Mmmm... then I guess it opens up the possibility that Paul's conversion might be an approach to enter into the early Christian community and continue with his own agenda.
@@brian90839 Fair point! Seriously. I didn’t deliver that as well as I could have: I am trying to suggest that you pay attention for signs of whether he actually does change. I see signs that he does not all over his genuine letters.
Read somewhere that right after the death of Jesus, there were four versions of Christianity being taught. Three were by people who had known Jesus and also by Paul who had never met Jesus. The first three were wiped out by the Romans but because of Pauls travels, his version remained. This is said to be of interest as the other three considered Pauls version as a far out whacky version. I don't have any other information on this.
@@markhatfield5621 Thanks for your comment! The only thing I would alter in what you shared is that we would not be calling them “versions of Christianity,” not yet. And those led by people who knew Jesus would not have seen their message as anything other than Jewish. Only Paul’s turned out to be radically different enough to lead to that sect splitting off and eventually becoming a separate religious tradition.
@@JenniferBirdPhD It's my understanding from that, that all forms of current Christianity came from Pauls version which substantially differed from that by people who actually knew Jesus. (I use 'version' for lack of a better word)
My feeling is the acts of persecution of Christians led Paul into his dichotomy of the law, whereby his zeal for the law led to him breaking the law - Thou shalt not kill etc. Paul's repentance is turning from the law to Jesus. His transformation of personality is limited. He certainly doesn't appear live and let live. He's very much an enforcer, not a compromiser. His genius is in organising and maintaining congregations thst were later federated, along with his writings into a bigger church along with other writings to dilute the dependence on Paul in the nane of other apostles. Overall however, in the words of Juno in Beetlejuice "he doesn't work well with others".
@@harrycrab8725 It is, but two things: 1) we still see him being that level of angry at times in his letters, and 2) that kind of behavior is not something a person easily changes from. It is more concerning than most people realize.
@@JenniferBirdPhDbut most of the stuff he was angry at was against false teaching that went against the Christian faith that was being spread in the congregations.
@@tylerx099 I hear what you’re saying. I’m not talking about being angry in general; I’m talking about the ways the Paul showed his anger, the violent rhetoric, his exasperation, his persistent insistence on being correct. All of those things are concerning because they are symptoms of that earlier level of hatred, antagonism, and harm-inflicting behaviors.
He was a murderer, he converted , all well and good, but follow his teachings, NOT. And of all writings that made it to the Canonized bible, his did? He wrote (supposedly) most of the new testament, Christians aren't followers of Christ, they're followers of Paul
It would concern me more if the past wasn't the worst.
Mmmm... then I guess it opens up the possibility that Paul's conversion might be an approach to enter into the early Christian community and continue with his own agenda.
She seems to say, "I do believe that people can change, and that people can change their ways... but I don't really believe that at all."
@@brian90839 Fair point! Seriously. I didn’t deliver that as well as I could have: I am trying to suggest that you pay attention for signs of whether he actually does change. I see signs that he does not all over his genuine letters.
Love this intro
Read somewhere that right after the death of Jesus, there were four versions of Christianity being taught. Three were by people who had known Jesus and also by Paul who had never met Jesus. The first three were wiped out by the Romans but because of Pauls travels, his version remained. This is said to be of interest as the other three considered Pauls version as a far out whacky version. I don't have any other information on this.
@@markhatfield5621 Thanks for your comment! The only thing I would alter in what you shared is that we would not be calling them “versions of Christianity,” not yet. And those led by people who knew Jesus would not have seen their message as anything other than Jewish. Only Paul’s turned out to be radically different enough to lead to that sect splitting off and eventually becoming a separate religious tradition.
@@JenniferBirdPhD It's my understanding from that, that all forms of current Christianity came from Pauls version which substantially differed from that by people who actually knew Jesus. (I use 'version' for lack of a better word)
My feeling is the acts of persecution of Christians led Paul into his dichotomy of the law, whereby his zeal for the law led to him breaking the law - Thou shalt not kill etc.
Paul's repentance is turning from the law to Jesus. His transformation of personality is limited. He certainly doesn't appear live and let live.
He's very much an enforcer, not a compromiser. His genius is in organising and maintaining congregations thst were later federated, along with his writings into a bigger church along with other writings to dilute the dependence on Paul in the nane of other apostles.
Overall however, in the words of Juno in Beetlejuice "he doesn't work well with others".
Isn’t this before his “conversion “? Doesn’t this just make his conversion more spectacular in the eyes of Christians (who are even aware of this)?
@@harrycrab8725 It is, but two things: 1) we still see him being that level of angry at times in his letters, and 2) that kind of behavior is not something a person easily changes from. It is more concerning than most people realize.
@@JenniferBirdPhDbut most of the stuff he was angry at was against false teaching that went against the Christian faith that was being spread in the congregations.
@@tylerx099 I hear what you’re saying. I’m not talking about being angry in general; I’m talking about the ways the Paul showed his anger, the violent rhetoric, his exasperation, his persistent insistence on being correct. All of those things are concerning because they are symptoms of that earlier level of hatred, antagonism, and harm-inflicting behaviors.
Paul was the false profit Jesus warned us about
Yet, all the Christianity we have is Pauline Christianity. Whatever preceded his is wholly lost.
He was a murderer, he converted , all well and good, but follow his teachings, NOT. And of all writings that made it to the Canonized bible, his did? He wrote (supposedly) most of the new testament, Christians aren't followers of Christ, they're followers of Paul
👍
Don't call yourself a minister while dismissing what Paul said about Women
@@elijahwilson1422 I have not called myself a minister since I filled in as the associated one year, in 2002-03. I’m a biblical scholar. 😊😉