Zone1 What separates Christianity from all other religions

[Paradoxical#1]

He was a student of the Old Covenant and was shown by Jesus the New Covenant that was within, 'hidden in plain sight' all the time.

He never met Jesus.

 

[Woodznutz]

He never met Jesus.

You sure of that?

 

[Lisa558]

You sure of that?

Paul, the first secular, self-loathing Jew, was born a few years after Jesus died.

 

[Crepitus]

What separates Christianity from all other religions​

Nothing

 

[Meriweather]

Paul, the first secular, self-loathing Jew, was born a few years after Jesus died.

Perhaps you mean a few years after Jesus was born? The year of Paul's birth isn't known, but it was thought to be somewhere between 5 BCE and 5 CE. That would have put him around thirty years old at the time Christ died and the Apostles began carrying on Jesus work of proclaiming the good news/Gospel.

 

[Lisa558]

Perhaps you mean a few years after Jesus was born? The year of Paul's birth isn't known, but it was thought to be somewhere between 5 BCE and 5 CE. That would have put him around thirty years old at the time Christ died and the Apostles began carrying on Jesus work of proclaiming the good news/Gospel.

Oh, yes….you're correct.

That said, there is still no evidence that Paul ever met Jesus.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

You sure of that?

As sure as I am that you never met Abe Lincoln.

 

[Meriweather]

Oh, yes….you're correct.

That said, there is still no evidence that Paul ever met Jesus.

According to Luke (and Paul), Jesus appeared and talk to Paul after both Jesus' Resurrection and his Ascension into heaven. Paul became the Apostle to the Gentiles, and advocated as such, no need for Gentiles to follow any Commandments but the Noachide Law (as Gentiles were not Jews--the people God chose to remain apart and follow all of Hebrew Law). The other Apostles met, held a council, and agreed that Gentiles did not need to become Jews in order to join Christian gatherings and be followers of Christ.

It follows that people who hold no belief in Jesus' Resurrection/Ascension will hold no belief that Jesus appeared to Paul after these two events.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

According to Luke (and Paul), Jesus appeared and talk to Paul after both Jesus' Resurrection and his Ascension into heaven. Paul became the Apostle to the Gentiles, and advocated as such, no need for Gentiles to follow any Commandments but the Noachide Law (as Gentiles were not Jews--the people God chose to remain apart and follow all of Hebrew Law). The other Apostles met, held a council, and agreed that Gentiles did not need to become Jews in order to join Christian gatherings and be followers of Christ.

It follows that people who hold no belief in Jesus' Resurrection/Ascension will hold no belief that Jesus appeared to Paul after these two events.

As I have stated innumerable times, Paul did NOT meet Jesus, He CLAIMED that he had a vision at a day and time where visions were accepted without question because humans were highly superstitious and gullible, especially with regard to religion.

As for the gospel of Luke, many scholars think an anonymous person wrote it, but even assuming Luke wrote it (40 years after Jesus died) he was not an eye witness. He is just recounting what Paul CLAIMED. It's like me saying that I was a friend of Joe Blow and Joe Blow had a vision 40 years ago that God told him none of us should worry because we all go heaven.

I just don't get this eagerness and need to believe Paul on a matter such as this. Wild unsubstantiated claims and millions believe them. What next? people will believe Trump colluded with Russia?

 

[Meriweather]

As I have stated innumerable times, Paul did NOT meet Jesus, He CLAIMED that he had a vision at a day and time where visions were accepted without question because humans were highly superstitious and gullible, especially with regard to religion.

As for the gospel of Luke, many scholars think an anonymous person wrote it, but even assuming Luke wrote it (40 years after Jesus died) he was not an eye witness. He is just recounting what Paul CLAIMED. It's like me saying that I was a friend of Joe Blow and Joe Blow had a vision 40 years ago that God told him none of us should worry because we all go heaven.

I just don't get this eagerness and need to believe Paul on a matter such as this. Wild unsubstantiated claims and millions believe them. What next? people will believe Trump colluded with Russia?

I think everyone is quite clear that you do not believe Paul or Luke's testimony about what happened then any more than you believe my testimony of my experiences. You dismiss Paul, Luke, and me as being highly superstitious and gullible and don't give us or our experiences another thought. Guess what? None of us care. Instead, we all point to God, calling for all to seek and find Him. We are nothing. God is everything.

 

[BreezeWood]

How do you know what Jesus taught? It's a simple question.

where is your proof the heavens ever would consider sending a messiah to save the jews -

- your question is answered.

... time now to find a cave to hid in.

 

[kjw47]

You deny the divinity of Christ. That's enough

So does Jesus-John 20:17

 

[Woodznutz]

As I have stated innumerable times, Paul did NOT meet Jesus, He CLAIMED that he had a vision at a day and time where visions were accepted without question because humans were highly superstitious and gullible, especially with regard to religion.

As for the gospel of Luke, many scholars think an anonymous person wrote it, but even assuming Luke wrote it (40 years after Jesus died) he was not an eye witness. He is just recounting what Paul CLAIMED. It's like me saying that I was a friend of Joe Blow and Joe Blow had a vision 40 years ago that God told him none of us should worry because we all go heaven.

I just don't get this eagerness and need to believe Paul on a matter such as this. Wild unsubstantiated claims and millions believe them. What next? people will believe Trump colluded with Russia?

The accounts in the NT canon are what we have. You either believe that God has inspired it or you don't. Christians believe on faith that it is true. Moreover, once you study it, it makes perfect sense.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

The accounts in the NT canon are what we have. You either believe that God has inspired it or you don't. Christians believe on faith that it is true. Moreover, once you study it, it makes perfect sense.

Ummm, don’t assume I don’t know your decadent New Testament full of deceit and lies. Faith is what people resort to when they desire a story to be true. You have been conditioned and manipulated to believe faith is good and a virtue because the tribal leaders know it is bunk and unbelievable.

 

[Woodznutz]

Ummm, don’t assume I don’t know your decadent New Testament full of deceit and lies. Faith is what people resort to when they desire a story to be true. You have been conditioned and manipulated to believe faith is good and a virtue because the tribal leaders know it is bunk and unbelievable.

Are you any relation to BreezeWood?

Can you point out those deceits and lies?

 

[BreezeWood]

As a Christian, you should be taught not to abolish the Law and teachings of the Prophets because Jesus stated that "He did not come to abolish the Law and the teachings of the Prophets but to fulfill them"

how is that a quotation, ace - written in the christian bible of forgeries and fallacies to base your argument using an unsubstantiated quote included in the 4th century for your own purpose as was theirs.

would that be the false ten commandments claimed by moses that were never seen by anyone than who made them up or the hereditary idolatry of abraham - religion of apartheid.

the 1st century events were exactly as their conclusion portray them the refutation of judaism by jesus their religion of servitude and denial the very opposite choice made by a&e to return to the everlasting by their own self determination than ruled by the falsehoods of others,

 

[Paradoxical#1]

Are you any relation to BreezeWood?

Can you point out those deceits and lies?

I have in earlier posts. Suffice to say there is no proof of divinity, a resurrection, a flood, the trinity, Paul’s vision, the 613 laws being abolished, that any original apostle wrote one word.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

So does Jesus-John 20:17

No. The verse emphasizes Jesus' humanity and his distinct relationship with God the Father, but it doesn't negate his divine nature. Rather, it highlights Jesus' humility and obedience to the Father, as He is not yet ascended and is therefore still subject to the Father's will.

 

[Lisa558]

I have found that “Born Again Christians” are the worst. They smack around everyone who doesn’t believe that an observant, young Jewish man would say that the only way to the Father is through him.

I say if people want to believe that, fine. But they should stop short of saying that those of us who don’t are “cursed.” It’s beyond obnoxious.

 

[Paradoxical#1]

No. The verse emphasizes Jesus' humanity and his distinct relationship with God the Father, but it doesn't negate his divine nature. Rather, it highlights Jesus' humility and obedience to the Father, as He is not yet ascended and is therefore still subject to the Father's will.

What bunk people can be made to believe.