"Josephus," Paul's pen name?

[Raha]

Re: Hmmm ....

Originally posted by tiassa The Pauline Evangelism is approximately what's wrong with Christianity. The most divisive aspects of Christian faith in modern America do not come from Christ, but from Christians interpreting (A) the Old Testament, and (B) the Pauline Evangelism.

Paul is the source of modern sexism, homophobia, and snotty elitism among Christians. And those are still strong issues today. [/B]

1. The first written account about Christ we know came from Paul.

2. Paul lived almost 2000 years ago. It has absolutely no sense judging him according today's standards and blaming him for something which started several hundreds years after his death. As I already pointed out in another "Anti-Pauline thread", Paul might be an inventor of Christianity, but Constantine is the real founder of Catholic Church. In fact, we know very little about how pre-Constantine Christianity looked like. Constantine, Eusebius and others did they best to make Christianity a perfect political tool and Eusebius especially taught that lies, forgeries etc. are absolutely OK when applied on behalf of faith.

3. It is quite a popular theme that Paul is the source of all evil, and I just do not like that. It is so irrational. I was not able to find any evidence against Paul. It was pretty risky business being an apostle in Paul’s era. Do not forget that in that time, Christianity was underground.

4. Sexism, homophobia – yes, but again – it was 2000 years ago! Judean as well as Roman society was extremely patriarchal. Paul in fact tried to improve conditions of women. His attitude towards homosexuals – well, that is something different – but he had probably very good reason for that. He lived in era when homosexuality was “in fashion”. Roman society was morally rotten to the core and undoubtedly “exported” this decay to provinces. So I believe that Paul had only the best intentions when he preached against homosexual behavior, debauchery etc.

Please – in the name of truth – stop looking for scapegoat. The development of Christianity is very complex thing, so blaming single, half mythical person is really useless.

 

[Tiassa]

Well, I don't know about you, but I'm not going to blame Jesus for what's wrong

I find your approach rather shallow:

Sexism, homophobia – yes, but again – it was 2000 years ago! Judean as well as Roman society was extremely patriarchal.

And you know what? It's the seed of this brand.

How hard is it to figure out?

Take me, for an analogy. I'm part-Japanese. Now, the Japanese suffer certain stereotypes of honor that amount to blind arrogance. This is well enough to work with for the moment. But here's the thing: I'm raised by an all-white family. I've never been to Japan, don't speak the language, don't even eat the food for the most part. My sense of Japanese history is ... just this side of nil. My sense of Japanese art is screens for a tile bathroom. I may be an arrogant motherf@cker but there is nothing about the "Japanese arrogance" that has to do with anything. So yes, I can point to White America for my attitude problem. Sure, there are other arrogances around, but it is white, middle-class, Sunday-Christian, Republican, All-Bloody-American piss-on-your-bumper arrogance that is the seed of my attitude problem.

Most Christians that I know--and, it's true, I can't speak for you here--simply don't look to pagan Rome for justification. They look to the Bible and its produce. So you know what, Raha? You can dispense with the deflection.

Paul in fact tried to improve conditions of women.

Just because you couldn't hear them didn't mean there wasn't anything wrong.

His attitude towards homosexuals – well, that is something different – but he had probably very good reason for that.

No, not really. It wasn't that great of reason. It was the Hebrew Scriptures.

Please – in the name of truth – stop looking for scapegoat. The development of Christianity is very complex thing, so blaming single, half mythical person is really useless.

Whatever you say, Raha. Far be it for me to value the measure of what people do with their goddamned religion. I mean shit, Raha, did you miss out on some history? Have you noticed what Christianity has come to? And yes. The most divisive aspects of Christianity come not from Christ, but from the Old Testament and the Pauline Evangelism. One cannot escape responsibility for the produce of their offerings.

It was pretty risky business being an apostle in Paul’s era.

Yes, it's risky business being an agitator in any era.

Do not forget that in that time, Christianity was underground.

Yes, and I'll skip bitching about the way it climbed over the Jews with rabid scorn. It should have stayed underground. I think of the spiritualism between twelve people in a home breaking bread in fear of the law and I wonder where the hell God is in these megalomaniacal houses of the holy that seat thousands.

And no, it's not entirely Paul's fault. But when the name is that influential, one must pause occasionally to consider the results of that influence. The Jefferson Bible is an interesting way of looking at it. When you cut away Paul, and you cut away the Old Testament, and look at Jesus Christ, there's a glimmer of promise. What's wrong with Christianity does not come from Jesus, but from the Old Testament and from Paul.

 

[Raha]

Well, Tiassa - if you want to know about my attitude towards Christianity, find my first posts in this thread:

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28051

My impression from your last post is that you are rather confused. You say, for instance, that Christ is OK, but Paul is Evil. But how do you know what Christ taught? As I already said, we know about Christ through Paul. Really - blind hate never did anybody any good. Do not make premature conclusions. Study and think. And "just for fun" answer me these questions:

1. Is Albert Einstein responsible for Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
2. Is Albert Einstein guilty for Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
3. Is Friedrich Nietzche responsible for the WWII and the Holocaust?
4. Is Friedrich Nietzche guilty for the WWII and the Holocaust?
5. Is Charles Darwin responsible for the WWII and the Holocaust?
6. Is Charles Darwin guilty for the WWII and the Holocaust?
7. Was Christopher Columbus good guy or bad guy?
8. Who is responsible for genocide of indigenous people of America?

 

[Quigly]

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08522a.htm

3/4 of the way down this page it talks about a book that has an insert referring to Jesus in it. Written by Josephus.

Book XVIII contains in chapter iii the celebrated passage in which mention is made of the Redeemer in the following words: ...Read the biography.

 

[Raha]

Ah, Testimonium Flavianum!

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Originally posted by Raha
Ah, Testimonium Flavianum!

Exactly. Quigly is apparently unaware that only the most intransigent fundamentalists believe that the Jewish Antiquities reference is legitimate. Even the Catholic Encyclopedia writes: "Attempts have been made to refute the objections brought against this passage both for internal and external reasons, but the difficulty has not been definitively settled. The passage seems to suffer from repeated interpolations." This is a remarkable admission given the likelihood that the interpolations was most likely done under the auspices of the early Catholic Church (e.g., Eusebius).

 

[guthrie]

Unfortunately, medicine woman, your quotes from the book consist of nothing more than speculation and assertion without anything else to back them up.

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Re: Re: Re: ConsequentAtheist

Originally posted by Medicine*Woman
I had it on my own bookshelf. Jesus, Last of the Pharaohs: The True History of Religion Revealed, 1999, by Ralph Ellis, EDFU books, Great Britain, pages 213-217 and 231.

Given the source, I expected no less of you.

 

[Tiassa]

Confusion, Raha?

Well, Tiassa - if you want to know about my attitude towards Christianity, find my first posts in this thread

Thank you, but I don't know why you would want to advertise your ignorance like that. For all that scorn you even missed some amazing stuff. A lot of the fun stuff. 10 years the age of consent? Pauline misogyny? How many "Great Awakenings"? (I think we're supposed to be in, like, the fourth or so?) It's a great story. Your version isn't even cartoon simple. It's not that you're wrong, but that you'll have a much better tale to tell when you've studied some more. A much more accurate, much more fascinating, much more bizarre, much more compelling, much more satisfying story to tell. There's so little there that I have to call your attitude against Christianity entirely prejudicial as opposed to judgmental.

My impression from your last post is that you are rather confused. You say, for instance, that Christ is OK, but Paul is Evil. But how do you know what Christ taught? As I already said, we know about Christ through Paul.

Because in the story--and that is all the Bible is, Jesus and Paul are two separate characters who do and say different things. Christ challenged, raised, and sought to unify. Paul judged, condemned, and divided.

Really - blind hate never did anybody any good.

Something about your first posts in another thread?

1. Is Albert Einstein responsible for Hiroshima and Nagasaki?
2. Is Albert Einstein guilty for Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Yes and yes. It's a slightly extended argument, but Einstein is among the guilty. Click the link. You know, study and think?

3. Is Friedrich Nietzche responsible for the WWII and the Holocaust?
4. Is Friedrich Nietzche guilty for the WWII and the Holocaust?

I'll have to get back to you on that one. Wild. I would have thought I would have at least heard about this by this time in my life.

5. Is Charles Darwin responsible for the WWII and the Holocaust?
6. Is Charles Darwin guilty for the WWII and the Holocaust?

I'm starting to see a suggestion of a pattern here, but I'd have to see the grounds by which you would indict Darwin.

7. Was Christopher Columbus good guy or bad guy?
8. Who is responsible for genocide of indigenous people of America?

By modern values, he's a very bad guy. Those responsible for the devastation of the indigenous tribes are legion. It was a far cry between killing natives outright to kidnapping their children and forcibly acculturating them to carrying out biological warfare. There's a reasonable connection between Paul and Manifest Destiny, but I'd have to see someone else's indictment, as the connection is at least as removed as I consider Darwin (or Spencer) and WWII.

But I'm curious where you're going with this since it seems very irrelevant. And I'm hoping the answer is something other than what I think it is. There's a difference between the development of an idea and relying on the original.

A couple of links for you:

- "Let Your Women Keep Silent", by Joe Hisle (Old Paths Advocate)
- "Psalm 9", by Perdurabo (The Book of Lies)

The OPA Subject Index is also useful. And the entry on "Capital Punishment" reminds us that Paul alone is not responsible for the hypocrisies of modern Christians who use the Bible as their justification.

When you are as influential over a set of ideas as the character called Paul has been through history, you must accept responsibility for the results of your influence. My problem with Christianity through my life has mostly been Pauline Christianity. Why would I blame Jesus for Paul? What, then, becomes the point of the story if I do?

Given your simplistic approach to Christianity, and your advertisement of the same, what greater credibility should I award to the simplicity of your present address of the issues?

You ought to start working toward a more subtle context so that you might understand the myriad nuances of this Christian phenomenon you tend to simplify so greatly.

I mean, you completely missed out on the development of American fundamentalism, which is in part responsible for influencing our President. All the condemning attitude I bear toward Christianity adds up to nothing if I don't understand it and figure out what to do about it, whether it is my attitude toward the religion or the religion itself.

Keep at it, though. After a while, learning and thinking become entertaining to a certain degree. I promise.

 

[Raha]

Re: Confusion, Raha?

Originally posted by tiassa
But I'm curious where you're going with this since it seems very irrelevant.

Just because I wanted to learn more about YOU in context of this discussion. Because I think you are interesting person. Just one more question:

Why are you so hostile towards me? Did I do something to you? I just disagreed with some of your opinions, is it such a big crime?

 

[okinrus]

Because in the story--and that is all the Bible is, Jesus and Paul are two separate characters who do and say different things. Christ challenged, raised, and sought to unify. Paul judged, condemned, and divided.

Are we reading two different books here? Is this the same man who said that all men, women of every race were equal under Christ, that we are all part of the one body that which is Christ, and went to Peter to make sure that his writings were alligned with the church?

 

[Markx]

Re: Re: Hating Paul?

Originally posted by ConsequentAtheist
? And your Egyptian Moses-construct, do you hate him as well?

.

How do we know that MW is egyptian?

 

[Markx]

Originally posted by guthrie
Unfortunately, medicine woman, your quotes from the book consist of nothing more than speculation and assertion without anything else to back them up.

So does any of your books or refernces or any of my books. You can't go back and verify every thing or can you?

 

[Markx]

Paul a Liar?

Good read from http://www.yahuah.org/liar.html


I thought it would be interesting to share it.



Is Paul a Liar?

Re 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:

Can we find names of one or more of these false apostles in the Scriptures themselves? Who claimed to be an apostle? Who claimed not to be lying? Four times Paul swore that he was not lying. Is that not in itself a characteristic of liars? Paul himself stated in Romans 3: 4 "Let God be true, and every man a liar."

The four passages in which Paul claims not to be lying, Romans 9: 1-2, 2 Corinthians 11: 27-31, Galatians 1: 20, and 1 Timothy 2: 3-7, are printed out below. I examine these passages to see if perhaps some of Paul's lies may be associated with these statements.

Ro 9:1-2 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, that I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.

2Co 11: 27-31 In weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness. Beside those things that are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the churches. Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not? If I must needs glory, I will glory of the things which concern mine infirmities. The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that I lie not.

In these two passages Paul boasts of his concern for the church. I wonder if Paul's concern for the church is overrated? Don't those who really care just do the caring instead of talking about it?

Ga 1:20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.

This third passage is in context of the Jerusalem Council. This Council directed the Gentile believers to the heart of the Torah with the four requirements repeated in Acts 15: 20, 29 and 21:25. Paul said that they asked only that he remember the poor in Galatians 2: 10 and went on in Galatians to downplay the Torah and may have actually cursed the Apostles. For a fuller discussion see Scott Nelson's chapter, Paul, a liar?!.

1Ti 2: 3-7 For this [is] good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time. Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, [and] lie not a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

This final statement by Paul that he is not lying comes with Paul's claim to be an apostle. I do not believe that this is a light matter in reference to "thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars" in Revelation 2: 2! Again, Scott Nelson has a detailed discussion of Paul's claim versus reality in Paul, the False Apostle.

We must heed the warnings.

Joh 8:44 Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Re 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.


I love that book. I have to get it online and do some copy and pasting. Since there is a lot of writing.

 

[Markx]

Please Do Visit!

Please visit the following site for the more in depth info about Mr. Paul.

http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/paula.htm

 

[Medicine*Woman]

The question of Paul

Originally posted by Markx
So does any of your books or refernces or any of my books. You can't go back and verify every thing or can you?

That's why I started this thread by asking the question about Paul's and/or Josephus' writings.

 

[Tiassa]

Hostile?

Why are you so hostile towards me? Did I do something to you? I just disagreed with some of your opinions, is it such a big crime?

It was the sanctimonious last paragraph of your post Re: Hmmm .... Specifically:

Please – in the name of truth – stop looking for scapegoat. The development of Christianity is very complex thing, so blaming single, half mythical person is really useless.

I could have dealt with what I perceive to be a shallow take on Christianity were it not for that self-righteous crap. Given the post you would later direct me to, I don't think you're the right person to be hanging your attitude on the complexity of Christianity.

Hell, I just figured "condescending" was your preferred tone.

 

[Crushing Belial]

It is better to remain silent and thought a fool then he who opens his mouth and removes all doubt.

 

[okinrus]

Re 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:

Can we find names of one or more of these false apostles in the Scriptures themselves? Who claimed to be an apostle? Who claimed not to be lying? Four times Paul swore that he was not lying. Is that not in itself a characteristic of liars? Paul himself stated in Romans 3: 4 "Let God be true, and every man a liar."

Revelation is the newest book of the bible and it was written way after Paul's letters.

This third passage is in context of the Jerusalem Council. This Council directed the Gentile believers to the heart of the Torah with the four requirements repeated in Acts 15: 20, 29 and 21:25. Paul said that they asked only that he remember the poor in Galatians 2: 10 and went on in Galatians to downplay the Torah and may have actually cursed the Apostles. For a fuller discussion see Scott Nelson's chapter, Paul, a liar?!.

I don't know what your trying to prove with this? If you will read the entire passage you would notice "those of repute made me add nothing... Only, we were to be mindful of the poor, which is the very thing I was eager to do." The apostles did not need to tell Paul to tell the Gentiles to follow the four requirements because they were already in his gospels.

Joh 8:44 Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Paul was dead when this was written.

 

[ConsequentAtheist]

Re: Re: Hmmm ....

Originally posted by Raha
Constantine, Eusebius and others did they best to make Christianity a perfect political tool and Eusebius especially taught that lies, forgeries etc. are absolutely OK when applied on behalf of faith.

Raha, I would be interested in having you review Eusebius the Liar?, and then let me know whether you stand by what you wrote and, if so, why.