How did Paul manage to twist this zionist death cult into an universalist religion?
>>18389867By basically boiling it down to a few key tenets. Hence getting rid of circumcision because there was absolutely no way they were going to gain mass support if joining required cutting off part of your dick back in a time before anesthetic.
>>18389867I always enjoyed how old testament prophecy was basically the ethno-national equivalent of an edgy school shooter manifesto detailing how they're going to punish everyone who bullied them
>>18389867I assume the self contradictory theology is a feature and not a bug, as if you can force someone to lie you can force them to do anything, making it a far better tool of domination.
>>18389867Paul didn't. The religion is syncratic. It has "Oh, your god does that? SO DOES OUR GOD". Then when you become the official religion of the Roman Empire, it's really easy to convert millions.Then British, French, Spanish, Portuguese Empires did the rest of the work to spread it to the world. The American Empire is continuing the tradition of the 5 previous empires, to keep it going.
>>18389867I'm about ~80% sure the historical Paul was solidly at least half-gnostic in that he attributed a decent portion of the Tanakh, including much of the Jewish law, to one or more entities aside from what was in his view the true God, though this was obfuscated by a later interpolator of his letters.One place that might seem to hint at this is Galatians 4, where Paul is talking to Christians who want to follow the Jewish law (4:21 "you who desire to be subject to the law"), and what he says in 4:8-11 has been translated (though there remains debate):>Formerly, when you did not know God, you were enslaved to beings that by nature are not gods. Now, however, that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and beggarly elemental spirits? How can you want to be enslaved to them again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years. I am afraid that my work for you may have been wasted.So if that translation is correct, then following the Jewish law means being enslaved to beings who are not really gods, which would seem to imply that the true God isn't the one who gave the Jewish law.And also in favor of that, earlier there's Galatians 3:19, which can be, though usually isn't, translated as:>Why then the law? It was added because of transgressions, until the offspring would come to whom the promise had been made, and it was ordained by angels into the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator involves more than one party, but God is one.Where that last sentence would imply that the angels were acting independent of God.And there are several other things like that which give a sense of how Marcion could end up using some version of Paul's letters to argue that Paul's God was totally different from the God who created the world, although I'm not confident Paul himself went that far.
>>18390095Another one is in Romans 5:20, where Paul says, in the NRSV>But law came in, so that the trespass might increase, but where sin increased, grace abounded all the moreNow, the idea that the point of the law was to increase trespass rather than decrease it is strange enough, but, on top of that, in the Greek, the word translated as "came in" has the primary meaning of "come in stealthily." and is the same word translated as "slipped in" in Galatians 2:4 in the NRSV.>But because of false brothers and sisters secretly brought in, who slipped in to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might enslave us—
>>18389867its easy to understand if you stop pretending to be retarded
>>18390129And then when Paul does treat the law as authoritative, maybe because his opponents are treating it as authoritative or maybe because he thinks the true God is speaking through some part of it, he sometimes gives strange allegorical interpretations of it, like in Galatians 4:22-31, where Ishmael and Isaac's mothers apparently represent Jerusalem and its heavenly analogue, and 1 Corinthians 9:8-10, where when the Jewish God says "You shall not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain." he clearly actually means that Paul deserves to be financially supported for his preaching.So I'd suggest that Paul had at least two devices in his arsenal for reworking the Tanakh: 1. The true God didn't say that. 2. That has a deep allegorical meaning which barely has anything to do with a plain reading of the text, and you can actually throw out the plain reading of the text.Only after Christianity became fairly popular was the general character of the religion established enough that they could throw out parts of Paul's reasoning while keeping several of his conclusions.Also, IIRC, the Clementine Homilies, though generally recognized as opposed to Pauline doctrine, have Peter also rejecting parts of the Tanakh as not written by God, though I don't remember whether it says they were added by people or Satan. But if that's true then it may have been that Peter as well as Paul were fine with tossing out parts of the Tanakh and relying on direct divine revelation instead to create a quite different religion. And again only later was this aspect of Christianity covered over.
>>18389867I'm not going to get into a long drawn out debate, because it's too late in the day to start, but Paul is what makes the message of Christ universal.Contrary to what a lot of people (including a few preachers) may tell you; the true message of Christ is not the worship of Christ; but a recognition of God's personal presence within your own life. That is the revelation and the rebirth that Christianity talks about.Now, in the Jesus story, you have a lot of miracles performed by Jesus. OK, that's fine, you say, he's Jesus, of course he could do those things. Then you have the apostles, who knew Jesus in the flesh and received their commissions directly from him. And a few of them are recorded doing miracles. OK, Jesus personally appointed them, so that is understandable.But Paul is different. He never knew Jesus in the flesh. he never received a direct appointment; and yet his entire message (and, if you believe the bible, his story) is him having access the same faith, Holy Spirit, and destiny as the Apostles.So to us, the human; who isn't Jesus, and didn't get a direct commission from Jesus while he was here on earth in the flesh; the sanctification of Paul; (and his message), give hope and promise to the rest of us.
>>18390153>trinity for dummies>nonsensical bullshitmany such cases
>>18390168>pretending to be retarded
>>18390173your stupid chart doesn't even match what christians believe, its some retarded donut steel trinity you made up
>>18390007The New Testament has that element too. Revelation is literally just some Jew coping and seething over the Roman occupation and writing this elaborate fantasy where Jesus comes back and BTFOs the Romans.
>>18390042These are not different empires, these are just the 10 kings that will rule the fourth kingdom of Daniel. From Rome to America it has been the same kingdom.
>>18390095>How can you want to be enslaved to them again? You are observing special days and months and seasons and years. I am afraid that my work for you may have been wasted.He is talking about shit like saint Patrick's day and sint valentine's day and all those days that were celebrations of different God's and now instead of calling them gods they call them saints, yet keep the same celebration the exact same way the used to celebrate their gods in those days. There are many of those special days and months.
>>18390173>not pretending
