%% That; + letter to the Hebrews, noted ''Faith is the title deed'' Hebrews 11;1 = Amplified Classic Bible.When you have a renter tell a real estate owner, no such thing as a title deed to RE; it's only because a renter does not want to know...……………………………………………………………………………...
Paul began his persecution 20 years after Jesus showed how the body can just appear out of thin air and disappear just as easily (the body is not what you think it is). With the intent to destroy , Paul made himself a candidate to be enlisted by the gOd of this world who appeared to him as an angel of light ... the kind Paul warned about later...which used force and even damage to the body (unlike anything Jesus had ever done) to push Paul into an alternate gospel that would franchise the priestcraft amongst the Gentiles giving himself a prominent role in the new sect of neo-Judaism (which sought to overlay concepts such as Passover upon an otherwise very Hinduistic message ). And with his neo version of the gospel Paul continued to destroy the message working from the inside as if one of them...heavily name dropping to get himself authority by association but never becoming friends with any of the names he dropped. Indeed he scolded the likes of Peter who, 20 years later, was still struggling with cognitive dissonance, eating with Gentiles except when Jews were around. Paul prided himself on having learned nothing from the leaders of the "Way" (as it were) and everything from the angel of light that appeared to him (and by the way he never quoted Jesus probably disregarded every other popular gospel of the time). He then began handing out deeds to swampland sight unseen to anyone who would invest faith in his scheme and not without controversy as well diversion from several other gospels available having even lost a close associate due to disagreements about the gospel. His version became useful to state actors one of whom oversaw the assembly where Paul's version was selected for inclusion in a collection that would best serve the state giving its purveyors licence to expand the priestly franchise. Paul was a Roman after all! So his was popular to any Roman who could overlook the fact that Paul was a student of the school of Phariseeism and committed to the Judaization of all things Jesus. Instead of quoting Jesus as was a popular method of dissemination evidenced by the gospel of Thomas , Paul offered ideological calithsetics that furthered the tradition of forcing the round peg of Jesus into the square hole of Judaism, himself being the chief "Judaizer" of the day ( although not Jewish enough for the likes of James). In conclusion Paul offered a version of Judaism to a larger demographic reaching beyond the few Jews-for-Jesus crowd led by Peter and James. Off the rails as much as any other Judaized version of Jesus message, it as served more than any other version, to obscure the original "Way" which eventually went back underground having gone far East with Thomas who was murdered there still not in agreement with most the other deciples about what the message meant. Aiming his version at the most popular cities outside of Israel , Paul's took root and began to grow as it pandered to the core motives that propel humanity onwards in the world of its gOd. By gOd with a capital "O" I mean the gOd which designed the orgasm as an incentive to reproduce and gave that method to man and monkey alike. Some call it (orgasm) " the big O", causing some to exclaim the name of "oh gOd" while caught up in the climax it offers. Good, on the other hand is the Supreme Being that designs and creates only one kind of Being...being SPIRITUAL... after its own likeness. And so, this must not be the gOd which Jews like Paul claims to have made the material world where orgasms play a central role . This was pointed out by Marcion who used his wealth to collect many documents including the entire library of Paul's letters then available. Since this diverges from the Pauline letters currently attributed to his name it opens up speculation that the popular library attributed to Paul might not be exclusively from Paul...or that they may contain edits that made them amenable to the neo-orthodoxy . Further illustrating that orthodoxy was a drifting boat is the fact that Origen was the leading librarian/scholar representing orthodoxy in his day....only layer to be labeled a heretic . So while it's possible Paul learned and subscribed to a less popular version of "the Way" ...we don't necessarily have his actual opinion on all matters ...his letters likely having been altered from what Marcion saw in his library. Marcions version was definitely more Gnostic flavored. Some of that flavoring that can still be tasted in Pauline sayings such as: "there is neither male nor female in Christ"...and "Awake oh ye who sleep in Christ".
Nothing you say is consistent with any time line agreed upon by biblical historians. Almost all agree that Paul’s conversion took place within 3 years of Jesus’ resurrection and ascension. Somewhere give/take AD30. That puts Stephen’s martyrdom and Saul’s persecution of the Church prior to that date. Saul of Tarsus was active in the Sanhedrin prior to that. As for the remainder of your post, no one can comprehend your Jiberish. The original remaining 11 Apostles, all endorsed Paul and his mission to the Gentiles. It again amazes me that people separated by nearly two millennia feel they are more qualified to discern the veracity of scripture than those who were familiar or actually knew the authors. Paul’s message was simple, everything needed for salvation/reconciliation with God is found in Christ and Christ alone. It is faith in Jesus’ redemptive work on the cross and his resurrection that brings reconciliation, that is available to both Jew and Greek. This was prophesied by the OT prophets but not fully understood until after Christ’s earthly ministry. You seem to think there is some higher, more righteous existence beyond God your so called Good. I will tell you there is no other god. The God of the Bible, Yahweh, I Am, is the only self-existent Spirit/Entity that all creation is subject, and is so far beyond our comprehension.
Paul says... Paul says... so it must be true. The Bible says the Bible says.. so it must be true! Well no. Not one single thing that Paul says about himself or about Jesus can be supported in any way at all, other than in the category of the Bible's own fabricated narrative, which itself is written completely in the form of historical fiction. It's like Harry Potter must have existed because the author JK Rowling says so. The authors who wrote Paul in historical context were creating messages for the times to entreat groups of people to change from one philosophical school of political and religious thought to another. If Paul ever had a message, the message below to the Philippians does far more credit than any which can be given to his idea for the more usual scape-goating of personal responsibility through the immorality of vicarious redemption. Because an imaginary God decided to make you sinful whether you are or not without you having any choice in the matter, and then tortures and kills itself as a means to make you feel responsible but at the same time offers that as a perverse means by which to excuse yourself of responsibility, if only you will swallow the whole absurdity enough to lose all human reasoning and believe in complete fiction, is just about as unethical of an idea as it gets. "When my father died and was buried in a chapel overlooking Portsmouth [..] I gave the address from the pulpit. (Paul's letter) Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report: if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.I chose this because of its haunting and elusive character, which will be with me at the last hour, and for its essentially secular injunction, and because it shone out from the wasteland of rant and complaint and nonsense and bullying which surrounds it." Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything Within all the Bible's contortion, confusion and contradiction, Paul sounds almost Shakespearean here. I do however agree with you on two points. Good1 does write gibberish but then most of religion is based on gibberish. The Bible itself contains far too many examples of first class gibberish that puts Good1 to shame. Secondly to your point, everyone knows how extremely easy and even intuitive it is to imagine a higher existence than God (which is all Good1 is doing). If God is beyond comprehension as you say, then what about the other God that is +1 more beyond comprehension. Even children know how that works.
%% Good points Wallet. The letter to the Hebrews says ''Faith is the title deed''- Hebrews 11:1 Amplified Bible. Nickname Good 1 talks about swampland,LOL Huh??
Before Saul/Paul ever preached or wrote a word, the Apostle Peter presented Cornelius the Centurion, a gentile, the same gospel that Paul would later proclaim. Cornelius and his household came into a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ that day. It was this period of the early church where God opened their eyes to His perfect will, that Salvation/Reconciliation was not just for the Jew, but for all mankind. It had been there all the time going back through the Prophets all the way to Abraham. “Through your seed all the nations of the world will be blessed” Gen 22:18. Paul was chosen by God as the vessel to proclaim the gospel (Jesus Crucified and Resurrected) to the Gentile nations, that mission was endorsed and proclaimed by the original Apostles. Their mission (Apostles) from day one was within the Jewish community which now openly embraced their new gentile brothers and sisters. There was no separation of doctrine between the two, Apostles vs Paul, it was the same. The only difference was the audience to which they preached and ministered to.
%% Exactly.The gospel went to the Jew first, then all the nations of the world.1st Corinthians 15 noted, i delivered what i had received, how Christ died for our sins, according to the holy scriptures, was crucified dead + buried + rose again the third day, according to the holy scriptures...........................................................................................................
I have seen how biblical historians can be driven by agenda. And in this case there is more evidence of their agenda than there are facts. Certainly getting Paul closer to the time Jesus was showing how the body can just appear and disappear into thin air would give him more authority to interpret what it meant. So if Paul could have, he would have boasted about the timeline...if it was short. But it was 20 years, so not a word about it from Paul, who boasted about how many people had seen Jesus show how the body can be levitated (the body is not what you think it is.) According to your historians, what is the best reason they offer to bring Paul within three years of the time Jesus demonstrated the body is not what you think it is? Here your agenda seems to be showing as well. You only have Paul's word that he was a student of Gamaliel who may have been head of the Sanhedrin. You don't know how active Paul was in the Sanhedrin there being a limited number of them, and Paul never listed among them. At best the student Paul may have been used as an intern, and later as a henchman. That's not the same as "active in" the Sanhedrin as if he were a voting member. But yah, Paul was heavily complicit in the murder of one of the greatest voices to carry on Jesus' message, Stephen being among a small handful, maybe less than five, who understood what Jesus was saying. This is an OMEN of what was to come. Paul continued to destroy the message, only from a more cerebral method, giving a page to the Jesuits to come. He was a Pharisee, after all. Again, unabashed agenda driven opinion. Zero evidence for this. They couldn't even find 11 apostles to contribute written testimony (or any testimony) about Jesus let alone Paul. In the letter of James, he is actually complaining about Paul, without mentioning his name. And when Paul talks about "Judaizers" he is talking about James, even though Paul was a Judaizer himself, being the Pharisee that he was, trying to squeeze blood out of Jesus' message with old testament analogies. Peter only mentions that what Paul says is hard to understand. Hardly a glowing endorsement coming from someone who may have spent as many as three years with Jesus and could still hardly understand what he was saying...and years later showing that he still did not understand by the Jewish politics he was playing around the company he kept at meals. My source for the 20 year date goes closer to the actual events than you would believe, judging from two millennia away. Nor is understanding a time or location anchored phenomenon. From two millennia away i can understand the phenomenon of agenda and the splitting of factions. Nor is closeness to events a guarantor of understanding as admittedly, after three years, the most popular students of Jesus were still asking dumb questions, still not understanding. The Warren Report and the official 911 report also show us that proximity to events in time do not necessarily render honest appraisals of what actually happened and what it meant. Understanding what Jesus meant is not a time based function. And it's my understanding that Paul did not understand any more than a few of Jesus closer students after walking a few miles with him...even the source of my 20 year date. Depends one what Paul means by salvation. There are two basic types in dispute: the salvation of mankind, or the salvation of Christ. For the salvation of Christ, all that is needed is Christ alone. For the salvation of mankind then is needed the death of Christ. Paul was very much interested in the salvation of mankind, or at least a culled demographic of mankind...as were most Pharisees...who were interested to see themselves resurrected in the future. But instead of resurrection, Jesus told at least one Pharisee, and by implication all others, that they were so slow in understanding that they would need to be born again...in reference to the extra time given to learn through re-incarnation. My sources weren't Pharisees but did need more time to learn and through subsequent re-incarnation(s) was finally able to make their bodies appear and disappear into thin air, as well traverse the time phenomenon to explain things more clearly. Finally, Paul himself suffered from cognitive dissonance, just as you do. It was Paul himself who said that in Christ there is "no Jew or Greek". Meaning, salvation is not for Jews or Greeks, so there is nothing available to them except the death of Christ (for those that seek their own salvation). By contrast, Jesus insisted that people lay down their lives for the sake of Christ, meaning, it is for Christ's salvation that people should lay down their lives. Yes so i distinguish them apart by naming the original Good, and naming the imposter gOd, with a capital O, but missing some very vital qualification. This is not a new concept, the bible itself (in its telling of two different gospels) admits that the gOd of this world is the "devil". My definition of devil is: All That Is Difficult. Self deception is especially very difficult to overcome. Well yes, it is beyond your comprehension, so why are you commenting with such vigor and assurance? But not beyond the comprehension of Jesus who called them "sons of the devil" who traced their genealogy back through bloodlines back toward Adam and Eve, who themselves were children of the devil (self deception is very difficult to overcome). Humanity is the product of self deception, a deception that re-imagines gOd after it's own opinions. Undeceived, there are no males or females, no slave or free, no Jews or Greeks. Undeceived, there is ONLY CHRIST. By insisting on your own existence, you are insisting that besides Good, there is another Good.