Paulinity or Christianity?

[Malic]

---

hi guys...

lets have a friendly discussion here...lets talk about the history of christianity,tho we know that Jesus was the inspiration for this religion but it was Saul or Paul who developed most of the theologies.

Jesus words or teachings only place a little space in the bible while Pauline epistles occupied much of the New Testament bible.

Because of this most scholars today believed that the real founder of christianity was not Jesus but Paul. In other words, Jesus' christianity or should i say religion was different than that of what Paul taught.

thus the thread...Paulinity or christianity?


Pour in your thoughts...

[regnauld]

hi guys...

lets have a friendly discussion here...lets talk about the history of christianity,tho we know that Jesus was the inspiration for this religion but it was Saul or Paul who developed most of the theologies.

Jesus words or teachings only place a little space in the bible while Pauline epistles occupied much of the New Testament bible.

Because of this most scholars today believed that the real founder of christianity was not Jesus but Paul. In other words, Jesus' christianity or should i say religion was different than that of what Paul taught.

thus the thread...Paulinity or christianity?


Pour in your thoughts...

Yes you have a point. The original Christianity was Gnosticism.This is the ESOTERIC side of Christianity. Saul or Paul was not the original.

Gnosticism (Greek: γνῶσις gnōsis, knowledge, or in sanskrit gnana, knowledge) refers to a diverse, syncretistic religious movement consisting of various belief systems generally united in the teaching that humans are divine souls trapped in a material world created by an imperfect god, the demiurge, who is frequently identified with the Abrahamic God.
The demiurge may be depicted as an embodiment of evil, or in other instances as merely imperfect and as benevolent as its inadequacy permits. This demiurge exists alongside another remote and unknowable Supreme Being that embodies good. In order to free oneself from the inferior material world, one needs gnosis, or esoteric spiritual knowledge available through direct experience or knowledge (gnosis) of (this unknowable) God.[1] Within the sects of gnosticism, however, only the pneumatics or psychics obtain gnosis; the hylic or Somatics, though human[2], are doomed[3]. Jesus of Nazareth is identified by some Gnostic sects as an embodiment of the supreme being who became incarnate to bring gnosis to the earth. In others (e.g. the Notzrim and Mandaeans) he is considered a mšiha kdaba "false messiah" who perverted the teachings entrusted to him by John the Baptist.[4]
Whereas formerly Gnosticism was considered mostly a corruption of Christianity, it now seems clear that traces of Gnostic systems can be discerned some centuries before the Christian Era. [5] Gnosticism may have been suppressed as early as the First Century, thus predating Jesus Christ.[6] Along with Gnosticism in the Mediterranean and Middle East before and during the Second and Third Centuries. Gnosticism became a dualistic heresy to Judaism (see Notzrim), Christianity and Hellenic philosophy in areas controlled by the Roman Empire and Arian Goths (see Huneric), and the Persian Empire. Conversion to Islam and the Albigensian Crusade (1209–1229) greatly reduced the remaining number of Gnostics throughout the Middle Ages, though a few isolated communities continue to exist to the present. Gnostic ideas became influential in the philosophies of various esoteric mystical movements of the late 19th and 20th Centuries in Europe and North America, including some that explicitly identify themselves as revivals or even continuations of earlier gnostic groups.

[regnauld]

Pauline Christianity is a term used to refer to a branch of Early Christianity associated with the beliefs and doctrines espoused by Paul the Apostle through his writings. Most of orthodox Christianity relies heavily on these teachings and considers them to be amplifications and explanations of the teachings of Jesus. Others perceive in Paul's writings teachings that are radically different from the original teachings of Jesus documented in the canonical gospels, early Acts and the rest of the New Testament, such as the Epistle of James. The term is generally considered a pejorative by traditionalist Christians as it carries the assumption that Christianity as it is known is a corruption of the original teachings of Jesus.
Proponents of the perceived Pauline distinctive include Marcion of Sinope, the 2nd century theologian, and excommunicated heretic who asserted that Paul was the only apostle who had rightly understood the new message of salvation as delivered by Christ. Opponents of the same era include the Ebionites and Nazarenes, Jewish Christians who rejected Paul for straying from "normative" Judaism, see also List of events in early Christianity.
Pauline Christianity, as an expression, first came into use in the twentieth century amongst those scholars who proposed different strands of thought within Early Christianity, wherein Paul was a powerful influence.[1] It has come into widespread use amongst non-Christian scholars and depends on the claim, advanced in different ages, that the form of the faith found in the writings of Paul is radically different from that found elsewhere in the New Testament, but also that his influence came to predominate. Reference is also made to the large number of non-canonical texts,[2] some of which have been discovered during the last hundred years, and which show the many movements and strands of thought emanating from Jesus's life and teaching or which may be contemporary with them, some of which can be contrasted with Paul's thought. Of the more significant are Ebionism and Gnosticism (see below). However, there is no universal agreement as to Gnosticism's relationship either to Christianity in general or the writings of Paul in particular.
The expression is also used by modern Christian scholars, such as Ziesler[3] and Mount, whose interest is in the recovery of Christian origins and the contribution made by Paul to Christian doctrine.
The critical use of the expression relies in part upon a thesis that Paul's supporters, as a distinct group, had an undue influence on the formation of the canon of scripture, and also that certain bishops, especially the Bishop of Rome, influenced the debates by which the dogmatic formulations known as the Creeds came to be produced, thus ensuring a Pauline interpretation of the gospel. The thesis is founded on the differences between the views of Paul and the Church in Jerusalem revealed in his letters,[4] and also between the picture of Paul in the Acts of the Apostles and his own writings, such that the essential Jewish or Old Testament character of the faith is said to have been lost, see also Jewish Christianity. It has arguably been given impetus by the growth in importance of Evangelical Christianity, most especially in the United States, which rely very much on certain of Paul's writings, in particular the Epistle to the Romans.

[Malic]

Yes you have a point. The original Christianity was Gnosticism.This is the ESOTERIC side of Christianity. Saul or Paul was not the original.

Gnosticism (Greek: γνῶσις gnōsis, knowledge, or in sanskrit gnana, knowledge) refers to a diverse, syncretistic religious movement consisting of various belief systems generally united in the teaching that humans are divine souls trapped in a material world created by an imperfect god, the demiurge, who is frequently identified with the Abrahamic God.
The demiurge may be depicted as an embodiment of evil, or in other instances as merely imperfect and as benevolent as its inadequacy permits. This demiurge exists alongside another remote and unknowable Supreme Being that embodies good. In order to free oneself from the inferior material world, one needs gnosis, or esoteric spiritual knowledge available through direct experience or knowledge (gnosis) of (this unknowable) God.[1] Within the sects of gnosticism, however, only the pneumatics or psychics obtain gnosis; the hylic or Somatics, though human[2], are doomed[3]. Jesus of Nazareth is identified by some Gnostic sects as an embodiment of the supreme being who became incarnate to bring gnosis to the earth. In others (e.g. the Notzrim and Mandaeans) he is considered a mšiha kdaba "false messiah" who perverted the teachings entrusted to him by John the Baptist.[4]
Whereas formerly Gnosticism was considered mostly a corruption of Christianity, it now seems clear that traces of Gnostic systems can be discerned some centuries before the Christian Era. [5] Gnosticism may have been suppressed as early as the First Century, thus predating Jesus Christ.[6] Along with Gnosticism in the Mediterranean and Middle East before and during the Second and Third Centuries. Gnosticism became a dualistic heresy to Judaism (see Notzrim), Christianity and Hellenic philosophy in areas controlled by the Roman Empire and Arian Goths (see Huneric), and the Persian Empire. Conversion to Islam and the Albigensian Crusade (1209–1229) greatly reduced the remaining number of Gnostics throughout the Middle Ages, though a few isolated communities continue to exist to the present. Gnostic ideas became influential in the philosophies of various esoteric mystical movements of the late 19th and 20th Centuries in Europe and North America, including some that explicitly identify themselves as revivals or even continuations of earlier gnostic groups.

by posting this...are you saying that Gnosticism is the real teachings of Jesus christ?

[regnauld]

by posting this...are you saying that Gnosticism is the real teachings of Jesus christ?

The CHRIST is actually a title. Gnosticism may have been suppressed as early as the First Century, thus predating Jesus The Christ.

Well, for me, yes. This is the ESOTERIC side of Christianity.

[Malic]

The CHRIST is actually a title. Gnosticism may have been suppressed as early as the First Century, thus predating Jesus The Christ.

Well, for me, yes. This is the ESOTERIC side of Christianity.

I see.

Some say that the esoteric side of christianity has some buddhist influenced. Is this true?

[regnauld]

I see.

Some say that the esoteric side of christianity has some buddhist influenced. Is this true?

Maybe. I'm still studying the Esoteric Christianity! I would say perhaps yes! Jesus came here to ENLIGHTEN us just like Buddha!

[brownprose]

hi guys...

lets have a friendly discussion here...lets talk about the history of christianity,tho we know that Jesus was the inspiration for this religion but it was Saul or Paul who developed most of the theologies.

Jesus words or teachings only place a little space in the bible while Pauline epistles occupied much of the New Testament bible.

Because of this most scholars today believed that the real founder of christianity was not Jesus but Paul. In other words, Jesus' christianity or should i say religion was different than that of what Paul taught.

thus the thread...Paulinity or christianity? Pour in your thoughts...

Ta-as gamay bro I hope you will indulge me to explain this topic a bit.

Jesus spoke/taught largely to a Jewish audience in which many of his teachings dwell largely on introducing virtue than dissecting the technical aspects of the Mosaic Law. Although Jesus did some clarifications on certain Jewish practices, it is quite clear that Jesus didn't cover each one of them as he was given a much important charge than to waste time arguing or discussing about the law.

But it is also clear that Jesus who was born under "the law" had in many ways also practiced Judaism (circumcision, Sabbath observance, etc). But as I have said, Jesus did not teach everything the Apostles need to know about the law because Jesus' teaching ministry dealt largely on such abstract concepts like love, charity, patience, forgiveness etc in addition to his authorship or "flagship teaching" about salvation in which he spoke of it in cryptic fashion or in parables -- it was rather new and vaguer in concept for Jesus' audience and even for the apostles to grasp since it was less spoken of in the Old Testament.

There is no doubt that Jesus did carry many of the Jewish practices during his lifetime aside his teachings but it wasn't clear on the part of the Apostles whether or not Jesus really did away the Mosaic Law altogether. Thus, when they preached Christianity after the resurrection in non-Jewish or "pagan" territories, they brought along with them those traditions like circumcision, Sabbath observance, diet laws, rules on sharing a meal with Gentiles, etc. In fact, the apostles did once think that to follow Christ one must also be circumcised since Jesus was also circumcised. In Acts 15, "Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved."

Then came Paul. Paul recognized that Christianity couldn't be taught in Jewish fashion for reasons of differences in culture. The Jewish-Christianity adopted by the Apostles was just simply very selective or rather "racist" which was resented by Paul in his letter to the Galatians saying: "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?"

Radical or controversial that he was, Paul's presence was necessary to diffuse the legalistic, biased, ritualistic, racist and dominantly Judaistic nature of Christianity evangelized by Peter et al. Paul was instrumental to changing mindsets. A Christianity that is all-embracing, more tolerant and acceptable or can easily be assimilated to non-Hebrew cultures.

Had it not for Paul, Christianity would have not grown or reached this far.

Matud pa ni Paul "For there is no respect of persons with God...He has chosen us to be a holy people to Himself ...whether Jews or Greeks; for you are all one in the belief of His name."

[Malic]

Ta-as gamay bro I hope you will indulge me to explain this topic a bit.

Jesus spoke/taught largely to a Jewish audience in which many of his teachings dwell largely on introducing virtue than dissecting the technical aspects of the Mosaic Law. Although Jesus did some clarifications on certain Jewish practices, it is quite clear that Jesus didn't cover each one of them as he was given a much important charge than to waste time arguing or discussing about the law.

But it is also clear that Jesus who was born under "the law" had in many ways also practiced Judaism (circumcision, Sabbath observance, etc). But as I have said, Jesus did not teach everything the Apostles need to know about the law because Jesus' teaching ministry dealt largely on such abstract concepts like love, charity, patience, forgiveness etc in addition to his authorship or "flagship teaching" about salvation in which he spoke of it in cryptic fashion or in parables -- it was rather new and vaguer in concept for Jesus' audience and even for the apostles to grasp since it was less spoken of in the Old Testament.

There is no doubt that Jesus did carry many of the Jewish practices during his lifetime aside his teachings but it wasn't clear on the part of the Apostles whether or not Jesus really did away the Mosaic Law altogether. Thus, when they preached Christianity after the resurrection in non-Jewish or "pagan" territories, they brought along with them those traditions like circumcision, Sabbath observance, diet laws, rules on sharing a meal with Gentiles, etc. In fact, the apostles did once think that to follow Christ one must also be circumcised since Jesus was also circumcised. In Acts 15, "Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved."

Then came Paul. Paul recognized that Christianity couldn't be taught in Jewish fashion for reasons of differences in culture. The Jewish-Christianity adopted by the Apostles was just simply very selective or rather "racist" which was resented by Paul in his letter to the Galatians saying: "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?"

Radical or controversial that he was, Paul's presence was necessary to diffuse the legalistic, biased, ritualistic, racist and dominantly Judaistic nature of Christianity evangelized by Peter et al. Paul was instrumental to changing mindsets. A Christianity that is all-embracing, more tolerant and acceptable or can easily be assimilated to non-Hebrew cultures.

Had it not for Paul, Christianity would have not grown or reached this far.

Matud pa ni Paul "For there is no respect of persons with God...He has chosen us to be a holy people to Himself ...whether Jews or Greeks; for you are all one in the belief of His name."

nice input.

My thoughts...

Jesus never made a clear stand on how they should treat Moses and the prophets. But in the book of Matthew we find a verse that somehow gives light to this issue. There, in that verse it says," I came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it".

Common sense also tells us that as a faithful Jew,Jesus performed the obligatory judaistic practices and customs. Therefore to me,we can safely say that Jesus never had any intentions of demolishing Moses and the prophets.

Naturally the Apostles simply followed what their master was doing and preached what their master taught. In other words they never excluded Moses while teaching about Jesus.

Came Paul...who never was with Jesus,never heard Jesus' teachings and after conversion never went to Jerusalem to learn from the Apostles. Only after 3 years did he went to see the apostles.

and according to him in the book of galatians that his gospel is not from men and nobody taught him about it,that includes The apsotles, but he claimed it to be a direct revelation from Jesus.

further research in the bible will show us that Paul had conflicts with the apostles and Jewish christian. I believe that this conflict is due to the fact that Paul preached a different christianity than what the Apostles taught.


more explanations coming...i have to catch my time...

Salam

[Hellblazer 2.1]

hi guys...

lets have a friendly discussion here...lets talk about the history of christianity,tho we know that Jesus was the inspiration for this religion but it was Saul or Paul who developed most of the theologies.

Jesus words or teachings only place a little space in the bible while Pauline epistles occupied much of the New Testament bible.

Because of this most scholars today believed that the real founder of christianity was not Jesus but Paul. In other words, Jesus' christianity or should i say religion was different than that of what Paul taught.

thus the thread...Paulinity or christianity?


Pour in your thoughts...

asalam alaikum, sadeek malic. keifal hal? inta kuayyees? alhamdullah.

which christianity are you referring to? roman catholicism? then yes, i would agree that its basic foundation would be from the fantasies of Saul of Tarsus a.k.a. Paul. but i would disagree that all of christianity was influenced by paul. for i believe that the 12 apostles (the ones who saw and interacted with Jesus the Christ) spread throughout the kingdoms of the world and preached the Jesus' gospels the way they received it from him.

after Jesus' death, the first Christian sect (as it was called then because it wasn't a religion yet) was succeeded by Jesus' brother, James the Just.