Kindest Regards, Excaliburton!
Excaliburton said:
1 What I most dislike about Paul's teachings is the idea that people do not have to repent of their sins to be saved but only have to repent of their unbelief. This has caused sin and crime to abound in the world, and I do not like sin.
At the risk of being the buttinsky I can be, I hear ya on this point. While I agree there are
some factions / sects / denominations that do get a bit...hung up...on the faith vs. works issue and seem to interpret "grace" as license to sin ("just stick a couple of bucks in the offering plate and all is forgiven"), thankfully they are not the majority opinion even if they can be quite vocal. Besides, weren't Paul's words on this specific subject "G-d forbid!"?
2 If you exclude the works of Paul and his disciple, Luke, then you will find the Holy Spirit was given only to Jesus' apostles in John 20:22 and to nobody else.
Well, see, if we are going the route of guilt by association, then we also have to discount Mark, according to Mr. Garaffa. And while I am not familiar with the fellow you mentioned, I would not be surprized if he mentions the same point. And since we are using the "guilt by association" technique, let us not forget Matthew was a tax collector. And none of the words were written by Jesus, so by implication, since all was written at least 20 years after Jesus' execution, likely no one got it right. Shoot, John can't even agree with the other three, so which are we to believe? Ooops, that's right, Jesus as Divine and the Son of G-d, is through Paul and his associates, so without Paul we have a mundane messiah. No walking on water, no healing the sick, no bread and fishes, no raising from the dead (personally or professionally). So, what do we have? "Just" another wannabe wise man with a collection of sayings to sooth hysteric old women. What difference if I was to *worship* Mohandas Gandhi? (No offense to Gandhi, great man, just not Messiah material with a capital "M") Without Paul, Jesus is just another man, and that assumes the sect he started could or would even survive the Roman slaughter and purge of Jerusalem and Israel, which, frankly, I have grave doubts.
3 Have you ever noticed that none of the events in the Acts is ever mentioned or corroborated in any of the books written by Mark, Matthew, John, Jude, James or Peter? Acts is entirely disconnected from the rest of the non-Pauline NT.
Or Luke. Of course, why should it? Why would the gospels tell a part of the story with which they are not concerned? Why would I read Little Red Riding Hood to find out about the Three Little Pigs? Acts is a continuation of the book of Luke, and picks up where Luke leaves off (makes sense, same author).
You are welcome to believe as you wish, but at least consider the ramifications of the direction you point yourself in. The matter is not as simple as "doing away with Paul." The methods used to do away with Paul whittle away at the entire New Testament until there is nothing left.
Even if, and I stress *if*, one could stand on the purported words of Jesus alone, then one must be a Jew, with everything that entails. Not just lip service; a full blown card carrying Temple going Shabbat keeping Hannukah celebrating circumcised no bacon eating Jew. That is the reality. Jesus came to the Jews. John, Peter, James and crew set up shop in Jerusalem to cater to the Jews.
Paul's commission carried the message to the Gentiles. Without Paul, the Gentiles are excluded. Simple really. One could theorize all kinds of maybes and hopefuls, *if* G-d *really* wanted things to go that way...but they didn't. G-d blessed Paul's ministry, as evidenced by the success Christianity enjoys to this day. And I thank G-d for it.
Of course, this is just my opinion, having looked a little at this subject, and coming away with a wanting feeling, as though something is left behind, or left out, or missing, or I don't know what. I have done what I could for a long time to walk the path of a Messianic Jew, so I know very well how the path is too Christian for the Jews, and too Jewish for the Christians. If you would prefer to give up Paul, I still think one is far better off just converting to Judaism proper. Your life and faith walk will be far easier and will make much more sense. Otherwise, one is walking a fence, trying to balance two faith walks that do not fully complement each other, despite their kinship and shared doctine.
