Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Agh all of this is wrong. Have you ever read your book?
According to whom? Paul. Paul was the one who said that.
Nope. Paul again because the Easter miracle happened on Sunday.
Again No. It was in Paul's letters. You can even trace the line of Pharisee thought (as documented in the Talmud) that led to his conclusion. There is a reason why Christians can eat pork.
Show that to me.
Again. His letters predate the Gospels and I never said Paul invented it, I said he popularized it. Baptism was a sorta off-shot of a related Jewish tradition at that time. If very well could have vanished as a fad.
Yes, I know. I said that. We see hints of the Celestial Jesus in the letters of Paul that evolved eventually into the Trinity.
Nope. If the timeline of events were true the ministry had women on near equal footing which Paul reduced steadily as he lived.
He didn't exist but had he existed he wouldn't have said that. Again Paul. The exact wording is off.
Actually the Gospels came out after Paul and his debate with James :)
Really? Show me Jesus talking about Bishops please.
4 cannon, and 11 non-cannon. Oh did you mean writers? Thousands. Nothing you saw in your KJV Bible even resembles what the original writings were like.
Not one of those supports your claim
See Luke 22:19-20, Mark 14:22-24, John 6:35, John 6:51-58, John 15:5, John 19:29-32, Matthew 22:34-40, and Matthew 12, a chapter literally called "Jesus works on the Sabbath". The events in the gospels came before Paul because Paul's conversion was after the last supper. To say his events came before the events in the gospels is very odd in an argument. You can't say "well the gospels were written after", that's like saying Canaanites came after the Hebrews because the Hebrews were written about before the Canaanites were written about. Things exist independently from writing about them.
Not really sure why you included the trinity as a thing anyways if it's not impactful as to whether it's true or not, it would be like saying Paul invented robes. Yeah, and? All three parts of the trinity exist, but seeing it "as a trinity" is not necessary.
When I said the position of women was always culturally influenced, I wasn't saying that in the sense that Paul didn't demote us in favor of men but that that was culturally a non-issue/moot. Paul said at one time we should wear coverings on our head, but that is extremely setting-exclusive, if depictions are anything to go by.
Paul was completely unnecessary with baptism popularization. Traditions don't just vanish like you describe. Or else we wouldn't have a John the Baptist to speak of.
The last verse I gave about children in my previous comment literally and explicitly denounces using any method such as the rod. If that doesn't support what I'm saying, then you've escalated this argument into a matter of understanding as well now, and I cannot explain something to someone who figuratively doesn't speak my language.
I'm surprised I actually agreed with someone on what good manners and good form are before witnessing the argument continue out of the idea I'm not "supposed to" agree with you according to your assumption of what I am. I ethically agree with you, take it or leave it.
All of them argue over what is work not about the rule itself.
Incorrect. The letters predate the Gospels by decades. Which we know because they reference later events and try to patch up holes that didnt exist in Paul's time. Especially John which was written ~100 yesrs aftet the events and shows a fully developed theology.
Give me one. Show me any secular reference to Jesus that predates Paul.
Because the Trinity doesn't exist. He started the fiction and it carried on.
Now we are cherry picking.
quote it, NIV