Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Belindi]

Jerlands wrote:

I see that the laws expressed in both the OT and NT are what have established our current civilization.

Established by whom?

[jerlands]

Jerlands wrote:

I see that the laws expressed in both the OT and NT are what have established our current civilization.

Established by whom?

Well, how did our current society evolve? From Byzantium onwards I see the herald of Christianity playing key role.

[Belindi]

Jerlands wrote:



Established by whom?

Well, how did our current society evolve? From Byzantium onwards I see the herald of Christianity playing key role.

Who is "the herald of Christianity" ?

[jerlands]

Well, how did our current society evolve? From Byzantium onwards I see the herald of Christianity playing key role.

Who is "the herald of Christianity" ?

Definition of herald (courtesy of Merriam Webster)
1 a : an official at a tournament of arms (see 3arm 1a) with duties including the making of announcements and the marshaling of combatants
b : an officer with the status of ambassador acting as official messenger between leaders especially in war
c (1) : officer of arms (2) : an officer of arms ranking above a pursuivant and below a king of arms
2 : an official crier or messenger Mercury was the gods' herald.
3 a : one that precedes or foreshadows heralds of a coming storm
b : one that conveys news or proclaims : announcer
it was the lark, the herald of the morn —William Shakespeare
c : one who actively promotes or advocates : exponent

[jerlands]

Well, how did our current society evolve? From Byzantium onwards I see the herald of Christianity playing key role.

Who is "the herald of Christianity" ?

Also, so there's less confusion.. by Byzantium I'm referring to Constantine.

[jerlands]

Well, how did our current society evolve? From Byzantium onwards I see the herald of Christianity playing key role.

Who is "the herald of Christianity" ?

Who is actually the movement of Christianity so herald would equate to those who carried the banner or followed.

[Fooloso4]

Belindi:

Who is "the herald of Christianity" ?

Paul. Without Paul there would be no Christianity. Without Paul there would be no New Testament. Of central difference is what each says about the Law. This, as Paul himself says, was the main contention between him and the twelve disciples. For Jesus and the disciples one must be obedient to the Law. Paul claimed that this was only necessary for the Jews, the gentiles should follow the law written in their hearts. Paul’s eschatology and his gospel of grace, he calls it “my gospel” (Romans 2.16), a secret unknown to the disciples (Romans 16:25), differed fundamentally from the messianic beliefs of Jesus and his disciples believed. The meaning and promise of the messiah undergoes a transformation under Paul.

[jerlands]

Belindi:

Who is "the herald of Christianity" ?

Paul. Without Paul there would be no Christianity. Without Paul there would be no New Testament. Of central difference is what each says about the Law. This, as Paul himself says, was the main contention between him and the twelve disciples. For Jesus and the disciples one must be obedient to the Law. Paul claimed that this was only necessary for the Jews, the gentiles should follow the law written in their hearts. Paul’s eschatology and his gospel of grace, he calls it “my gospel” (Romans 2.16), a secret unknown to the disciples (Romans 16:25), differed fundamentally from the messianic beliefs of Jesus and his disciples believed. The meaning and promise of the messiah undergoes a transformation under Paul.

There is no one single herald in Christianity but Jesus. Paul was very important in reaching people largely I believe due to the experience through his radical conversion. Peter, James.. you can't discount any single one because each is a pillar in the house of Christianity, some more central but nonetheless I see all as part of a whole.

[Belindi]

I can't see how the histories of God, Jesus, and Paul are relevant to the purpose of The Bible, unless you are claiming that God caused it to be written.

[jerlands]

I can't see how the histories of God, Jesus, and Paul are relevant to the purpose of The Bible, unless you are claiming that God caused it to be written.

Man prays and his prayers are answered. God apparently speaks through the spirit which might be thought of as inspiration. I think man comes into a situation and looks for solution. The Bible however is something more because it's preparation is before it's manifestation. How is the history of anything relevant? If this sounds like mishmash it is because the story begins at the beginning and that is a long essay. So.. My OP stated my view of history and how I perceive the Bible to play a role.

Those who destroy the lie promote Ma'at;
those who promote the good will erase the evil.
As fullness casts out appetite,
as clothes cover the nude and

The reason I'm posing this question is I believe the Bible is misunderstood and it's possible I misunderstand it so I want to explain my view. In a nutshell I see history as "Out of Egypt," we hear the words go forth and populate the earth and the law was condensed and made transportable. At the time of Christ the law was further condensed to two sentences (Matthew 22:35-40, Mark 12:28-34) and man could go forth simply with the law in his heart. And that takes us to today.

[Fooloso4]

Jerlands:

There is no one single herald in Christianity but Jesus.

I think Jesus would have been appalled if he knew what Paul had said about him.

Peter, James.

There are no written works of Peter or James. No way to say what their influence was beyond their opposition to Paul.

... you can't discount any single one because each is a pillar in the house of Christianity, some more central but nonetheless I see all as part of a whole.

A house divided cannot stand. The rift between Paul and the apostles led to Christianity becoming a gentile religion. You may wish to downplay the difference between Paul and the apostles but they were decisive. You may wish to disregard what is said in the New Testament in favor of some notion of cosmic human history, but if you are going to discuss the purpose of a book you must pay attention to what it actually says.

[jerlands]

Jerlands:

There is no one single herald in Christianity but Jesus.

I think Jesus would have been appalled if he knew what Paul had said about him.

Well, I think that's hard to fathom.

Peter, James.

There are no written works of Peter or James. No way to say what their influence was beyond their opposition to Paul.

No, both are obscure in written history and and because of this we don't know exactly what roles they played but for whatever reason Peter is given the title of the rock and said to be the first pope.

... you can't discount any single one because each is a pillar in the house of Christianity, some more central but nonetheless I see all as part of a whole.

A house divided cannot stand. The rift between Paul and the apostles led to Christianity becoming a gentile religion. You may wish to downplay the difference between Paul and the apostles but they were decisive. You may wish to disregard what is said in the New Testament in favor of some notion of cosmic human history, but if you are going to discuss the purpose of a book you must pay attention to what it actually says.

I believe the NT was intended for Gentiles and that perspective arises from my impression of what the NT is for man. Would you expect 12 men to hold and share the same purpose in life. Think of the 12 sons of Jacob and the blessing laid upon each of them. What you refer to in discord is very similar. Whether or not Paul was an apostle is controversial but many hold the view he became the 12th after the death of Judas.

[Fooloso4]

jerlands:

Well, I think that's hard to fathom.

Compare Paul’s letters to the Sermon on the Mount regarding the Law. See also the quote from Matthew below. To fathom this does not require digging very deep, but dig you must if you are to fathom. Whether you believe it is another story.

No, both are obscure in written history and and because of this we don't know exactly what roles they played but for whatever reason Peter is given the title of the rock and said to be the first pope.

Why say no when you confirm what I said about his role? Yes, Jesus called him the rock and he was later said to be the first pope, but a herald must have a message. As the quote from Matthew below indicates his message was not for the gentiles. He was not a herald of Christianity.

I believe the NT was intended for Gentiles and that perspective arises from my impression of what the NT is for man.

Of course the NT was for the gentiles. That's the point. According to Matthew Jesus told his disciples not to go to the gentiles:

These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And proclaim as you go, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ (Matthew 10:5-7)

Jesus message was for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. This was not a gentile house. The house of Christianity is not the house of Israel. The house of Israel keeps God’s Law.

Would you expect 12 men to hold and share the same purpose in life.

According to the quote from Matthew above, yes, their purpose was to tell the lost sheep of the house of Israel that the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Whether or not Paul was an apostle is controversial but many hold the view he became the 12th after the death of Judas.

What we know is that Paul was not Jesus’ apostle while Jesus was alive. Nothing he said is based on what he heard Jesus say. All that he says is based on his own visions.

[jerlands]

jerlands:

Well, I think that's hard to fathom.

Compare Paul’s letters to the Sermon on the Mount regarding the Law. See also the quote from Matthew below. To fathom this does not require digging very deep, but dig you must if you are to fathom. Whether you believe it is another story.

Fathom is actually a measure of the depth of water but originates from old english "length of outstretched arms so no digging required, snorkeling maybe. aside from that you lost me somewhere after "Matthew below?"

No, both are obscure in written history and and because of this we don't know exactly what roles they played but for whatever reason Peter is given the title of the rock and said to be the first pope.

Why say no when you confirm what I said about his role? Yes, Jesus called him the rock and he was later said to be the first pope, but a herald must have a message. As the quote from Matthew below indicates his message was not for the gentiles. He was not a herald of Christianity.

I believe the NT was intended for Gentiles and that perspective arises from my impression of what the NT is for man.

Of course the NT was for the gentiles. That's the point. According to Matthew Jesus told his disciples not to go to the gentiles:

These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And proclaim as you go, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’ (Matthew 10:5-7)

This is an example of the problem in taking things out of context. The above is during the life of Jesus and below is after his death and resurrection.

Matthew 28:19 New International Version (NIV)
19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

Jesus message was for the lost sheep of the house of Israel. This was not a gentile house. The house of Christianity is not the house of Israel. The house of Israel keeps God’s Law.

Would you expect 12 men to hold and share the same purpose in life.

According to the quote from Matthew above, yes, their purpose was to tell the lost sheep of the house of Israel that the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Whether or not Paul was an apostle is controversial but many hold the view he became the 12th after the death of Judas.

What we know is that Paul was not Jesus’ apostle while Jesus was alive. Nothing he said is based on what he heard Jesus say. All that he says is based on his own visions.

The apostles traveled widely, into regions not populated by Jews so their main audience was not Jews.

[Belindi]

Jerlands wrote:

Fooloso4 wrote: ↑Yesterday, 9:00 pm
jerlands:
Well, I think that's hard to fathom.
Compare Paul’s letters to the Sermon on the Mount regarding the Law. See also the quote from Matthew below. To fathom this does not require digging very deep, but dig you must if you are to fathom. Whether you believe it is another story.


(Jerlands's reply)Fathom is actually a measure of the depth of water but originates from old english "length of outstretched arms so no digging required, snorkeling maybe. aside from that you lost me somewhere after "Matthew below?"

One must guess Jerlands that English is not your native language. Nevertheless it's stupid to argue about a colloquial phrase with someone who so obviously is a master of it.