From: jbrown@doc.bmd.trw.com
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Crusades; Once more into the breach
Date: 19 Aug 92 10:01:31 MST

In article <1992Aug18.172557.27380@bmerh85.bnr.ca>, dgraham@bmers30.bnr.ca (Douglas Graham) writes:
> In article <1992Aug18.142438.8656@csrd.uiuc.edu> g-skinner@uiuc.edu writes:
> 
>>>I dunno.  What do we do when the teachings of Paul contradict those
>>>of Jesus?
>>
>>We'd have to work out any contradictions, giving precedence to Jesus
>>in the final analysis.
 
Assuming that such "contradictions" were real rather than imagined, or
due to a lack of understanding.

[Speed limit analogy deleted.]

> 
>>>>If so, I note that we have words from Paul to the effect "you are no
>>>>longer under the law, but under grace."
>>
>>>But this directly contradicts the jot and tittle stuff spoken by
>>>Jesus.  Why should Paul, a mere mortal, be able to override Jesus,
>>>who was God?  
>>
>>(Correction: Son of God.)
> 
> Pardon me.  I do get confused at times.

That's understandable.  For many Christians the terms "Son of God" and
"God" are synonomous, especially in the context you used, namely, "...Jesus,
who was God?"  Some Christians place more distinctions on the term "Son
of God", so Gregg's correction is understandable although trivial in this
context where your usage was essentially and functionally correct.

> 
>>Christianty holds that he does not override
>>Jesus.  Jesus said that he would not change the law ("jot and tittle,"
>>as you say).  Paul says the penalties have been paid.  The law remains
>>unchanged.
> 
> Alright, let me make sure that I've got this straight.  First, we have
> Jesus, the great moral teacher, the Son of God, whose teachings all
> Christians claim to follow.  Jesus teaches on a number of occasions that
> he has no intention of changing the Law.  Seems pretty straightforward to
> me.
> 
> Then Paul comes along and cooks up some story about penalties being paid,
> and that the Law is irrelevant -- Grace is where the action is now.  Of
> this, Jesus never mentioned a peep.  I suppose I can accept that this is
> Christianity, but I think then that it may be stretching the truth quite
> a bit for Christians to claim that they follow the teachings of Jesus.
> 
>>The question is, Does Christianity still prescribe the
>>penalties associated with the law?  Because Christianity holds that
>>all penalties have been paid, I think the answer is "No."
> 
> I think the answer has disappeared in a blur.  I think the answer is
> whatever our priest says it is, and can change daily depending on the
> aspirations of our priest.
> --
> Doug Graham         dgraham@bnr.ca         My opinions are my own.

Doug, your comments seem reasonable in the context of one who does not
have a fundamental understanding of Christianity.  Having a poor grasp
of the doctrines and principles of Christianity is understandable for
one who denies or disbelieves in God, and who is not likely motivated
in gaining a complete understanding of Christian principles and teachings.

I am not criticizing you, so I hope you understand that I mean no offense
when I say that your understanding of Christianity, its doctrines, and
harmonizations of the gospels and the epistles in the NT is quite lacking.

There is no contradiction whatever between the teachings of Jesus and Paul.
Nor is there a contradiction between Paul and James.  Nor between, Jesus,
Paul, James, and John.  Etc.  The cohesive structure of the NT is well
established in Christian philosophy and thought.  Any imagined contradiction
in the NT is trivial at best, and the real work of harmonization remains,
admittedly, between the NT and portions of the Old.  Whether you or others
wish to accept Christian harmonizations in the NT, is of course, up to you.
But arguments as to whether Christians obey Jesus or Paul (or James or John)
really carry little weight for the well-grounded Christian who is aware of
the context and harmonizations of these various teachings.  You might as
well assert that Jesus never lived, or that Christianity is "immoral" for
all the good it will do.  All you will succeed in doing is to convince other
non-believers, as lacking in their understanding of Christianity as you, of
the "truth" of these assertions.
 
Regards,

Jim
Send a copy of any replies to Jim_Brown@oz.bmd.trw.com as I am not able to
read this newsgroup each day, and many posts get deleted from the system
before I can read them.