[Bananafish] (and then i'll shut up) No need to.

[Puebloshalom at cs.com]

"But I believe the general consensus in the modern church(s) is that Paul 
determined the Gentilization (I know that's not a word) of Christianity."

I agree that is what the consensus is in the modern church.

"Paul ended that debate. It was Paul who taught that Christ had come to free 
us from "The Law" and had overthrown basic tenets of Judiasm, the dietary 
laws, the day of the Sabbath,  and "an eye for an eye" just as examples."

But this is not what Paul writes about.  Again the "consensus" view about 
what Paul wrote did not occur until the early 3rd Century at the earliest.  Also, 
what is Modern Judaism today is much different then what existed then (Paul's 
day).  The followers of Jesus  did not historically begin to split out of its 
Jewish context/main stream until after the Bar Kokhba revolt and Rabbi Akiva 
in the early 2nd century and was not Universal (catholic) until well after the 
Quartodecimanism controversy/ Paschal Controversy.  By this time the church 
had since lost all contact with the context in which Paul wrote.  It seems that 
in the last 150 years or so Hebrew has become widely studied by church 
scholars and over time some of the traditional views (300 CE to about1600 
CE-enlightenment) of what Paul wrote about are being reconsidered by some in the modern 
church(s).  How wide spread this is I am uncertain but I have run across these 
people and seen hints of it in writings by people like Alfred Edersheim early 
on and more explicit in others more recently, especially among modern 
christian scholars who have taken up the study of the 1st century Jewish tradition.  
1st century Jewish tradition was not only NOT studied by the catholicized 
church but was actually repudiated which resulted (in my opinion Kenny) in an 
impoverished understanding of Paul (not to mention many dead Jews), on the scale 
of the differance between Reader's Digest and Hustler (using an analogy you 
might relate to Kenny).

This all began with Aristotle's view of revenge, Augustine's view of 
Aristotle's view and your preference for Augustine (the Aristotlean) over Paul (the 
Pharisee).  It is not three card monty after all.  Kenny, I hope you are taking 
my sarcasm in the spirit of humor in which it is intended.  Nothing is more 
laborious than a humorless discussion of a serious topic.  You know, Salinger 
believed that modern christianity dead ends with Franny's mantra.  An old mother 
(an old English euphamism for the church), according to Jerome,decays into a 
porch bound fat lady without discipline, Paul would be flabbergasted, not 
being a Wise Child.

Daniel




> I don't even remember where this all began. I think I was giving my 
> personal 
> feelings regarding Paul. So stern. So uncompromising. Makes Jesus look like 
> Larry Flint. Just my personal take on the man.
> But I believe the general consensus in the modern church(s) is that Paul 
> determined the Gentilization (I know that's not a word) of Christianity.
> At the time, there was a debate raging in the church as to whether Jesus had 
> 
> come to save the Jews alone (as Messiah of the chosen people) or all of 
> mankind.
> Paul ended that debate. It was Paul who taught that Christ had come to free 
> us from "The Law" and had overthrown basic tenets of Judiasm, the dietary 
> laws, the day of the Sabbath,  and "an eye for an eye" just as examples.
Kenny
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.bway.net/pipermail/bananafish/attachments/20070131/ec4fec4e/attachment.html