RE: Paul vs God

RE: Paul vs God (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Rule -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 8:18:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: realcoolhand But the "law" turned on two fundamental propositions. First that "The Lord our God, the Lord is one. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might." Deuteronomy 6:4-5. That applied only to that particular pagan god for as long as he ruled. Of course it may also apply to the Divine - but then a couple of pagan gods presumably could not care less if someone chose not to worship him or her, and that also may apply to the Divine.

NefertariReborn -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:12:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: realcoolhand quote: ORIGINAL: NefertariReborn Paul's letters to the .....(fill in the blank) ....are just that letters giving his opinion on topics that were being raised in the early church. No different than Billy Graham writing a book on issues of the present day church. I agree, but there's still tremendous value in attending to what record we have of intelligent, faithful men and women struggling with their relationship to God and their own humanity. I couldn't agree more. There's value in it as a historical document of the struggle. Rigid guidelines for how I "DO" My theology? I think not. If one believes the story of Pentecost and Spirit/The Divine "lives inside" and desires more than anything to be known as fully as a human can know divinity then My relationship with the divine is personal, unfolding and intimate. (Something I believe that differentiates this faith from others - he called them pagan. I try not to label faith into "I -thou' categories. Gets murky) I discard Pauline doctrine because I find it, just like it's writer to be like anyone else on the road, seeking to know and being just as confused as the rest of Us. Women are less, then having met Lydia, maybe not so less. etc. etc. etc. I see contradictions in Paul's ramblings, some great lessons too, but contradictions. And since Paul could not make up his mind, I don't think I will join the merry band. Again, if the Pentecostal tradition is to be believed, Spirit will do a good job on Its own revealing what needs to be revealed to Me personally. I'm not hard to find.

realcoolhand -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:15:00 PM)
That's a fair and respectable position; personally, I enjoy negotiating the rigor and rigidity of pauline doctrine, and feel that I'm the better for it in the end, but it's not for everyone. And his view on women: yeah; that's kinda fucked up.

NefertariReborn -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:21:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: NefertariReborn A conversion does not equal divinity, at least in My eyes, and so God trumps Paul when it is all said and done. Paul's letters to the .....(fill in the blank) ....are just that letters giving his opinion on topics that were being raised in the early church. No different than Billy Graham writing a book on issues of the present day church. And you know what they say about opinions... you can be cited as a prime example. Paul was not merely converted. He was changed by Divine intervention. It is ridiculous to compare Paul to any mere ordinary human being like Billy Graham or yourself. You say that the pagan god of the Jews trumps Paul. And I say that you are wrong. Paul himself never believed such a thing. Paul had an encounter with the Divine. No different than those who did so before him or after him. To move him into divine status is as ludicrous as the belief that Mary remained a virgin after Jesus' birth. Where did James come from? Wait, he was an immaculate conception as well I suppose. Debate, but do not run wildly to the inane. Resist the temptation.

NefertariReborn -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:23:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: realcoolhand "Life is either a daring adventure or it is nothing at all." I love that, Nefertari, and had not read it before. Thank you. Then I am glad I joined in this little thread. I am fond of that quote on many levels.

realcoolhand -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:27:35 PM)
Paul had encounter with the divine, that's true, but he was also very much invested in his own religious tradition, which is why so many of his letters (regardless of the recipients) are exegeses of the old testament books.

Rule -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:28:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NefertariReborn Again, if the Pentecostal tradition is to be believed, Spirit will do a good job on Its own revealing what needs to be revealed to Me personally. I'm not hard to find. If you truly believe that, then throw away and forget all of your holy books and forget the Pentecost as well. (I will google Pentecost to see what it means.)

tazzygirl -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:30:38 PM)
Im following, and i thank you and NR for making this interesting. Im actually learning alot. A question. Your above post, are you saying that Paul's letters were interpretations of the old testament? And, if so, whose interpretations was he giving?

realcoolhand -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:33:24 PM)
They were, for the most part, interpretations of the old testament, and he was giving those interpretations consistent with his own understanding of the significance of Jesus, as mediated to a certain extent by his political, cultural, and political (yes, political) allegiance to the more traditionally jewish Christian community in Jerusalem, at least that's my best reading. And you're more than welcome; I love nothing more than sharing what little I know with folks who appreciate and enjoy learning.

tazzygirl -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:36:37 PM)
Ok. Im lost once again. And thank you for putting up with my questions. I thought the traditional religion in Jerusalem was... well.. Jewish... not Christian. Im obviously off here.

Rule -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:39:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NefertariReborn Paul himself never believed such a thing. Paul had an encounter with the Divine. No different than those who did so before him or after him. To move him into divine status is as ludicrous as Paul may not have believed himself to be superior to the then long ago murdered pagan god of the Jews - undoubtedly confusing him with the Divine - but he most certainly was. Ugly ducklings never suspect they are actually swans either. (I would guess that was one of the fairy tales by Hans Christian Andersen? Yes, I guessed right.) Paul's encounter was quite a bit different than that of billions of others.

realcoolhand -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:39:50 PM)
Well, the early Christian church was also centered in Jerusalem, and led by Peter, who was a bit more traditional by Paul (who was almost palpably liberated, intellectually as well as spiritually, by his conversion). Christianity was by no means dominant in Jerusalem, but in the first decade after Christ Jerusalem was the center of christendom.

NefertariReborn -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:41:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: NefertariReborn Again, if the Pentecostal tradition is to be believed, Spirit will do a good job on Its own revealing what needs to be revealed to Me personally. I'm not hard to find. If you truly believe that, then throw away and forget all of your holy books and forget the Pentecost as well. (I will google Pentecost to see what it means.) That's not a bad topic for a thread. Answering as I would want to might send this one off on a tangent so I will follow My own advice and resist the temptation. For all of its size, My holy book that is, its message boils down to 2 things: Love God Love everyone else technically I suppose it could be just one thing: Love I don't think that's so academic that it cannot be easily understood. Now back to Paul and his ramblings.

realcoolhand -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:43:03 PM)
Wish I could, Nefertari, but I'd better be off to bed with my lovely girl. It's been fun, and I'll see you all later. [:)]

NefertariReborn -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 9:49:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: realcoolhand Well, the early Christian church was also centered in Jerusalem, and led by Peter, who was a bit more traditional by Paul (who was almost palpably liberated, intellectually as well as spiritually, by his conversion). Christianity was by no means dominant in Jerusalem, but in the first decade after Christ Jerusalem was the center of christendom. And somehow got taken over by James, the brother of Jesus who wasn't an original member of The Way. Interesting how that happened. Peter had to explain his fraternization and abadonment of some Jewish law to James which riled Paul no end. They weren't called Christians right away either by the way. ha ha liked that double The Way Geekness is hot.

realcoolhand -> RE: Paul vs God (5/30/2010 10:09:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NefertariReborn Geekness is hot. I'm the Brad Pitt of geekness. Or the Ava Devine, depending on your perspective.

vincentML -> RE: Paul vs God (5/31/2010 8:54:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: realcoolhand Well, the early Christian church was also centered in Jerusalem, and led by Peter, who was a bit more traditional by Paul (who was almost palpably liberated, intellectually as well as spiritually, by his conversion). Christianity was by no means dominant in Jerusalem, but in the first decade after Christ Jerusalem was the center of christendom. I wonder what your basis is for these statements. I also wonder if you are not implying too much hierarchal structure to what was more likely a scattering of communities who met in homes througout Asia Minor. The judaic christians are barely mentioned in the writings of antiquity outside the current Canon. That suggests they were a very minor community in Jerusalem. The major Jewish sects during the life of Jesus were, as you probably know: Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and Zealots. The Essenes were an ascetic group who lived monastically in Judea and prayed upon the impending eschatology. Some scholars suggest a line of descent from the Essenes to John the Baptizer to Jesus and his community. When you say " Jerusalem was the center of christendom," I come away with an analogy to the Catholic church and it's Papacy in Rome. I doubt that is what you intended. And when you say "Christianity was by no means dominant in Jerusalem," my reaction is they were barely noticed. I would suggest that the prominence of Christianity in Jerusalem is a product of magnification when seen through the lens of Paul's writings and the Gospels, and so is delusional. No one else paid much attention to them. Ya think?

realcoolhand -> RE: Paul vs God (5/31/2010 9:01:53 AM)
My authority is, primarily, the book of Acts. As you point out, judaic Christians--and I would add Christians in general--were not much mentioned by non-Christian sources for a half-century after the death of Christ. However, the book of Acts makes clear that the 11 remaining Apostles remained in Jerusalem during the early years of the Church, only gradually scattering out, and during the earliest years directed the Church from Jerusalem, even directing Paul in his travels. As, despite his loyalty, Paul's letters reflect a serious and persistent tension with his sponsors in Jerusalem, I doubt very much that intentionally overstated their influence or authority. Now, if you had authority suggesting the the nascent Church was centered somewhere other than Jerusalem, that *would* be something.

eyesopened -> RE: Paul vs God (5/31/2010 9:14:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Ok. Im lost once again. And thank you for putting up with my questions. I thought the traditional religion in Jerusalem was... well.. Jewish... not Christian. Im obviously off here. There was an effort on Paul's part (and many others) to connect Yeshua to the promised Messiah. Most Jews of the day were looking for more of a political messiah than a spiritual one. So revisitng the Old Testament was part of what Paul did. Not unlike Augustine who said the Old was necessary in Christian canon as "The Old Testament is the New Testament concealed, the New Testament is the Old Testament revealed" or something to that effect. In reading the letters you can see that Paul also modified his teaching to match his audience. The letter to the Hebrews is really going after the Jesus-as-Messiah thing where the letter to the Romans is more of a message of Grace. In order for a man-god to worship or accept Jesus, Constantine had to make Jesus also a man-god or else the great Emporer would be worshiping a lessor man. Many civilizations had no problem with a man-god. Jews had a big problem with it. Which could be why Jerusalem had a more difficult time with the new ideas.

eyesopened -> RE: Paul vs God (5/31/2010 9:40:13 AM)
I would also look at the book of Acts and the author and its context. Luke was defending Paul in a criminal trial. As Paul's defense lawyer, his legal brief (Acts) is going to have a certain bias. Not saying these books aren't interesting reads or that spiritual discovery can't be had but I personally try to understand the context of what I am reading. Just me of course.

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875