Did Paul hijack Jesus ?

[stlekee]

I love reading the gospels for the simplicity and deep wisdom/love in Jesus' teachings. But as I talk with Christians and read things here at this site, I hear very little of Jesus' message, but a lot of Pauline doctrine.

So how did Paul become more knowledgable about Jesus than Jesus himself? Doesn't it bother anyone else that Paul comes along after the fact and adds all this theology to account for Jesus? I wonder what Jesus might have thought.

I guess I'm just more interested in Jesus than Paul. But there are relatively few sayings and words of Jesus in the bible compared to Paul's writtings.

[Mithrae]

I love reading the gospels for the simplicity and deep wisdom/love in Jesus' teachings. But as I talk with Christians and read things here at this site, I hear very little of Jesus' message, but a lot of Pauline doctrine.

So how did Paul become more knowledgable about Jesus than Jesus himself? Doesn't it bother anyone else that Paul comes along after the fact and adds all this theology to account for Jesus? I wonder what Jesus might have thought.

I guess I'm just more interested in Jesus than Paul. But there are relatively few sayings and words of Jesus in the bible compared to Paul's writtings.

We know a lot more about Paul than we do about Jesus; interpretations of Jesus range from that he never even existed, to the cynic sage, militant revolutionary, law-abiding rabbi, son of God and so on.

Besides Paul's own writings, the earliest extant source we have on Jesus is Mark's gospel: And from the very second chapter, we see Jesus forgiving sins, eating with sinners and violating the Sabbath. Even earlier than Mark, the lost source Q attributes some interesting teachings to Jesus also: That John the baptist was the messenger prophesied by Micah and the greatest man born of a woman, that the law and the prophets were until John but since then the kingdom of God has been preached, that the least in the kingdom of God is greater than John...

Whatever theories we come up with regarding Jesus, it's worth noting that all the available evidence suggests that he thought he was something special and that some big changes were goin' down in his and John's day. Just how reliable is the evidence from 20+ years after Jesus' death is obviously the subject of much debate and speculation. It's certainly true that the core teachings of Jesus tend to be more simple and down-to-earth than what is found in Paul's letters. On the other hand, Jesus was a carpenter's son preaching mostly to rural Jews; Paul was an educated former Pharisee writing to urban Gentiles.

I don't have much of a point to make really, besides observing that to my mind it's worth maintaining a little caution against taking the Jesus/Paul dichotomy too far. They were different people in different circumstances who'd never actually become personally acquainted, so differences are to be expected. And perhaps Paul did indeed somewhat hijack the nascent Jesus movement with his own developing theology. But then again, perhaps the differences which can be seen are more a matter of presentation, emphasis and perspective than of true depth and substance.

[InTheFlesh]

you hijacked it alright and derailed the train.

John 20:17
17 Jesus said to her, "Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, 'I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.'"


Jesus did not claim to be God,others claimed he was but he made no unambigous statements to such a thing. worshipping a God-man is blasphemy

he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?
[36] He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?
[37] And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee.
[38] And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.

Worshipping a God-man is truth.
Try again!

John.14
[6] Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life:

With this type of claim,
should we worship another?

John.4
[24] God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

[Mithrae]

Jesus' message was a bit more complex than that. He expressed an attitude towards the Law of God, unlike Paul's. Paul taught that the believer in Christ was to be free from the curse of the law. Jesus taught that the law was to be kept, not legalistically, but in one's mind, heart and intents.

Whether or not it's believed that Jesus himself said/did those things, Mark has Jesus condoning his disciples' breaking of the law (picking grain on the Sabbath) and himself pushing the law to the very brink (arguably breaking it). His various comments in Q imply some kind of phase change from the law and prophets into to the kingdom of God.

According to Acts, Paul was a student of Gamaliel, who was the grandson of Hillel the Elder:

• The comparative response to the challenge of a Gentile who asked that the Torah be explained to him while he stood on one foot, illustrates the character differences between Shammai and Hillel. Shammai dismissed the man. Hillel said: "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn" (Shab. 31a). Hillel recognized brotherly love as the fundamental principle of Jewish moral law. (Lev. xix. 18).

As far as I'm aware Jewish beliefs and culture didn't require the pursuit of Gentile converts, nor require Gentiles to convert to get into 'heaven' (or whatever each sect believed about the after-death) - though as above it was undoubtedly considered beneficial. Paul's beliefs differed from James' practice, in that Paul clearly stated that even Jewish Christians need no longer keep the law. But his summary view of the law was not so different from Hillel's (and Jesus'):

• For you, brethren, have been called to liberty; only do not use liberty as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.â€� ~Galatians 5:13-14

As most folk here will know from reading Romans and Galatians, instead of Moses he hearkened the foundation for his beliefs back to Abraham, the man of faith, and the promises given to him before the law and even before circumcision. The law was given to convict of sin, not as a means for salvation, and even the later prophets suggested a time when it would no longer be upheld (Jeremiah 31:31-34 cf. 2 Corinthians 3:3-6).

As for why Paul's campaign was so determined against those who wanted Gentiles circumcised and to follow the law, and his words often so strong on the subject even to the point of calling the law a 'curse,' I suspect his life and conversion experience may be of use in understanding. By his own claims, prior to conversion he had kept the law zealously and done everything his own efforts could possibly do to be a 'perfect Jew.' It's surely understandable that, when he decided instead that salvation came through Christ, his theology might become somewhat reactionary against his former views.

[Murad]

Worshipping a God-man is truth.
Try again!

John.14
[6] Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life:

With this type of claim,
should we worship another?

John.4
[24] God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Sorry but that is a quotation out of context.
You purposely twisted the context of John 4:24 by using John 14:6 to give a weird interpretation.

First of all; that phrase: "I am the way, the truth, and the life"; applies to every prophet of his time; for example in the time of Moses; he was also the "the way, the truth, and the life"; because he preached the true messege of one God.

Worshipping a god-man is far from the truth; if you have even the most basic/elementary knowledge of Judaism; you will understand why it is a complete blasphemy in whatever context you put it in.

(Mark 10:18) "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone.

Notice how he didn't say anything about the Father; but God as a whole.

I dont see the reason why you purposely deceive yourself with pseudo interpretations that make no sense to anyone except yourself.

Jesus was not God; God is all knowing; he wasn't. Period.

(Mark 13:32)
"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
(Matthew 24:36)
"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

[flitzerbiest]

I love reading the gospels for the simplicity and deep wisdom/love in Jesus' teachings. But as I talk with Christians and read things here at this site, I hear very little of Jesus' message, but a lot of Pauline doctrine.

So how did Paul become more knowledgable about Jesus than Jesus himself? Doesn't it bother anyone else that Paul comes along after the fact and adds all this theology to account for Jesus? I wonder what Jesus might have thought.

I guess I'm just more interested in Jesus than Paul. But there are relatively few sayings and words of Jesus in the bible compared to Paul's writtings.

More to the point, Paul himself seems to care nothing at all about the preaching of Jesus--he never quotes it.

[InTheFlesh]

Worshipping a God-man is truth.
Try again!

John.14
[6] Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life:

With this type of claim,
should we worship another?

John.4
[24] God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Sorry but that is a quotation out of context.
You purposely twisted the context of John 4:24 by using John 14:6 to give a weird interpretation.

First of all; that phrase: "I am the way, the truth, and the life"; applies to every prophet of his time; for example in the time of Moses; he was also the "the way, the truth, and the life"; because he preached the true messege of one God.

Worshipping a god-man is far from the truth; if you have even the most basic/elementary knowledge of Judaism; you will understand why it is a complete blasphemy in whatever context you put it in.

(Mark 10:18) "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good--except God alone.

Notice how he didn't say anything about the Father; but God as a whole.

I dont see the reason why you purposely deceive yourself with pseudo interpretations that make no sense to anyone except yourself.

Jesus was not God; God is all knowing; he wasn't. Period.

(Mark 13:32)
"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.
(Matthew 24:36)
"No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

ArrRRHHHH!!!
I hate when that happens.
Sorry, typed up a whole reply and lost it.

Bottom line,
why did Jesus accept worship?
Even the angel in Revelation
rejected being worshipped
and instructed to worship God.

How about the child born
who is The everasting Father is Isaiah?

And straight from the horses' mouth...

[8] Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
[9] Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

I know Jesus is the Son of Man
but he is also the Son of God.
The Son of God has no Father.

Heb.7
[3] Without father, without mother, without descent, having neither beginning of days, nor end of life; but made like unto the Son of God; abideth a priest continually.

[Murad]

I hate when that happens.
Sorry, typed up a whole reply and lost it.

Dont worry; it happens to the best of us

Bottom line,
why did Jesus accept worship?

Did David worship Saul when he prostrated his face down to the ground before him?

1 Samuel 24
7 With these words David rebuked his men and did not allow them to attack Saul. And Saul left the cave and went his way.
8 Then David went out of the cave and called out to Saul, "My lord the king!" When Saul looked behind him, David bowed down and prostrated himself with his face to the ground.
9 He said to Saul, "Why do you listen when men say, 'David is bent on harming you'?

What we establish here is; the "worship" Jesus received was this kind of worship:

v. wor·shiped, or wor·shipped wor·ship·ing, or wor·ship·ping wor·ships or wor·ships
v. tr.

1. To honor and love as a deity.
2. To regard with ardent or adoring esteem or devotion. See Synonyms at revere1.



Further definition:

Revere:

http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=revere

ALSO
Can you honestly give me a logical answer on why God prayed to himself in another entity?:

“Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, ‘My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will’� (Matthew 26:39)

Jesus never preached the 'Trinity'; it is a man made pseudo doctrine.

The whole concept of a Crucified God that is 100% God & 100% Human simultaneously is absolutely illogical.
Have you ever evaluated your belief? Or do you blindly follow the teachings of your church fathers & say its a 'Divine Mystery' then call it a day ?

Do you know how different Pauline Christianity is when compared to the original Church of Jerusalem?
Have you read the interpreters bible? It describes how certain verses of the bible were added in spain in the years 250-400 ?

Jesus also predicted his messege would be corrupted:

They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'"
(Matthew 15:9)

Even the angel in Revelation
rejected being worshipped
and instructed to worship God.

Yes; all worship is for God Al-Mighty alone. It is blasphemy to worship the creation.
I have a question for you from the Quran:

“In blasphemy indeed are those that say that God is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the least power against God(Father), if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every – one that is on the earth? For to God belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For God hath power over all things.�
[Qur'an 5:17]

How about the child born
who is The everasting Father is Isaiah?

"Everlasting Father" is different than "Eternal Father". Jesus was never called "eternal" ever in his life. Plus also, King Hezekiah was also called "Everlasting Father" by the Jews. Also, Ezra was called "The Father of Judaism" in Yemen by the Yemenis Jews (Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 6, Encyclopedia Judaica Jerusalem, page 1108).

So as we clearly see, it was normal to give Fatherly and GODly names and titles to people in the Old and New Testament days. Jesus being called "Everlasting Father" doesn't mean anything more than him being a great person and leader. He was the Jews' Messiah. But most certainly, the title does not make Jesus in any way the Creator of the Universe.

And straight from the horses' mouth...

[8] Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us.
[9] Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father?

Seeing means knowing as God cannot be seen.

And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.
(Exodus 33:20)

And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form
(John 5:37)

I know Jesus is the Son of Man
but he is also the Son of God.
The Son of God has no Father.

Adam had no Father and no Mother.
According to your logic; does that make Adam a greater God?
Why not? They were both the word of God "Be!"

Do you believe God was once a helpless baby?

Jesus was not God; he was a messenger of God.

[InTheFlesh]

1 Samuel 24
7 With these words David rebuked his men and did not allow them to attack Saul. And Saul left the cave and went his way.
8 Then David went out of the cave and called out to Saul, "My lord the king!" When Saul looked behind him, David bowed down and prostrated himself with his face to the ground.
9 He said to Saul, "Why do you listen when men say, 'David is bent on harming you'?

What we establish here is; the "worship" Jesus received was this kind of worship:

Heb.1
[6] And again, when he bringeth in the firstbegotten into the world, he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him.

Show me ANYONE ELSE in the bible that is worthy of this type of worship?

ALSO
Can you honestly give me a logical answer on why God prayed to himself in another entity?:

“Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, ‘My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will’� (Matthew 26:39)

Son of Man and Son of God.

Jesus never preached the 'Trinity'; it is a man made pseudo doctrine.

He did not teach it because God is one.
Jesus is God.
Every whole person is made up of 3 parts.
Isn't every cell made up of 3 parts?
3 parts, but 1 cell.

Have you ever evaluated your belief? Or do you blindly follow the teachings of your church fathers & say its a 'Divine Mystery' then call it a day ?

My church fathers are the scriptures.
And why think outside the box?

Do you know how different Pauline Christianity is when compared to the original Church of Jerusalem?
Have you read the interpreters bible? It describes how certain verses of the bible were added in spain in the years 250-400 ?

no, no and no.

I have a question for you from the Quran:

“In blasphemy indeed are those that say that God is Christ the son of Mary. Say: "Who then hath the least power against God(Father), if His will were to destroy Christ the son of Mary, his mother, and all every – one that is on the earth? For to God belongeth the dominion of the heavens and the earth, and all that is between. He createth what He pleaseth. For God hath power over all things.�
[Qur'an 5:17]

What is the question?

How about the child born
who is The everasting Father is Isaiah?

"Everlasting Father" is different than "Eternal Father". Jesus was never called "eternal" ever in his life. Plus also, King Hezekiah was also called "Everlasting Father" by the Jews. Also, Ezra was called "The Father of Judaism" in Yemen by the Yemenis Jews (Encyclopedia Judaica, Vol. 6, Encyclopedia Judaica Jerusalem, page 1108).

So as we clearly see, it was normal to give Fatherly and GODly names and titles to people in the Old and New Testament days. Jesus being called "Everlasting Father" doesn't mean anything more than him being a great person and leader. He was the Jews' Messiah. But most certainly, the title does not make Jesus in any way the Creator of the Universe.

You are dancing around.
The term everalsting Father only appears ONCE in the bible.
How is it that you say it's a common title for all?

And as far as eternal...
1Tim.1
[17] Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.

If you say that Jesus is not the creator,
then you simply don't trust the bible.

He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Seeing means knowing as God cannot be seen.

And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.
(Exodus 33:20)

Gen.32

[30] And Jacob called the name of the place Peniel: for I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved.
Don't you know the sword has two edges
that form ONE SHARP POINT?

And the Father who sent me has himself testified concerning me. You have never heard his voice nor seen his form
(John 5:37)

Because they did not belive Jesus was the Father.
He was telling them, they believed in a God that was unknown to them.

Adam had no Father and no Mother.
According to your logic; does that make Adam a greater God?
Why not? They were both the word of God "Be!"

The verse I shared does not apply to Adam
because Adam had a starting point.
The Son of God has no beginning of days.

Jesus was not God; he was a messenger of God.

If you what you say is true,
then the biblical Jesus is a liar.
Why did the Jews kill him?
Was it not because he claimed to be God?

John.19
[7] The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God.

If he only claimed to be the son of man,
he wouldn't be charged with blasphemy.
But because he was making himself equal with God.

[30] I and my Father are one.
[31] Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.
[32] Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
[33] The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.

Jesus claimed to be God himself.
God was manifest InTheFlesh.

1Tim.3
[16] And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.
1John.3
[8] He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.

[flitzerbiest]

Jesus never preached the 'Trinity'; it is a man made pseudo doctrine.

He did not teach it because God is one.
Jesus is God.
Every whole person is made up of 3 parts.

Muscle, skeleton and genitals?

Isn't every cell made up of 3 parts?
3 parts, but 1 cell.

Um...no, it's not. The problem with starting with arbitrary belief then proceeding on to the real world is that one tends to see echos of that belief everywhere--even in areas such as cellular anatomy, where those echoes flatly don't exist. Dividing the cell into three parts makes as much sense as my divided human quip above.

[McCulloch]

Every whole person is made up of 3 parts.

I count thirteen:

1. Circulatory system: pumping and channeling blood to and from the body and lungs with heart, blood, and blood vessels.
2. Digestive System: digestion and processing food with salivary glands, esophagus, stomach, liver, gallbladder, pancreas, intestines, rectum, and anus.
3. Endocannabinoid system: neuromodulatory lipids and receptors involved in a variety of physiological processes including appetite, pain-sensation, mood, motor learning, synaptic plasticity, and memory.
4. Endocrine system: communication within the body using hormones made by endocrine glands such as the hypothalamus, pituitary or pituitary gland, pineal body or pineal gland, thyroid, parathyroids, and adrenals or adrenal glands
5. Integumentary system: skin, hair and nails
6. Immune system: the system that fights off disease; composed of leukocytes, tonsils, adenoids, thymus, and spleen.
7. Lymphatic system: structures involved in the transfer of lymph between tissues and the blood stream, the lymph and the nodes and vessels that transport it.
8. Musculoskeletal system: muscles provide movement and a skeleton provides structural support and protection with bones, cartilage, ligaments, and tendons.
9. Nervous system: collecting, transferring and processing information with brain, spinal cord, peripheral nerves, and nerves
10. Reproductive system: the sex organs; in the female; ovaries, fallopian tubes, uterus, vagina, mammary glands, and in the male; testes, vas deferens, seminal vesicles, prostate, and penis.
11. Respiratory system: the organs used for breathing, the pharynx, larynx, trachea, bronchi, lungs, and diaphragm.
12. Urinary system: kidneys, ureters, bladder and urethra involved in fluid balance, electrolyte balance and excretion of urine.
13. Vestibular system: contributes to our balance and our sense of spatial orientation.

However, René Descartes, enumerates only two: mind and matter. I am sure that if your goal was to claim that humans are composed of any particular number of parts, you could come up with something.

Isn't every cell made up of 3 parts?
3 parts, but 1 cell.

A prokaryotic cell has three architectural regions:

1. Flagella and Pili
2. The cell envelope
3. The cytoplasmic region

However a typical animal (eukaryotic) cell, has at least 13 (a coincidence? )components:

1. nucleolus
2. nucleus
3. ribosome
4. vesicle
5. rough endoplasmic reticulum (ER)
6. Golgi apparatus
7. Cytoskeleton
8. smooth endoplasmic reticulum
9. mitochondria
10. vacuole
11. cytoplasm
12. lysosome
13. centrioles within centrosome

But your errors in fact are essentially irrelevant. The orthodox Christian doctrine of Trinity does not claim that God is made up of three interrelated parts, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, but the each person is wholly God, whatever that means.