinking that any of Jesus' immediate Apostles had any hand in any of the NT writings.

It is my belief, and of many Bible scholars, that there was a great division between Paul's "Christians" at Antioch and James' "Jesus-people" at Jerusalem. Paul's letter to the Galatians would be prime evidence.

The followers of James party wrote of Jesus, whereas the Paul party wrote about Jesus. They were different religions. The James-party writers composed their letters some 40 to 90 years after Jesus' ministry, probably all outside Palestine. Paul received his ideas through a flash of inspiration and claimed continued discussions with Jesus.

The later dominant Paul-movement determined, sometimes quite incorrectly, which writings were orthodox and which were not.

The book "Acts of the Apostles" (only one of several) was written about 90 years after Jesus' ministry and some 60 years after Paul's death. As with Luke's gospel (likely written by the same group), the book of Acts is historically unreliable. One of its main objectives was to paint a picture that all was fine between the two parties (Paul and James).

The fact is that Paul's religion is not the religion of the Gospel writers. The fact is that Paul's religion determined later orthodoxy.

Keep supernatural causes out of the picture. This was a human struggle, with religious power politics at play.

Doug

Since: Jul 09

St. Paul

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
May 19, 2012
 
>the irreconcilable differences between Paul's "Christ-movement" and James' "Jesus-movement".

There aren't any--not that none of EGW's critics step up to the plate on this.
DANNO

London, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
May 19, 2012
 
Doug Mason wrote:
Dan,
I believe you start from a sound base when you point out the irreconcilable differences between Paul's "Christ-movement" and James' "Jesus-movement".
But I feel that your rationale from that point on is highly suspect, assigning Satanic influences and thinking that any of Jesus' immediate Apostles had any hand in any of the NT writings.
It is my belief, and of many Bible scholars, that there was a great division between Paul's "Christians" at Antioch and James' "Jesus-people" at Jerusalem. Paul's letter to the Galatians would be prime evidence.
The followers of James party wrote of Jesus, whereas the Paul party wrote about Jesus. They were different religions. The James-party writers composed their letters some 40 to 90 years after Jesus' ministry, probably all outside Palestine. Paul received his ideas through a flash of inspiration and claimed continued discussions with Jesus.
The later dominant Paul-movement determined, sometimes quite incorrectly, which writings were orthodox and which were not.
The book "Acts of the Apostles" (only one of several) was written about 90 years after Jesus' ministry and some 60 years after Paul's death. As with Luke's gospel (likely written by the same group), the book of Acts is historically unreliable. One of its main objectives was to paint a picture that all was fine between the two parties (Paul and James).
The fact is that Paul's religion is not the religion of the Gospel writers. The fact is that Paul's religion determined later orthodoxy.
Keep supernatural causes out of the picture. This was a human struggle, with religious power politics at play.
Doug
Doug.

What are your beliefs on Christ and on Salvation?

Do you believe Christ rose the dead?

Do you believe he assended into Heaven?

Do you believe he will return?

Do you believe in Salvation by grace /Faith alone? as preached by Paul?

Do you accept Paul as a true or false apostle?

Since: Dec 07

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
May 19, 2012
 
dj,

My information comes from Bible scholars, none of whom has any knowledge of SDAs or of their prophetess.

Paul was completely against obedience to the Law (circumcision, etc), and we read of those believers who came in after him and undermined his message. He had to claim that he was "A Hebrew" becuase they were claiming his teachings undermined their legalistic beliefs.

Paul's religion said "faith alone" whereas the Jerusalem party said "not one jot would ever be taken from the law." We are not talking about the TC, we are talking about The Law.

Paul wrote that he had not received his teachings from the leaders at Jerusalem, and he says he had scant regard for them.

Doug

Since: Dec 07

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
May 19, 2012
 
DANNO wrote:
<quoted text>
Doug.
What are your beliefs on Christ and on Salvation?
Do you believe Christ rose the dead?
Do you believe he assended into Heaven?
Do you believe he will return?
Do you believe in Salvation by grace /Faith alone? as preached by Paul?
Do you accept Paul as a true or false apostle?
Christ is not a name; it is a title meaning "Anointed". It was used by Paul as equivalent to a name, but it was Rabbi Yeshua (=Joshua). The Gospel writers used Yeshua (aka Jesus) and kept mum about "Christ".

The NT is ambivalent about the process of salvation; even the gospels differ on the purpose of Jesus' death.

"Salvation" from what? What is the victory? What would my birthday cake look like when I turn one million years, or five billion years? What will it be like with lions and lambs lazing around day after day, millennia after millennia?

I do not believe anyone has risen from the dead; consider the serious differences in the accounts on the subject between the gospels.

The Hebrew cosmology (have you seen it?) that includes heaven is faulty, although I suppose it could exist in one of the dimensions proposed by string theory. Did Jesus float off the ground into the stratosphere and into the low pressure of space without exploding or suffering from lack of oxygen? Or is the book of Acts a writing of fantasy?

Jesus said he would return while those around him were still living.(Did he mean the Holy Spirit? That story was written about 100 CE.) Paul believed in and taught the imminent Return.(Because it failed a forger wrote 2 Thess in Paul's name.) The writers of Revelation said he was coming "soon". Throughout the succeeding ages, people have anticipated the imminent divine intervention. This includes great minds such as Charles Wesley, Isaac Newton and Whiston. From Jesus' time to now, in every age, people have said he is coming "soon". People never learn from history, so they keep on doing the same thing, while at the same time giving their religious leaders the opportunity to control and manage their minds.

I believe Paul was a very intelligent person. He was schooled in Greek philosophy and this helped him mould his message. I am interested in reading him to see how I can help free people from religious manipulators.

It's all human. I wonder where religion comes from and what its appeal is. Does it exist because humans are conscious of their mortality, and that this frightens them?

People worship a book. Why?

Doug

Since: Oct 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
May 19, 2012
 
djconklin wrote:
--not that none of EGW's critics step up to the plate on this.
A double negative in a sentence cancel each other out,... which really makes the sentence read this way.

"All of EGW's critics step up to the plate on this."

Your English skills aren't quite as good as you boast about DC.

Since: Jul 09

St. Paul

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
May 19, 2012
 
>My information comes from Bible scholars,

Name them

>none of whom has any knowledge of SDAs or of their prophetess.

Note relevant.

Since: Jul 09

St. Paul

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
May 19, 2012
 
>>djconklin wrote:
--not that none of EGW's critics step up to the plate on this.

>A double negative in a sentence cancel each other out,

Not when there's a misspelling. Note that Toipix doesn't have a way to edit one's own post.

Try: "note that none of EGW's critics step up to the plate on this."

Note also that they still haven't/can't.

Since: Jul 09

St. Paul

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
May 19, 2012
 
>We are not talking about the TC, we are talking about The Law.

Have fun trying to prove that one.

Since: Dec 07

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
May 20, 2012
 
djconklin wrote:
>We are not talking about the TC, we are talking about The Law.
Have fun trying to prove that one.
A few examples:

The TC appears at several places within The Law.

Jesus cites Deuteronomy and Leviticus when he was asked for the Greatest commandments in "The Law".- Matt 22:26-34. At verse 34, the expression "Law and the Prophets" means the totality of the Hebrew Scriptures.)

Jews (including Jesus the Jew) consider Scripture as being in three parts: Law, Prophets and Writings. They create the term Tanakh from this.

At the Sermon on the Mount, in which not one drop would pass from the "Law or the Prophets", Jesus cites from a range of sources, not simply the TC.

When the antinomian Paul sought to prove that salvation was based on faith and not on obedience, he said that The Law (Scripture) supported his position. In presenting his defence, Paul called on two part of The Law: the story of Abraham and the story of David.- Romans 3:21 - 5:1

Which brings the other thought that the totality of Scripture is also understood as "The Law". I suggest studying the literal meaning of the term "Torah"

Doug

Since: Dec 07

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
May 20, 2012
 
djconklin wrote:
>My information comes from Bible scholars,
Name them
>none of whom has any knowledge of SDAs or of their prophetess.
Note relevant.
dj,

I was initially responding to the implication that EGW was in some way relevant to my assertion of irreconcilable differences existing between Paul's genuine writings and the Gospels. As I say, I have no influence from her, one way or the other.

Paul's genuine writings were completed by 64 CE, the presumed date of his death. The subsequent writings were either supportive of him (such as by his associate Mark, written 69-70 CE), opposed him or ignored him. These later Gospels were written up to around 90 CE. So the matter is complex.

If you want to know scholars who have written on the subject over the past 200 years, a good place to start is: "Paul and The Gospels: Christologies, Conflicts and Convergences", edited by Michael F. Bird and Joel Willitts. They provide a balance presentation but there is no doubt in my mind that at times each Gospel writer, and they all wrote subsequent to Paul, wrote their
own ideas which at times were at variance to Paul's position.

If you email me, I can send you scans of some pages from that book.

I doubted that you need me to list Paul's genuine writings, since the list is so well known.

In the following post I provide part of the introduction by Michael Goulder to his book, which I personally admire.

Doug

Since: Dec 07

Melbourne, Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
May 20, 2012
 
From as far back as we can trace it (to the 40s) there never was a single, united church. There were (in fact from the 30s) two missions: one run from Jerusalem, with Peter and the sons of Zebedee in charge, and later James, Jesus' brother, and other members of his family; the other run by Paul, from various centres.

The two missions were agreed about the supreme significance of Jesus, but they disagreed about almost everything else the validity of the Bible, whether the kingdom of God had arrived or not, sex, money, work, tongues, visions, healings, Jesus' divinity, and the resurrection of the dead, for example.

The New Testament gives the impression of a united, developing body of belief because it is a selection of writings; naturally it was selected by the winning mission, that is the Paulines, and that is why it consists of the Epistles of Paul (and his followers), and four Gospels, two of them ultra-Pauline and two building bridges to Jerusalem....

Acts is in fact a doubtful asset, for it was Luke who invented the united virginal church theory, and Acts is his steady and skilful attempt to paper over all the cracks....

There certainly were traditions of Jesus' sayings which have come through into our four Gospels; but it has been common ground for a century that John put these teachings into his own words, and felt free to reinterpret them in line with his own theology. It has become widely agreed more recently that the other three evangelists used some similar licence or freedom....

I think that all four evangelists felt free to put the tradition in their own (Greek) words, and thought that it was their duty to do so, in the same way that contemporary Jews retold the biblical stories. So it is perilous to infer that Jesus said something from the fact that one or more of the Gospels said he did; but it is usually safe to think that each evangelist wrote what he himself believed to be true. The Gospels almost always give us the theology of their authors, and sometimes true tradition about Jesus.

(St. Paul versus St. Peter: A Tale of Two Missions, pages ix xi, Michael Goulder)

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Seventh-day Adventist Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Was Mrs.White Right or Wrong? 12 min Saved By Grace 820
The Blasphemy of Jesus 19 min His4everFriend 106
MANY SDA's believe WEDNESDAY Crucifixion, WHY? (Feb '11) 54 min Gerhard Ebersoehn 3,199
Jesus was right re: the Jews Persecuting Christ... 1 hr Shane Rohrich 37
Mr. Martinez was right re: Islam. Beheading Ch... 1 hr Shane Rohrich 208
The bible proves we are SAVED by WORKS! 1 hr Shane Rohrich 17
Ten Commandments were not given to Adam and Eve (Jul '13) 1 hr His4everFriend 2,906

Search the Seventh-day Adventist Forum:
•••