Why have Christians turned their backs on the word of Jesus?

Question

why have christians turned away from the mission and the word of Jesus and turned instead to the Pauline theory of Christ?

I am at the moment researching the Gospels, I have not yrt reached a conclusion, but I know this for a fact, neither Mark, John, Luke actually ever spent time or even knew Jesus, this is a remarkable fact, Paul was indeed the single influence of the Trinitarian theory, one that became orthodox at the council of nicea in 325ce, I have been reading about St Barnabas adn have some thought that he was indeed the author of the hypothetical 'Q' Gospel.

what are your thoughts

good answer David C, it was down to Paul, he realised that to preach the new message, his message, he would have to adapt the message to suit the different people he came into contact with. Paul wanted to spread out from the place of Jesus and widen the scope of believers, he could only do this by adapting the minor details so that they were more palitable to the Pagans.

Answer 1

Well sweetie, I think that the primary problem that so many Christians (including Paul) had, and continue to have with the teachings of Jesus was simply that "His" teachings do not allow for an individual to take control of a government--or even take part IN any government activities (e.g. "thou cannot serve both God and Mammon."), for that matter. Yes, that's right--according to ol' J.C., Christians aren't even supposed to vote! They are supposed to be "in the world, but not OF it".

Also, Jesus had this nasty habit of telling people not to judge others, nor to set foot on the paths of anger or hatred. Christians are supposed to be "meek" (and hence inherit the Earth and the kingdom of "the father"). And unlike Islam, which teaches charity to the poor, Christianity teaches an outright disowning of all one's wordly possessions (thus a christian should "take no thought of the moment...as to where comest my food or clothes," for faith would tell the christian that God would look out for him/her just as surely as "He" takes care of the birds and beasts.

You can see how all this Love, Mercy, and Poverty (and Peace), just wouldn't do for an organization like the Vatican--or for any monotheistic cult--how can you spread the word of a God that demands servility and subjugation from a world of pagans who are used to enjoying life and it's riches--as cruel and unfair as those riches might be--without the convenience of war, money, and a dogma which teaches followers to hate all who do not follow their ways? So Paul, who seemed to take no displeasure in the wholesale slaughter of his fellow man, is the one whose view's the RCC and all later churches tend to follow! Plus, Paul had seemed to develop quite a hatred for Jews--which Christ didn't have--great reason to do away with the very rival faith that J.C. himself belonged to.


"If there is one thing that Jesus wouldn't be if He were alive today, it would be a christian." --Mark Twain

Answer 2

I think you're nuts. The apostles that you name did indeed live at the time Jesus did, and did interact with Him. Paul was known as Saul before his abrupt meeting with Jesus took place, and was very much a Pharisee. He knew the law better than anyone else of the disciples of Jesus. For that cause, he was sent to the Gentiles because of his past, and for the reason that going to the Jews could have given rise to pride on his part, since he knew what they believed so well.
The "Q" gospel is just what you call it, hypothetical. It may be believed to have existed, but has yet to be proven to have existed. The best scholars of that time give no mention of it. The detractors of Christianity of that time give no mention of it. The fact that the Gospels are so much a like is the reason for the idea of the "Q" gospel. Problem is, while very much a like, they are still different. You also need to consider that since all, except Paul, spent about 3 years with Jesus, they would all know basically the same things, but still report them differently, just as happens today when several people report on an incident that they all were involved in.
If there just "has to be" a "Q" gospel from which all the gospels were written, then should there also not be a "Q" testimonial for anything being tried in a court of law where all witnesses report from a prearranged master testimony? Yeah, I know, that sounds preposterous, and silly. Yet, if the idea of the 'Q" gospel is to be believed, why then would a "Q" testimony not be a real possibility as well. Your reasoning's against such as that, must then also hold true for the "Q" gospel thing.

Answer 3

I don't think Paul believed the Trinity.

At Colossians 1:15, 16 he says of Jesus: "He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation; because by means of him all other things were created in the heavens and upon the earth, the things visible and the things invisible, no matter whether they are thrones or lordships or governments or authorities. All other things have been created through him and for him." Paul knew that Jesus and God were not co-eternal.

Trinitarians say that “first-born” here means prime, most excellent, most distinguished; so Christ would be understood to be, not part of creation, but the most distinguished in relation to those who were created. If that is the case, and if the Trinity doctrine is true, why are the Father and the holy spirit not also said to be the firstborn of all creation? But the Bible applies this expression only to the Son and according to the customary meaning of “firstborn,” it indicates that Jesus is the eldest in God’s family of sons.

Paul also said at Colossians 11:3 "But I want you to know that the head of every man is the Christ; in turn the head of a woman is the man; in turn the head of the Christ is God." He didn't believe Jesus and God were co-equal either.

Clearly, Christ is not God, and God is of superior rank to Christ. It should be noted that this was written about 55 C.E., some 22 years after Jesus returned to heaven. So the truth here stated applies to the relationship between God and Christ in heaven.

I'd be interested to hear what proof you have that Mark, Luke and John did not know Jesus. Do you believe that Matthew knew Jesus? If so, why do you believe he knew him and not the others?

With regard to the origin of the Trinity, the New Encyclopædia Britannica says: “Neither the word Trinity, nor the explicit doctrine as such, appears in the New Testament, nor did Jesus and his followers intend to contradict the Shema in the Old Testament: ‘Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord’ (Deut. 6:4) The doctrine developed gradually over several centuries and through many controversies. By the end of the 4th century the doctrine of the Trinity took substantially the form it has maintained ever since.” (1976), Micropædia, Vol. X, p. 126.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia states: “The formulation ‘one God in three Persons’ was not solidly established, certainly not fully assimilated into Christian life and its profession of faith, prior to the end of the 4th century. But it is precisely this formulation that has first claim to the title the Trinitarian dogma. Among the Apostolic Fathers, there had been nothing even remotely approaching such a mentality or perspective.” (1967), Vol. XIV, p. 299.

The Encyclopedia Americana says: “Christianity derived from Judaism and Judaism was strictly Unitarian [believing that God is one person]. The road which led from Jerusalem to Nicea was scarcely a straight one. Fourth century Trinitarianism did not reflect accurately early Christian teaching regarding the nature of God; it was, on the contrary, a deviation from this teaching.” (1956), Vol. XXVII, p. 294L.

According to the Nouveau Dictionnaire Universel, “The Platonic trinity, itself merely a rearrangement of older trinities dating back to earlier peoples, appears to be the rational philosophic trinity of attributes that gave birth to the three hypostases or divine persons taught by the Christian churches. This Greek philosopher’s [Plato, fourth century B.C.E.] conception of the divine trinity can be found in all the ancient [pagan] religions.” (Paris, 1865-1870), edited by M. Lachâtre, Vol. 2, p. 1467.

I think it's a bit too general to say all Christians have turned their backs on Jesus.

Answer 4

Some of the other Apostles admit that many of Paul's writings are hard to understand and that the unstable wrest his writings...

2 Peter 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

Paul's teaching of Christ does not contradict the teachings of Christ, but many wrest Paul's teachings into something Christ never taught. Paul did focus much on grace because he was such a recipient of it, while other apostles focused on works such as James. This does not mean one is more right than the other, it just means their focus was different at the time.

The existence of the Trinity was strongly shown at the moment of Jesus being baptized, when arising out of the water, the Holy Ghost descended upon Him in the form of a dove, and the voice of the Father spoke from heaven saying "This is my beloved Son in Whom I am well pleased, hear ye Him". This strongly shows a separation, yet oneness, of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost.

Some of the differences between Christ's teachings and Paul's was that at the time, Jesus was still under the Law of Moses. After the Cross, and the Law of Moses was fulfilled, then we entered the New Testament era, where the Law of Moses was fulfilled and completed, and things like animal sacrifices, circumcisions etc. were done. Jesus only ministered to the Jews, while Paul and the Apostles ministered to all. After the cross the Jews were no longer the chosen people and the gospel went to the Gentiles.

Answer 5

1) Because Paul had an encounter to Jesus that was clearly very real. A man does not through away status and wealth, and their total way of looking of reality, and then go on and suffer in many ways (described in 2 Corinthians 11:22-33 and other places) just on a whim.

He also says that his gospel came by revelation (eg 2 Corinthians 12:1-6). Revelation is available to christians through the power of the Holy Spirit. For instance it possible for your spirit to leave your body and go to the heavenly places - but this only comes for those advanced in faith, and fully committed to Christ. God does tend to choose the most (humanly) unlikely - Paul was one of worse christian persecutors. With regard to hos gospel for gentiles there was still an inertia among some christians and they still had a leaning towards adherence to the Jewish Law, rather than through the Way of the Spirit, Jewish prejudice against gentiles was very strong; many pharisees had converted. He was commissioned by the Antioch church - the major church in Syria - to go on mission with Barnabas, and later with Silas.

2) John: You are elevating liberal theologians, many of whom never had a real relationship with God over the John text. There is a verse at the end that says it was written by the beloved disciple, and another verse at the Passover meal identifying who the beloved disciple was - John, brother of James. Of course John's Ephesus or other church he was with may have helped with the construction of the text.

3) Luke: he clearly made a careful investigation of witnesses, and probably had access to an early account Q.

4) If you do trust the christian message you receive forgiveness and the Holy Spirit as promised.

Answer 6

Most of our traditions have been lifted from outside the original concepts of Jesus's time.

lets face it, in historical terms, Christ was a real flash in the pan, only three years of his life was observed - we are told - in any detail, and the rest has been added at a much later date, by a group of people who were not part of the community in which these events happened.

lets take his birth, I mean it is not in the oldest gospel of Mathew, it is a latter addition, and the Catholic countries, must be very miffed that the Mediterranean traditions of the Christmas crib have been supplanted by the northern Tree.

Much of what we have had been amended long before this argument arose. Nicea was a rubber stamp exercise, slight of hand, to make people decide between two similar versions, so they would not look outside the box and question the bigger issues, like
- why they had changed the birth of Christ to a pagan date?
- why they had changed the sabbath day?
- why they had changed from a quiet faith into a preaching one?
- why they had adopted pagan symbols and sayings into the scriptures?
- why they had created idols to help the poor pray?

Answer 7

You have never heard of the Apostle John and his Gospel. He walked with the Lord for three years. There isn't a "Q" document. That is fantasy. They compared what was written in the Gospels of Matthew and Mark, took the identical information and claimed that it had to be copied from an earlier document called "Q". The only problem is that nobody has ever seen this document. It is a false assumpion.
I would suggest getting the Holy Ghost and letting God reveal the truth to you. Then you wouldn't have to rely on the limited knowledge of man and their ideas. The Holy Ghost will lead us in all truth.

Answer 8

because they have inherited generations of apostascy.

Mark was Peter's secretary. He wrote Peter's account.

John was the beloved, the revelation. His Gospel gives first hand account of His experiences with Christ.

Luke spoke with first hand sources in compiling his Gospel.

Paul had nothing to do with the Council of Nicea. The Council of Nicea was nearly 3 centuries later after the Church had fallen into Apostasy.

They all taught the same Gospel though. That Gospel being the Atonement of Jesus Christ. The Plan of Redemption.

Answer 9

Mark and John were deciples they knew Jesus, they were at the last supper with him.

Authorized King James version (this verse is not in many new versions that take from the word of God)

1st John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.


II Timothy 3:16-17
16 All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Answer 10

Since the discovery of D.N.A genetics only a few years ago all Religious leaders wanted governments to stop further research into D.N.A genetics. While they were crusading the discovery of D.N.A saying this discovery was evil, scientists were trying to play God, etc, they weren't waving there bible's in that direction. What you are looking at or what vibrates or plays a selected ring tone in nearly everyone pocket on the planet , digital technology such as d.v.d, l.c.d, plasma. I pods, wireless and faster hi speed internet created the I want it now on demand attitude. "We now all have it ." This attitude has changed the way we all work,live and think.The day's of going to a church on a Sunday and Sunday lunch with the family are over as with the traditional Saturday and Sunday weekends.
Since company's require people to work 24/7 to keep up with this I want it now on demand attitude we all have with our new digital technology. Many local churches have closed there doors and sold the land due to the lack of attendance. While everyday new discoveries are being made with the discovery of D.N.A. genetics which has also made people question of the facts and fiction aspect of religion now they can be D.N.A tested which many have been found to be fictionalized. A lot of people are now able to discover new religions through the technology we all now have within our reach and share our questions, opinions and answers with each other than to one opinion made by there minister, priest, reverend, rabbi, mufti, guru , etc. As you research, religions you will discover many
opinions, so keep an open mind

Answer 11

Im not sure where you are getting your information from but John in fact WAS an one of the 12 apostles (brother of James) who also wrote Revelation among other books, Matthew also was one of the 12 (Levi tax collector), Mark accompanied Paul on his first missionary journey and Luke, the only gentile author was also a friend of Paul's....a friend has been sharing with me how many of todays versions of bible have been edited by Catholic church to omit divinity of Jesus however King James was translated word for word from original Hebrew and Greek texts in 1611 therefore is most accurate version....all the best on your search!! The most important thing to remember is that God(Jesus) came in the flesh to save you from punishment for your sins because He loves you and you can see him described right through bible in psalms and writings of prophets written centuries before His birth!!Its awesome!