Paul Is No Inventor of Christianity, Says Pope

[paarsurrey]

cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=9201#hys

Hi

I don’t agree with the Pope’s contention for reasons.

1. How many of the twelve did Paul meet? He did not meet them.
2. Peter was only eulogized by Paul for a purpose; to gain a little credence, which was not there.
   Peter was not a rock to build a church upon. He was among the first who defected Jesus and melted like anything; he was not loyal to Jesus. Paul chose him as a natural collaborator, in my opinion.
3. Paul did trade the concepts of Jesus, with mythical creeds of the pagans, all in Jesus name.
4. Paul did not meet Mary- the Mother, not even once. If Jesus had disappeared from Galilee at least she would be there.

In my opinion, Paul must have smelled that Jesus, Mary and all of the loyal disciples of Jesus were missing from Judea; they were heading towards India.

Paul an enemy of Jesus and his friends changed his strategy. He used Jesus name and invented a creed which had nothing to do with Jesus. Paul invented a theological philosophy using Jesus as a scapegoat – which was based on “Jesus dieing a cursed death on Cross”, a mythological faith.

Thanks

 

[inJESUS]

It is high time Muslims start relaxing a bit from conspiracy theories that insult history, tradition, geography and basic common sense. Bring your proof if you are truthful. Without proof, you are in doubt and have nothing but conjecture.

 

[Atreyu]

cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=9201#hys

Hi

I don’t agree with the Pope’s contention for reasons.

1. How many of the twelve did Paul meet? He did not meet them.
2. Peter was only eulogized by Paul for a purpose; to gain a little credence, which was not there.
   Peter was not a rock to build a church upon. He was among the first who defected Jesus and melted like anything; he was not loyal to Jesus. Paul chose him as a natural collaborator, in my opinion.
3. Paul did trade the concepts of Jesus, with mythical creeds of the pagans, all in Jesus name.
4. Paul did not meet Mary- the Mother, not even once. If Jesus had disappeared from Galilee at least she would be there.

In my opinion, Paul must have smelled that Jesus, Mary and all of the loyal disciples of Jesus were missing from Judea; they were heading towards India.

Paul an enemy of Jesus and his friends changed his strategy. He used Jesus name and invented a creed which had nothing to do with Jesus. Paul invented a theological philosophy using Jesus as a scapegoat – which was based on “Jesus dieing a cursed death on Cross”, a mythological faith.

Thanks

And yet Paul went to brutal imprisonment, torture and execution while constantly refusing to deny his teaching on Christ. Now that’s some dedication, don’t you think? Paul would have known whether or not what he was teaching was true. Do you agree?

Let’s compare this to a miraculous claim of Islam. Muslims believe that Muhammed was a prophet of God. Now I have several questions:

1. 
   *]What did Muhammed do to prove that he actually was a genuine prophet - did he perform any miracles?
   *]If so, were there any eye-witnesses to these miracles?
   *]Were any of these eye-witnesses persecuted by people who had a vested interest in proving these witnesses wrong?
   *]Were the eye-witnesses tortured?
   *]Were they executed because they would not repent of their supposedly “false” teaching?
   *]Any of them?
   *]Even a single one…?
   
   It is my understanding that you will probably answer no to the very first question. To which I would say, how on Earth do you know that what Muhammed told you is true?
   
   By the way, if you change my first question to “What did Jesus do to prove that he was actually a genuine prophet?”, I would answer “he rose from the dead”. Then I would answer the other questions as follows:
   2. Yes, there were plenty of eye-witnesses.
   3. Yes, many of them - probably most of them - were tortured by the Romans and the Jews.
   4. Yes, same answer as 3.
   5. Yes, same answer as 3.
   6. No.
   7. No, not a single one.
   If they had known what they were teaching was a lie, then it truly is a miracle that none of them - not one - “repented” of this lie under brutal torture and execution.

 

[inJESUS]

What about a comparison between Muhammad’s life after his encounter with his “spirit” to Paul’s life after his conversion

 

[Steadfast]

Paar’s biggest reason for disagreeing is left unarticulated:

The orthodoxy of Paul is inconvenient to Islam.

 

[Eucharisted]

cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=9201#hys

Hi

I don’t agree with the Pope’s contention for reasons.

1. How many of the twelve did Paul meet? He did not meet them.
2. Peter was only eulogized by Paul for a purpose; to gain a little credence, which was not there.
   Peter was not a rock to build a church upon. He was among the first who defected Jesus and melted like anything; he was not loyal to Jesus. Paul chose him as a natural collaborator, in my opinion.
3. Paul did trade the concepts of Jesus, with mythical creeds of the pagans, all in Jesus name.
4. Paul did not meet Mary- the Mother, not even once. If Jesus had disappeared from Galilee at least she would be there.

In my opinion, Paul must have smelled that Jesus, Mary and all of the loyal disciples of Jesus were missing from Judea; they were heading towards India.

Paul an enemy of Jesus and his friends changed his strategy. He used Jesus name and invented a creed which had nothing to do with Jesus. Paul invented a theological philosophy using Jesus as a scapegoat – which was based on “Jesus dieing a cursed death on Cross”, a mythological faith.

Thanks

Proof?

 

[ralphinal]

cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=9201#hys

Hi

I don’t agree with the Pope’s contention for reasons.

1. How many of the twelve did Paul meet? He did not meet them.

All 12 according to the Acts of the Apostles

1. Peter was only eulogized by Paul for a purpose; to gain a little credence, which was not there.
   Peter was not a rock to build a church upon. He was among the first who defected Jesus and melted like anything; he was not loyal to Jesus. Paul chose him as a natural collaborator, in my opinion.

I love how many MUslims focus on one part of the Bible and ignore the rest of the story. Yes, Peter did run. But, later, he would never again deny Jesus. Read Acts of the Apostles again.

1. Paul did trade the concepts of Jesus, with mythical creeds of the pagans, all in Jesus name.

Prove it

1. Paul did not meet Mary- the Mother, not even once. If Jesus had disappeared from Galilee at least she would be there.

This is a total red herring. First , there is no way to prove either side of it. Even if there was, what does it matter? As important as Mary is to Catholics, she was NOT a member of the leadership of the Church. However, logic will say that if he met John (and he did), he met her as well.

In my opinion, Paul must have smelled that Jesus, Mary and all of the loyal disciples of Jesus were missing from Judea; they were heading towards India.

SHow me a list of the loyal disciples that went on the journey. There is no proof from anywhere but one small part of the Indian Subcontinent for this. The Christians who were in India, founded by Thomas in the first century, held no such belief.

Paul an enemy of Jesus and his friends changed his strategy. He used Jesus name and invented a creed which had nothing to do with Jesus. Paul invented a theological philosophy using Jesus as a scapegoat – which was based on “Jesus dieing a cursed death on Cross”, a mythological faith.

Thanks

Wrong. Paul knew the other Apostles. Paul worked with them. Paul invented nothing.

Steadfast is correct: you guys hate Paul because everything he preaches is against the heresies in Islam. Others on here are right as well. Paul went from being a brutal political figure to a peaceful preacher after his conversion. Muhammmed did the opposite. Just compair their post-conversion lives

 

[inJESUS]

Not to mention that Pauline conspiracy theory was alien to the earliest Muslims, at least to Ibn Kathir, al-Tabari, al-Qurtubi, and al-Thalabi who considered him a messenger. But if Muslims don’t like the hadith, they say it is corrupt, and if they don’t like the above mentioned interpretors, they say they are wrong and yet they quote them to suit other purposes. Muslims always want to blame someone, their religion is built on blame, starting the first verse of their book but they weren’t able to ffind a scapegoat for centuries, so lately they are focusing on either Paul or Constantine. Empty and chaotic are the Islamic claims.

 

[cathopologist]

paarsurrey, to quote Pope Benedict XVI:
**

**“Our faith is not born from a myth or an idea, but from an encounter with the Risen One, in the life of the Church.” **

**

The reasons you gave to dispute St Paul from an Islamic perspective is truly, lame.

 

[bpbasilphx]

**I don’t agree with the Pope’s contention for reasons.

1. How many of the twelve did Paul meet? He did not meet them.**

**Obviously, you’ve not actually read the NT on this matter.

But who cares what a Mahometan thinks about Christianity, anyway?

Isa akbar!

Isa akbar!

ISA AKBAR!

I bear witness there is NO GOD but Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and Jesus is God Incarnate risen from the dead.**

 

[dzheremi]

So you disagree with the Pope. So what. Who cares what you believe? To other Muslims your sect is heretical, and to us your theories are insane. Who exactly do you think will listen to you? No one, until you have some proof. Go find proof instead of crazy conspiracies written on the internet. If you find proof, THEN present your theory. As it is, none of these threads you start about Jesus and Mary in India or Paul “inventing” Christianity have any credence. Stop wasting bandwith with this garbage.

 

[cathopologist]

I created a thread: Why do Muslims believe St Paul was a liar? Perhaps paarsurrey and gang can put in more of their diatribe if they wish.

 

[cthulhubryan]

cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=9201#hys

Hi

I don’t agree with the Pope’s contention for reasons.

1. How many of the twelve did Paul meet? He did not meet them.

All of them. Acts 9:27

1. Peter was only eulogized by Paul for a purpose; to gain a little credence, which was not there.
   Peter was not a rock to build a church upon. He was among the first who defected Jesus and melted like anything; he was not loyal to Jesus. Paul chose him as a natural collaborator, in my opinion.

You deliberately deny the words of God? Hmmm, not good.
Matthew 16:18

1. Paul did trade the concepts of Jesus, with mythical creeds of the pagans, all in Jesus name.

Is there a source for this? Or did Ren and Stempy tell you about it?

1. Paul did not meet Mary- the Mother, not even once. If Jesus had disappeared from Galilee at least she would be there.

There is no direct account of their meeting, but since Paul did meet with all the disciples and John had care of Mary then simple logic decrees that Paul met the Blessed Virgin

In my opinion, Paul must have smelled that Jesus, Mary and all of the loyal disciples of Jesus were missing from Judea; they were heading towards India.

Again with this India crappola. Jesus died on the cross. Jesus descended into hell to preach to the damned. Jesus was raised from the dead by God. Jesus then ascended to heaven to assume his rightful place as the 2nd person of the trinity.

 

[Crumpy]

The best essay on St. Paul that I’ve run across is section 82 of the New Jerome Biblical Commentary.

It’s a bit lengthy but it covers who Paul was, what happened to him, and what his ideas are.

It makes clear that Paul did not invent Christianity, but that he learned the faith from existing Christian churches.

There are big differences of opinon in Christianity and Muslims use that to “prove” whatever point that they want.

An essential and fundamental error in Islam is that it’s view of Christianity was a view of Arianism, which was a heresy from beginning to end. Arianism denied the Divinity of Christ and so it is no surprise that Islam does the same. Jesus was NOT just another prophet he was God and he said so, in so many ways.

There is no god but the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the great I AM, who is the Father, Jesus Christ the Son, and the Comforter the Holy Spirit, three in One. There is no other, Jesus is the great Prophet.

 

[ralphinal]

Because the Jesus of Islam is not the same as the Jesus of Christianity, Islam cannot exist 100% theologically beside Christianity. The first few generations of Muslims did not really have the problem. Once they were forced to hear about the True Christ, they were faced with a problem: how do we reconcile the two stories. The easiest way is to say that our Jesus is wrong. To that end, Paul, who wrote the majority of the NT, becomes the target. Add to that the fact that Paul’s writtings clearly show Islam to be incorrect, and there you go.

 

[inJESUS]

Maybe Muslims hate Paul so much because he prophecized about satan masquerading as an angel of light, and said that he doesn’t use “eloquent speech” to preach the gospel, and that he who gives another gospel let him be accursed, the 3 apply to Muhammad. He was a truly inspired “false” disciple yet in one hadith Muhammad quoted Paul’s words

 

[Soutane]

**I don’t agree with the Pope’s contention for reasons.

1. How many of the twelve did Paul meet? He did not meet them.**

**Obviously, you’ve not actually read the NT on this matter.

But who cares what a Mahometan thinks about Christianity, anyway?

Isa akbar!

Isa akbar!**

ISA AKBAR!

I bear witness there is NO GOD but Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and Jesus is God Incarnate risen from the dead.

Amen.Amen.Amen.

 

[swariffin]

cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=9201#hys

Hi

I don’t agree with the Pope’s contention for reasons.

1. How many of the twelve did Paul meet? He did not meet them.
2. Peter was only eulogized by Paul for a purpose; to gain a little credence, which was not there.
   Peter was not a rock to build a church upon. He was among the first who defected Jesus and melted like anything; he was not loyal to Jesus. Paul chose him as a natural collaborator, in my opinion.
3. Paul did trade the concepts of Jesus, with mythical creeds of the pagans, all in Jesus name.
4. Paul did not meet Mary- the Mother, not even once. If Jesus had disappeared from Galilee at least she would be there.

In my opinion, Paul must have smelled that Jesus, Mary and all of the loyal disciples of Jesus were missing from Judea; they were heading towards India.

Paul an enemy of Jesus and his friends changed his strategy. He used Jesus name and invented a creed which had nothing to do with Jesus. Paul invented a theological philosophy using Jesus as a scapegoat – which was based on “Jesus dieing a cursed death on Cross”, a mythological faith.

Thanks

Dear Paar,

For #1 and #2, it is clear that you did not read the Gospel and the Acts, or you read the wrong bible.

For #3, please give us a proof, I have asked you so many times and yet you never come with any.

For #4, why Paul need to see Mary. Mary is not the foundation of Christianity nor the center of Jesus’ teaching.

For your idea that Jesus went to India, please show us the reference in the OT or the NT. Not from your ProphetMessenger’s book. If I would create a religion, I would issue a bible, and argued that Jesus went to Jakarta. It is easy to do, especially taking the way of how you are arguing, by simply ignore answers and keep on posting.