Post by q27 on Jun 28, 2009 15:46:45 GMT -8
I have been away for some time.
I wrote this elsewhere on a Christian forum. The discussion was about Paul's Jewishness.
Please excuse the Christian language ...
Paul was confused. This confusion can be identified as he wrote his letters - the genuine Pauline articles and not the pseudo-Pauline stuff written later.
Paul's theology works a lot likes our - if we make an honest appraisal of ourselves. We start from a certain position and as things unfold slowly rework our original assumptions to make sense in light of later material. Paul did the same. He position in the first letter he wrote to the Thessalonians, the first of five in fact, changed over time to what he was to write in his letter to the Romans.
But, like Jesus, he was Jewish to the core. Neither Paul nor Jesus were interested in starting a new religion. They wanted, in their own ways, to reorientate Judaism towards the underlying love God had for his chosen people - whether through the flesh as part of Judaism, or through Grace worked by the Holy Spirit - rather then the fundamentalistic approach which grew up out of the Babylonian exile through strict adherence to the law. Both Jesus and Paul challenged the status quo in that regard.
What happened to change all this - the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem. Once the temple was destroyed most of the 613 commandments became redundant and yet again Judaism was thrown into exile - they still live in exile - exiled in their own land.
But to return to Paul. Paul saw that the death of Jesus allowed the Grace of God to be extended to all people - a sacrifice that was demanded under the
was satisfied for all time. (Perhaps Jesus death was a precursor to the destruction of the temple - the temple was no longer needed for sacrifices).
But Paul could not have foreseen such an event - even if he dared think it. So he was left in the middle of a river not knowing which bank to swim for. I'm not sure which side he came down on and I'm not sure anyone else does either. Christian doctrine will make a number of bold statements which have become doctrine but that has more to do with expediency as anything else - to facilitate the 'new' religion of Christianity. I remain unconvinced that either Paul or Jesus were wanting to start something which we call 'Christianity'.
Thoughts anyone.
I wrote this elsewhere on a Christian forum. The discussion was about Paul's Jewishness.
Please excuse the Christian language ...
Paul was confused. This confusion can be identified as he wrote his letters - the genuine Pauline articles and not the pseudo-Pauline stuff written later.
Paul's theology works a lot likes our - if we make an honest appraisal of ourselves. We start from a certain position and as things unfold slowly rework our original assumptions to make sense in light of later material. Paul did the same. He position in the first letter he wrote to the Thessalonians, the first of five in fact, changed over time to what he was to write in his letter to the Romans.
But, like Jesus, he was Jewish to the core. Neither Paul nor Jesus were interested in starting a new religion. They wanted, in their own ways, to reorientate Judaism towards the underlying love God had for his chosen people - whether through the flesh as part of Judaism, or through Grace worked by the Holy Spirit - rather then the fundamentalistic approach which grew up out of the Babylonian exile through strict adherence to the law. Both Jesus and Paul challenged the status quo in that regard.
What happened to change all this - the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem. Once the temple was destroyed most of the 613 commandments became redundant and yet again Judaism was thrown into exile - they still live in exile - exiled in their own land.
But to return to Paul. Paul saw that the death of Jesus allowed the Grace of God to be extended to all people - a sacrifice that was demanded under the
was satisfied for all time. (Perhaps Jesus death was a precursor to the destruction of the temple - the temple was no longer needed for sacrifices).But Paul could not have foreseen such an event - even if he dared think it. So he was left in the middle of a river not knowing which bank to swim for. I'm not sure which side he came down on and I'm not sure anyone else does either. Christian doctrine will make a number of bold statements which have become doctrine but that has more to do with expediency as anything else - to facilitate the 'new' religion of Christianity. I remain unconvinced that either Paul or Jesus were wanting to start something which we call 'Christianity'.
Thoughts anyone.
