A must requirement to be a Christian

A must requirement to be a Christian:

First of all, for the sake of clarification their were no christians before the Damascus road event, according to the New Testament.

To be member of a christian church, Christians MUST believe in all three versions of the Damascus road event to be The Word of God, and also, Christians MUST believe in all of Saul/St.Paul's doctrines to be The Word of God.

The conseqences of not believing in Saul/St.Paul testimony is going to be quite severe according to Saul/St.Paul as written here, --- " And to you who are trouble rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire "taking vengeance" on them that know not God and the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be "punished with everlasting destruction" from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and admired in all them that believed ( because our testimony among you was believed ) in that day. --- And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and "shall destroy" with brightness of his coming.-( 2 Thess 1:7-10, and 2:8 )

From what is written, If you are a disciple of Jesus and his Father, but not a disciple of Saul/St.Paul and his Jesus, you cannot be a christian

Peace with be you, Paul
 
Medicine Woman said:
David F.: I don't believe in Paul. I don't care whether or not the light on the road to Damascus was real or Paul's imagination. It makes no difference at all to my religion. I am a follower of Christ, not Paul. Am I still a Christian?
*************
M*W: Theoretically -- yes. Technically -- no. As I see it, you would more correctly be called a Paulinian, because you follow Paul's literary characterization of Christ. If you followed Jesus, you would be a Jew.
Yes, you could call me a Messianic Jew - although I don't attend a Synagogue. I believe in the Jewish/Abrahamic Covenent and I believe in a Jewish Messiah who came to save the world. I believe that the Jewish Messiah came first to the Jews, but then when he was rejected by the Jews, he extended his covenent offer to the Gentiles (me). There is no surprise here. God knew what would happen. He gave the Jews many chances and then, just as Jesus foretold, He gave their inheritence to others. I am not trying to be antisemetic since I believe that the same offer extended to me is also extended to any Jew who wishes to return to the Jewish Messiah. The real problem, IMHO, is those who claim to be Christian but reject all things Jewish.

I am leary of Paul and I only believe him when his writings agree with the OT and the Gospels. On the whole, I have not had any problem with this stance if I read Paul last and understand his writings based upon this premiss.
 
David F.: "I believe that the Jewish Messiah came first to the Jews, but then when he was rejected by the Jews, he extended his covenent offer to the Gentiles (me). There is no surprise here. God knew what would happen. He gave the Jews many chances and then, just as Jesus foretold, He gave their inheritence to others."

Battig1370: JESUS spoke these words to the nation of Israel, the Jewish People; "Therefore, say I unto you, The Kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof" (Matt. 21:43).

Peace with be you, Paul
 
§outh§tar said:
I disagree. We must ALWAYS take things in context, like Christians so vehemently argue. Since Paul's message persevered, can we not say the hand of the Spirit was upon him? Saying no means God allowed thousands and thousands to be deluded (by Paul), consequently damning the rest of humanity since we would never be able to know what the "true" message was. Therefore we must avoid sacrilege and say Paul was inspired.

But this is just arguing from a Christian standpoint (which I can still do ;) )

That is all very nice but what was Christ's message and how do you know?
That's an interesting perspective. Should we then say that the Catholics are right simply because they dominated for over a thousand years? Is might right? Or, was/is the Catholic Church (the church organization itself, not all the believers in the church) the Beast and the Whore (a beast represents an empire - the Holy Roman Empire - and a woman represents a religion - the Whore represents the Catholic Religion - so a Beast with a Woman riding would represent a combo Empire/Religion - the Catholic Church). Isn't the bible full of times when God allows Pagans to overrun the chosen people for a time, only to be subdued later? I think the "Might is Right" doctrine is dangerous.

I am intrigued by Leo's description of Marians? Do you mean followers of Mary? Isn't this just as bad as followers of Paul? (Even Paul tells others not to be followers of Paul but to be followers of Christ.) Why is being a Marian better than being a Pauline?

IMO, Paul did deceive many/most Christians, but it was not Paul himself who did this but rather others who followed and corrupted his writings. Paul was somewhat foolish to so blatantly denounce the Jews and his foolishness haunts us today. I think Paul did not intend to be so anti-Jewish but his writings reflect, unintentionally, many of his frustrations with the Jews who rejected him - even some of the Jewish Apostles. Paul should have been more careful.
 
Last edited:
battig1370 said:
David F.: "I believe that the Jewish Messiah came first to the Jews, but then when he was rejected by the Jews, he extended his covenent offer to the Gentiles (me). There is no surprise here. God knew what would happen. He gave the Jews many chances and then, just as Jesus foretold, He gave their inheritence to others."

Battig1370: JESUS spoke these words to the nation of Israel, the Jewish People; "Therefore, say I unto you, The Kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof" (Matt. 21:43).

Peace with be you, Paul
Yes, agreed.

But... Jesus, I believe, intended for the covenent (including the Law - 10 Commandments) to be extended "to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof", which was largely the belief of the Puritains who came to settle America. (they rejected pagan ideas and holidays like Christmas and embraced the Jewish Laws and holidays like the Feast of Tabernacles which we now call Thanksgiving). God/Jesus rejected the Jewish Nation because they would not follow His Covenant. Do you think he will any less reject us today for the same failure?

Today's Christians all but reject the Jewish Law, which makes them no better than the rejected Jews. Unfortunately, much of this can be blamed on a misreading of the writings of Paul (and his writings are very easy to misread in this way).
 
Last edited:
David F. said:
That's an interesting perspective. Should we then say that the Catholics are right simply because they dominated for over a thousand years? Is might right? Or, was/is the Catholic Church (the church organization itself, not all the believers in the church) the Beast and the Whore (a beast represents an empire - the Holy Roman Empire - and a woman represents a religion - the Whore represents the Catholic Religion - so a Beast with a Woman riding would represent a combo Empire/Religion - the Catholic Church). Isn't the bible full of times when God allows Pagans to overrun the chosen people for a time, only to be subdued later? I think the "Might is Right" doctrine is dangerous.

I am intrigued by Leo's description of Marians? Do you mean followers of Mary? Isn't this just as bad as followers of Paul? (Even Paul tells others not to be followers of Paul but to be followers of Christ.) Why is being a Marian better than being a Pauline?

IMO, Paul did deceive many/most Christians, but it was not Paul himself who did this but rather others who followed and corrupted his writings. Paul was somewhat foolish to so blatantly denounce the Jews and his foolishness haunts us today. I think Paul did not intend to be so anti-Jewish but his writings reflect, unintentionally, many of his frustrations with the Jews who rejected him - even some of the Jewish Apostles. Paul should have been more careful.

You missed the point of my writing.

Saying no means God allowed thousands and thousands to be deluded (by Paul), consequently damning the rest of humanity since we would never be able to know what the "true" message was.
 
§outh§tar said:
You missed the point of my writing.

Saying no means God allowed thousands and thousands to be deluded (by Paul), consequently damning the rest of humanity since we would never be able to know what the "true" message was.
Matthew 24
24
For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall decieve the very elect.​
If the "very elect" might even be deceived, how much more might us common folk be deceived? I think Jesus says exactly what you seem to think can't happen. What I am not sure of is whether this deception is damning. Can you be deceived and still "go to heaven"? I think the answer is yes. All that is required for salvation is belief in Jesus. I think not being deceived leads to what Paul calls, the prize of the high calling.
 
Last edited:
David F. said:
I don't believe in Paul. Paul is a fellow Christian but he is not my saviour. I don't care whether or not the light on the road to Damascus was real or Paul's imagination. It makes no difference at all to my religion. I am a follower of Christ, not Paul. Am I still a Christian?

The whole idea that Christ is a "Savior" is Paul, or at least 'christians' understand the idea of 'Savior' in Pauline terms, that is, that the murder of the Messiah provided forgiveness for Sin, thus 'saving' from the obligations to the Law and the requirements of Righteous Living.

So what 'chistians' see as 'Salvation' other Religions would see as libertinism and a blatant excuse to proflagacy and sinfulness.

Examine Christ's Sermons and Parables and you do not find a Savior, but a Teacher. Christ was not a Savior but a Leader. We were not supposed to be passively saved, or saved by an act of Murder. We were supposed to learn from the Teachings, and follow the Life of Christ.

The Narrow Way, not the wide way that would lead to destruction.
 
Leo Volont: Examine Christ's Sermons and Parables and you do not find a Savior, but a Teacher. Christ was not a Savior but a Leader. We were not supposed to be passively saved, or saved by an act of Murder. We were supposed to learn from the Teachings, and follow the Life of Christ.
*************
M*W: Remember, though, that Paul penned Jesus' sermons and parables, but you are right, Jesus was a teacher not a savior. We were supposed to learn from his teachings, not expect him to die for us.
 
Leo Volont said:
The whole idea that Christ is a "Savior" is Paul, or at least 'christians' understand the idea of 'Savior' in Pauline terms, that is, that the murder of the Messiah provided forgiveness for Sin, thus 'saving' from the obligations to the Law and the requirements of Righteous Living.

So what 'chistians' see as 'Salvation' other Religions would see as libertinism and a blatant excuse to proflagacy and sinfulness.

Examine Christ's Sermons and Parables and you do not find a Savior, but a Teacher. Christ was not a Savior but a Leader. We were not supposed to be passively saved, or saved by an act of Murder. We were supposed to learn from the Teachings, and follow the Life of Christ.

The Narrow Way, not the wide way that would lead to destruction.
Point taken, I will try not to use the word Savior. Perhaps Redeemer should be more correct.
Matthew 26
1
And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples,
2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.​
Luke 24
7
Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.

44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:​
This surely sounds like Jesus himself was saying that he had to suffer and die and rise again.
Psalms 23
12
Many bulls have compassed me: strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round.
13 They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion.
14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death.
16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
17 I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me.
18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.
19 But be not thou far from me, O LORD: O my strength, haste thee to help me.​
This sounds like an accurate portrayal of a crucifixion centuries before it was invented.
Isaiah 53
3
He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.​
He was wounded for our transgressions... He was bruised for our iniquities... It pleased the LORD to bruise him... for he shall bear their iniquities.

It certainly sounds like Paul is soundly in line with the OT. None of the above verses comes from the writings of Paul.

I think it is certainly correct to say Jesus died for the sins of mankind.

Was Jesus a great teacher? Certainly, but he was more than that. He was NOT a ruler in this world, by his own words, yet he was the King of the Jews. How can these be reconciled?

Daniel prophecies that the sacrifices will cease. Jesus says the Heaven and Earth will pass away before the Law (Covenant). How can there be a Covenant without the sacrifices? In Isaiah 53 (above) it says "he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter" so Jesus is the sacrifice. In the book of the Apostle John it is recorded that John Baptist calls Jesus "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world". Jesus fulfilled all the sacrifices. They are not done away with, they are already done - there is a difference. The Covenant is still whole and in place. Jesus tells us that eternal life is found by keeping the Commandments (Matt 19:17, Mark 10:19, Luke 10:26, 18:20), but the Commandments are only the first step. The second step is to follow Jesus and to love/give him all. Jesus says the only way to eternity is through him - "No man comes to the Father except through me".

I don’t see anywhere that Christians are allowed to do anything they want, all manner of sinning and breaking the Commandments, just so Jesus can wave his hands and forgive them. There is a Baptist philosophy called “once saved, always saved” which corresponds to this drivel but I don’t think anyone else (not even all Baptists) believe such nonsense.

I see ample evidence of the necessity for Jesus to die for the sins of the world without going to Paul at all. Christian belief is not dependant upon Paul.
 
David F.: Perhaps Redeemer should be more correct.
Matthew 26
1
And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples,
2 Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.​
Luke 24
7
Saying, The Son of man must be delivered into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise again.
*************
M*W: David, remember that Paul said these words. It was Paul who created the dying demigod savior myth of Jesus! Jesus never said these things. In fact, Jesus wasn't declared a deity until 325 AD! At the time Jesus was crucified, he was not considered to be a savior -- only a teacher.
*************
David F.: 44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:​
This surely sounds like Jesus himself was saying that he had to suffer and die and rise again.
*************
M*W: Again, David, Paul was the mouthpiece for Jesus. Rabbi Jesus had absolutely no idea what Paul would write since he was already dead or out of town -- whatever. Paul never met Jesus nor never heard him say anything. Paul's writings are fiction.
*************
David F.:
Psalms 23
12
Many bulls have compassed me: strong bulls of Bashan have beset me round.
13 They gaped upon me with their mouths, as a ravening and a roaring lion.
14 I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint: my heart is like wax; it is melted in the midst of my bowels.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd; and my tongue cleaveth to my jaws; and thou hast brought me into the dust of death. 16 For dogs have compassed me: the assembly of the wicked have inclosed me: they pierced my hands and my feet.
17 I may tell all my bones: they look and stare upon me.
18 They part my garments among them, and cast lots upon my vesture.
19 But be not thou far from me, O LORD: O my strength, haste thee to help me.​
This sounds like an accurate portrayal of a crucifixion centuries before it was invented.
*************
M*W: King David was supposed to have written Psalms about a thousand years before Jesus. In no way were they applicable to Jesus.
*************
David F.:
Isaiah 53
3
He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.
4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.
5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed, and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth: he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he openeth not his mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.​
He was wounded for our transgressions... He was bruised for our iniquities... It pleased the LORD to bruise him... for he shall bear their iniquities.
*************
M*W: Again, Isaiah was written about 700 years before Jesus, so nothing Isaiah said refers to Jesus.
*************
David F.: It certainly sounds like Paul is soundly in line with the OT. None of the above verses comes from the writings of Paul.
*************
M*W: Paul was very familiar with the OT, and he created fulfillments of the OT prophecies!
*************
David F.: I think it is certainly correct to say Jesus died for the sins of mankind. Was Jesus a great teacher? Certainly, but he was more than that. He was NOT a ruler in this world, by his own words, yet he was the King of the Jews. How can these be reconciled?
*************
M*W: If Jesus died on the cross or wherever, he knew he was dying for his own teachings. He knew he wasn't the messiah, he wasn't a ruler, he wasn't the King of the Jews. These ideas are reconciled to the mythwriting of Paul.
*************
David F.: Daniel prophecies that the sacrifices will cease. Jesus says the Heaven and Earth will pass away before the Law (Covenant). How can there be a Covenant without the sacrifices? In Isaiah 53 (above) it says "he is brought as a lamb to the slaughter" so Jesus is the sacrifice.
*************
M*W: References to the "lamb" and "bulls" is refering to the Zodiac sign of Aries, the Ram, which denotes a time in spring.
*************
David F.: In the book of the Apostle John it is recorded that John Baptist calls Jesus "the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world". Jesus fulfilled all the sacrifices. They are not done away with, they are already done - there is a difference. The Covenant is still whole and in place. Jesus tells us that eternal life is found by keeping the Commandments (Matt 19:17, Mark 10:19, Luke 10:26, 18:20), but the Commandments are only the first step. The second step is to follow Jesus and to love/give him all. Jesus says the only way to eternity is through him - "No man comes to the Father except through me".
*************
M*W: No matter what I say, you will refute it.
*************
David F.: I don’t see anywhere that Christians are allowed to do anything they want, all manner of sinning and breaking the Commandments, just so Jesus can wave his hands and forgive them. There is a Baptist philosophy called “once saved, always saved” which corresponds to this drivel but I don’t think anyone else (not even all Baptists) believe such nonsense.
*************
M*W: The only forgiveness there is is self-forgiveness and the forgiveness of others and us forgiving them. There is no god who gives forgiveness to us, so we must do it ourselves.
*************
David F.: I see ample evidence of the necessity for Jesus to die for the sins of the world without going to Paul at all. Christian belief is not dependant upon Paul.
*************
M*W: Unfortunately, it was and still is -- for Christians. It was Paul's story. It was not the truth. There is no savior to bail us out, and there is no heaven for us to go to. All that we will ever have is what we have here.
 
No, its not a must, but chances are if you are truely a Christian, than you will believe it.
 
Enigma'07 said:
No, its not a must, but chances are if you are truely a Christian, than you will believe it.

Amazing. Protestants don't even examine this logic of theirs: that to be "Truly a Christian" they must reject the Teachings of Christ, and adopt the Doctrines of Paul which disagree with Christ.

????

Oh, but wait... they do sometimes 'think' about it and attempt to reconcile their betrayal of Christ. The Theory they use for this is "Dispensationalism" -- they claim that Christ's teachings of Righteousness and Salvation by Works and by Moral Criteria was the leftovers from the Previous Dispensation, but as soon as Christ was Murdered, all of that changed. It was as though Christ were guarding the Gates of Heaven, but that after He was killed, Sinners were at complete Liberty to overrun Heaven (which is what Salvation by complete forgiveness of Sin amounts to, isn't it?).
 
top mosker: "---the same exact question in three different threads within a 24 hour period."

Battig1370: Quote the same exact question that I asked in three different threads within a 24 hour period?

Peace be with you, Paul
 
Battig1370: A must requirement to be a Christian is to believe as fact that a deity (Jesus) came to Saul/St.Paul on the road to Damascus, as an angel of light saying, "I am the Jesus of Nazareth" Am I correct in making this statement?

Enigma'07: "No, its not a must, but chances are if you are truely a Christian, than you will believe it."

Battig1370: If you a christian its not a must requirement, but if you are truely a Christian is it a must requirement to believe as fact that a deity (Jesus) came to Saul/St.Paul on the road to Damascus, as an angel of light saying, "I am the Jesus of Nazareth"?

What about the Saved Christian?

Peace be with be, Paul
 
Oops, I made a mistake. Jesus did not appear as an angel of light, He Himself apeared. And, he did not say that He was Jesus and Nazareth. He said, "Saul, Saul, whay are you persecuting Me?" And after Saul asked "who are you Lord?" He responded by saying, "I am Jesus whom you are are persecuting, but get up and enter the city, and it will be told you what you must do."

What about the Saved Christian?

What do you mean by this?
 
Back
Top