The Romans were well known for assimilating anything that they could not beat militarily. They recognized that Christianity had grown so large that they could not possibly stamp it out.
So they did the same thing that they always did when they found themselves in this position. Paul was roman, one of the first roman undercover agents if you will to gain prominence in the Christian hierarchy. His job was to subvert the faith correct the teachings so they were more palatable to roman tastes and take over and control as much of the leadership as possible. His cover story about being blinded and thrown from his horse was designed to play right into the Christian idea of a forceful Jesus that was the defender of the faith.
He was accepted by most of the Christian world and eventually trumped Peters wishes on many issues. Apparently everyone thought that Jesus had made a mistake in selecting Peter to take care of running the faith because Paul was and is still taken quite seriously.
Christianity is barely recognizable today if you compare it to what Jesus actually taught. If you read closely you can still see occasional glimpses of Jesus’ teaching in and among the nonsense that was overlaid on it by Paul and others. The roman conquest of Christianity took quite some time, but was completed in the 4th century around the time of the council of Nicea when the current bible was compiled.
Constantine also had one of these miraculous encounters with Jesus that lead to his conversion, but oddly continued to worship roman gods in private right up to his death. In public of course he was a true Christian.
The new faith that replaced the one Jesus entrusted peter with was called the universal, or Catholic Church. It is better known as the Roman Catholic Church. I guess you could call that a hint.
A truly brilliant plan actually. Made possible by the efforts of a roman double agent named Paul who called himself an apostle, but never actually met Jesus. For his loyalty and meritorious service he was later killed to cover up the truth.
2006-11-25 12:29:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
Paul's important to me because he went through a ton of stuff and came out with a lot of wisdom. His words encourage me quite a lot.
As far as him being a saint, technically all believers are called "the saints." He was a regular human being just like us. Yes, he was a pillar of the early Church, although he was not that well-known in his time. But I think sometimes we put too much emphasis on studying his words and not the words of Jesus.
P.S. I think the most poignant thing about Paul is that he referred to himself as "one born out of due time" (1 Corinthians 15:8). He was talking about how he never met Jesus while Jesus walked the earth...so in that sense he is a little easier to relate to than the disciples who were physically with Jesus for three years.
2006-11-25 12:34:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by The Clumsy Ninja 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
He is not a saint in Christianity. It is only the Catholic church that makes saints of out people.
Paul gave us most of the new testament, and his conversion on the road to Damascus is probably the most fascinating reversal in all of time; going from a persecuter of believers to one of the most impassioned authors to ever write about Jesus Christ.
I am grateful for all the books and letters Paul gave us that are now part of our new testament.
2006-11-25 12:42:14
·
answer #3
·
answered by Esther 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
I have noticed in many church's the teachings of Paul are all that are talked about.
While I'm not trying to take anything away from him, as a Christian Pastor, I tend to focus more on the teachings of Jesus Christ himself and those of God in the Old Testament.
2006-11-25 12:31:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by drg5609 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
He was great not only because of his intellect that was on par with Einstein but because he went through so much in his life.A well to do Jew educated in the "Harvard" of Judaism under the teaching of Gamaliel,the #1 proff.
Paul(Saul) persecutes these new Christians as heretics,even to agreeing to their deaths.Is converted by the risen Lord,and becomes the greatest teacher of the New Church,taking no crap from anyone ,not even Peter(Galatians).He would not compromise but wanted it right .Right up to his death around 64 AD.
2006-11-25 12:34:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by AngelsFan 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Paul was used of God to pen 2/3 of The New Testament. I would say he is fairly important.
2006-11-25 12:28:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by Minister 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
because the Bible makes use of the time period, "flesh" isn't in simple terms the body, in spite of the indisputable fact that the total organic guy issue to sinful want. it truly is the which technique of "flesh" contained in the traditional formula figuring out the three threats to spirituality as "the international, the flesh, and the devil." The Bible teaches that the flesh isn't in simple terms tainted on the floor or streaked interior, yet thoroughly polluted. Paul suggested, "For i comprehend that throughout me (it rather is, in my flesh) dwelleth no sturdy ingredient" (Rom. 7:18). we do not lose our flesh at salvation, for fleshly want lingers even in a while. individual who has self-discipline will be able of conquer sin. Any frame of mind for defeating the flesh is doomed to failure if it relies upon on a guy's skill of self-administration. Victory calls for an outstanding skill, and the absolutely skill that ought to tame the flesh is the Holy Spirit. strolling after the Spirit places an end to strolling after the flesh (Rom. 8:a million-14). How is it plausible to stroll after the Spirit? contained in the lesson on searching God's can we defined this as residing in obedience to God, inspired with the help of love for God, all proceeding from a wide awake dependence on the Spirit of God, all ensuing in a consistent starvation for the want of God.
2016-11-26 22:09:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Paul was the greatest theologian in church history
2006-11-25 12:29:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
To me, he is the Comforter, Christ said he would send. I think his writings are grossly misunderstood.
2006-11-25 12:32:02
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
best model to follow.
2006-11-25 12:30:25
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 1
·
0⤊
0⤋