Sunday, February 05, 2006

Bulletin: Interfaith Dialogue @ University of Malaya


Is Jesus the Only Way? (From the map, looks like it is not :) )

An atrocious statement it is, but come scrutinise it for yourself at-

Interfaith Dialogue Series II

Topic: Basic Beliefs of 4 Major Religions
Date: 6 February 2006
Time: 8pm (7.30pm for a good seat)
Venue: Auditorium, Kompleks Perdanansiswa (Follow poorly-drawn arrows for directions)

2 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

My beloved Christian brothers,

Earlier on, I raised the doubtful role of Paul as the perperator of Christianity. When Jesus was alive he was spreading enmity towards Jesus' teachings. When Jesus passed away, then Paul began spreading the teachings of Jesus. Following is an interesting article on Paul:

The Romantic Origins of Christianity



And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free! (John 8:32)



Written by Abdullah Smith



Few Christians know that Christianity is the result of love affair between Paul and Popea, which had failed. Paul despised both the Jews and Romans because Popea was Jewish and Nero was a Roman. They fell in love, and married each other, rejecting Paul completely.



The brokenhearted Paul (then) traveled to Arabia for three years to fabricate his new doctrines, which later became “Christianity”.



Saul did everything in his power to win the attention and hopefully the love of beautiful Popea. Saul’s exertions against the Nazarenes – his bitter and zealous persecution of the early followers often brought mere approval from Popea, condescending affection – but his repeated offers of marriage were repeatedly spurned. A case of unrequited love!



Then Popea abruptly left Jerusalem to enter into a career on the stage in Rome. As actresses go, she graduated from High Priest’s daughter to become the mistress of Emperor Nero who eventually made an honest woman of her by marrying her.



Saul was heart broken; Saul was outraged; Saul was disconsolate, depressed, distraught and disheartened. Saul left Jerusalem and headed for the desert (in Arabia) where like a wounded lion he licked his wounded heart, bleeding with sorrow.



(Farouk Hosein, Fundamentalism Revisted, published by Eniath’s Printing Company Ltd. Chaguanas, Trinidad, W.I., p. 40-41)



“… But Saul was a resilient man; he was resourceful. He was a man of action. Remember, he was not satisfied to lay back and watch the Nazarenes overtake the established Jewish church. He acted then. Saul had three years to muse upon his vengeance. (ibid)



Paul traveled to Arabia for three years and to the Southern regions of Damascus before returning to Jerusalem. According to modern scholars, Paul fabricated the doctrines of Christianity as vengeance against the Jews. It was produced in Arabia and Damascus.



Paul’s conversion coincided with his being rejected by Popea. He must have been under considerable emotional and mental strain at the time. It is possible that this crisis in his life had some bearing on this sudden change from his being one of the greatest supporters of the Jewish Law to one of its greatest enemies” (Muhammad Ataur-Rahim, Jesus Prophet of Islam, 1992 edition, p. 57)





The Ebionites, or Nazarenes, who were the first Christians, rejected all the Epistles of Paul and regarded him as an imposter. They reported, among other things, that he was originally a pagan; that he came to Jerusalem where he lived some time; and that having a mind to marry the daughter of a high priest, he caused himself to be circumcised. But, that not being able to obtain her, he quarreled with the Jews and wrote against circumcision, and against observing the Sabbath and against all the legal ordinance.” (The Age of Reason” by Thomas Paine, p. 167)





'They declare that he was a Greek ... He went up to Jerusalem, they say, and when he had spent some time there, he was seized with a passion to marry the daughter of the priest. For this reason he became a proselyte and was circumcised. Then, when he failed to get the girl, he flew into a rage and wrote against circumcision and against the sabbath and the Law' (Epiphanius, Panarion, 30.16.6-9, The Ebionite Account)





Paul took solitude in the desert after he was rejected.





Paul then left Damascus and, instead of seeking out the company of the other followers of Jesus, went into the Arabian Desert where he remained hidden for three years. It may well have been here that he began to formulate his own version of what Jesus had taught. This involved a rejection of the Jewish Law, which in turn meant his turning away from the fact that throughout his life Jesus had remained a practicing Jew, and always sought to uphold the teachings which Moses had brought before him.

(Muhammad Ataur Raheem, Jesus prophet of Islam, 1992 edition)





When Paul had written “against circumcision and against the Sabbath and the Law”, this was the beginning of Christianity. A religion based on vengeance, emotion, and fraud.



The foundation of Christianity is the total rejection of Circumcision, Sabbath, and the Law (Galatians 3:13, Romans 3:20) which was followed by Jesus (Matthew 5:17-20, 23:23)





With the teaching by some, notably Paul, that the laws of the Jews need not to be followed by a Christian, contradictions began to arise between the body of newly-written Scriptures, which later became known as the “New Testament”, and the Old Testament. However, the Old Testament was retained by the established Church in spite of these contradictions, since an outright rejection of the Old Testament would have been regarded by many of the people as a rejection of Jesus himself. Confusion was the inevitable result. In the attempt to accept and reject the Old Testament simultaneously, contradictions arose within the New Testament itself, since it had to be “new” without openly rejecting the old. But, in the early days of the Church, there was no real attempt to formally arrange the books and ensure that all the accounts and doctrines tallied with each other. The leaders of the first Christian communities were free to use their discretion and to refer to those Scriptures which they thought best contained the teachings of Jesus. (Muhammad Ataur-Raheem, Jesus Prophet of Islam, 1992 edition, pp. 46)



The unreliability of the gospels appears to be admitted by the Church itself: The metaphysics of Christianity today is not even based on what is in the gospels. The established church is founded on the doctrine of original sin, of atonement and redemption, of the divinity of Jesus, of the divinity of the Holy Ghost and of Trinity. None of these doctrines are to be found within the gospels. They were not taught by Jesus. They were the fruits of Paul’s innovations and the influence of Greek culture and philosophy. Paul never experienced the company nor the direct transmission of knowledge from Jesus. Before his conversion, he vigorously persecuted the followers of Jesus, and after it he was largely responsible for abandoning the code of behaviour of Jesus when he took “Christianity” to the non-Jews of Greece and beyond. (ibid, p. 196)



Paul was a Gentile born in Tarsus, he converted to Judaism and employed by the High Priest to arrest the followers of Jesus. He desired to marry Popea, the daughter of the High Priest, but when she rejected his offer, Paul avenged by creating “Christianity” as retaliation against the Jews.



Paul borrowed from the Mystery Religions to produce Christianity. The Church Father Iranaeus condemned Paul for his innovations:



Iranaeus believed in One God and supported the doctrine of the manhood of Jesus. He bitterly criticized Paul for being responsible for injecting the doctrines of the pagan religions and Platonic philosophy into Christianity. (Muhammad Ataur-Raheem, Jesus Prophet of Islam, 1992 edition, p. 77)



I have inquired into some of the fundamental doctrines of Christianity; the examination has led me to the conclusion that the dogmas of the Trinity, the Divinity of Jesus, the Divine-Sonship, the Original Sin and Atonement are neither rational nor in conformity with the teachings of Jesus. These dogmas came into being and were due to pagan influences. They show that Christianity has departed considerably from the religion of Jesus. (The Myth of the Cross, Alhaj A.D. Ajijola)





"No sooner had Jesus knocked over the dragon of superstition than Paul boldly set it on its legs again in the name of Jesus." (George Bernard Shaw)



“Christianity began as a cult with almost wholly Pagan origins and motivations in the first century, “and by the fourth it had utterly turned its back on Paganism and repudiated very hint of. . . connection with it, loading it with contempt from that day to this” (The Pagan Christ, Tom Harper, pp. 51)

Paul was born a gentile in a town that was not only heavily influenced by Mystic Cults and the gods such as Attis, Adonis, Mithras, Osiris and Baal-Taraz but was actually named after one of these gods (Baal-Taraz => Tarsus). Also found in Tarsus were Jews who were called 'God-fearing' because they accepted the teachings of Judaism but were unwilling to be circumcised or adopt all of the food laws of Judaism. Paul was either born to 'God-fearing' parents or he converted as a young man and headed for Jerusalem to study with a view to becoming a Pharisee (the most highly respected Jewish philosophers). His early childhood influences included much exposure to the pagan gods and Mystic Cults that were so prevalent in Tarsus.

Having failed to make the grade as a Pharisee (he was bright but lacked the logic ability required, as demonstrated by his often muddled theology, especially in Romans) he became one of the High Priest's hired thugs (the High Priest being a Sadducee appointed by Rome). After the death of Jesus he was sent to kidnap some of Jesus' followers who had fled to Damascus and return them to the High Priest for punishment. Investigating these followers of Jesus, Paul saw a lot in the idea of a resurrection that was in common with the myths that he had grown up with. Having failed to reach his goal of becoming a Pharisee and having been reduced to the role of a thug for a quisling Roman collaborator, Paul cracked and experienced a breakdown of some sort which left him with the basis of the ideas that became Christianity. He dressed up Jesus in the clothes of Attis, Adonis, Mithras, Osiris and Baal-Taraz added his own imagined divinity to this and set out to finally become the important man that his ego required of him and that had brought him to Jerusalem to begin with. (Simon Ewins, http://www.holysmoke.org/hs00/paul.htm)

Paul’s determination was to destroy the Jewish authorities, and to gain acceptance from the Gentiles, he succeeded in overthrowing the Nazarenes, who were the true followers of Jesus (Matthew 10:5-6, 15:24)

The Ebionites were stigmatized by the Church as heretics who failed to understand that Jesus was a divine person and asserted instead that he was a human being who came to inaugurate a new earthly age, as prophesied by the Jewish prophets of the Bible. Moreover, the Ebionites refused to accept the Church doctrine, derived from Paul, that Jesus abolished or abrogated the Torah, the Jewish law. Instead, the Ebionites observed the Jewish law and regarded themselves as Jews. The Ebionites were not heretics, as the Church asserted, nor 're-Judaizers', as modern scholars call them, but the authentic successors of the immediate disciples and followers of Jesus, whose views and doctrines they faithfully transmitted, believing correctly that they were derived from Jesus himself. They were the same group that had earlier been called the Nazarenes, who were led by James and Peter, who had known Jesus during his lifetime, and were in a far better position to know his aims than Paul, who met Jesus only in dreams and visions. Thus the opinion held by the Ebionites about Paul is of extraordinary interest and deserves respectful consideration, instead of dismissal as 'scurrilous' propaganda -- the reaction of Christian scholars from ancient to modern times. (Hyam Maccoby, The Myth Maker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity)

The Ebionites are thus by no means a negligible or derisory group. Their claim to represent the original teaching of Jesus has to be taken seriously (ibid, Hyam Maccoby)



After the Romans destroyed the Temple in 70 CE, the Pauline Church was firmly established under the doctrines of Paul at Rome.



The Jerusalem Church was defeated by the Pauline Church. The Nazarenes became known as the Ebionites, which means the ‘poor ones’. The Pauline “Christians” triumphed over the followers of Jesus:



From the time Jesus left earth to the second half of the Second Century, there was a struggle between two factions. One was what one might call Pauline Christianity and the other Judeo-Christianity. It was only very slowly that the first supplanted the second, and Pauline Christianity triumphed over Judeo-Christianity. (Maurice Bucaille, The Bible, The Quran, and Science, p. 70)



The Judeo-Christians have now disappeared as a community with any influence, but one still hears people talking about them under the general term of ‘Judaistic’. (ibid, p. 70)



The centre of Christianity today is Rome, yet Jesus never said anything about Rome being the centre of his teaching. He preached only to the Jews (Matthew 15:24) and never to the Gentiles (Matthew 10:5-6)



It was Paul who founded Christianity which spread to Europe and beyond, whereas the centre of Jesus was in Jerusalem:



Differences between the two were not only evident in life-style and belief, but were also clearly delineated geographically. As the Pauline Church grew more established, it became increasingly hostile to the followers of Jesus. It aligned itself more and more with the rulers of the Roman Empire, and the persecution which to begin with had been directed at all who called themselves Christians, now began to fall mainly on those who affirmed the Divine Unity. Attempts began to be made to change their beliefs and forcefully to remove those who refused to do so, together with the books they used. Most of the early martyrs were Unitarians. The more the doctrine of Trinity became accepted, the more its adherents opposed those who affirmed the Divine Unity. (Muhammad Ataur-Raheem, Jesus Prophet of Islam, 1992 edition, p. 74)



The Encyclopedia Wikipedia Online testifies that Paul is the founder of Christianity:



Paul is venerated as a Saint by all the churches that honor saints, including those of the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Anglican traditions, and some Lutheran sects and he is the patron saint of the City of London. He did much to advance Christianity among the Gentiles, and is considered to be one source (if not the primary source) of early Church doctrine, and the founder of Pauline Christianity. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_of_Tarsus)



What is the significance for our faith and for our religious life, the fact that the Gospel of Paul is different from the Gospel of Jesus?



The attitude which Paul himself takes up towards the Gospel of Jesus is that he does not repeat it in the words of Jesus, and does not appeal to its authority.... The fateful thing is that the Greek, the Catholic, and the Protestant theologies all contain the Gospel of Paul in a form which does not continue the Gospel of Jesus, but displaces it.



(Albert Schweitzer, The Quest for the Historical Jesus)



Paul was the very first to envisage Christianity, as a new religion, different from Judaism” (Hyam Maccoby, The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity, pp. 104-105)



The Greek philosopher Celsus was a strong opponent of Christianity; his writings are preserved by Origen.

It is clear to me that the writings of the Christians are a lie and that your fables are not well-enough constructed to conceal this monstrous fiction.' (On The True Doctrine, c178 AD)




Paul was responsible for a “great persecution against the Church” (Acts 8:1)

After his so-called conversion, Paul decided to hibernate in the Arabian Desert where he began to formulate doctrines for his new religion called “Christianity”, out of vengeance.



Paul deceptively started working from within the Nazarene movement to eventually destroy them:



“… But Saul was a resilient man; he was resourceful. He was a man of action. Remember, he was not satisfied to lay back and watch the Nazarenes overtake the established Jewish church. He acted then. Saul had three years to muse upon his vengeance. Popea’s rejection represented rejection by the High Priest and all that he stood for – the Old Jewish Law. The Roman Emperor, that pagan son of a Saul would deal with him. He would undermine them both. Undermine the Orthodox Jewish tradition and law – destroying the power of the established Jewish Church and the power of the High Priest, Popea’s father.



Secondly, Saul would lure away the pagan from their traditional worship of their Emperors (one who had dared to possess the body of his believed Popea) and leave the Emperor without an empire. Luring away the pagan worshippers from their defied Emperors to a God-like Christ would torpedo the Emperors love for glorification. That hero worship would be transferred from Emperor to Christ. That would leave the Emperorship as a mere shell – a semblance of its former self. Saul decided he would kill two birds with one stone. He worked out his strategy during his three years self imposed exile in the dessert.



To work his plan, Saul knew that he could not allow himself to be sidetracked or diverted by the philosophy, theory or doctrine of others. He therefore invented a story about a direct revelation received from Christ which nobody could dispute, and by virtue of which he enjoyed the latitude to preach his own doctrine. Saul recognized NOT the teachings of Jesus handed down by his Apostles and disciples, but claimed that he was divinely inspired to teach the new doctrine of Christ, rather than of Jesus, which he utterly discarded. For Paul, Jesus and Christ were two distinct and separate personalities. Such was Paul’s motivation and determination. His inclinations were always destructive. Destroy the Nazarenes. Then later, destroy the old – the Jewish orthodox power, destroy the Roman Emperor. (ibid, Fundamentalism REVISITED)





In the solitude of the Arabian desert, he had marked out a course of action for himself in which he would not accept any interference or advice. Had he discussed this matter with the apostles or taken any of them into his confidence, it would mean a definite setback to his scheme of preaching a modified religion to the Gentiles. The apostles would have very strongly opposed the whole idea, and would have denounced the whole idea as an abomination. There is ample proof provided by the New Testament that the Disciples and the earliest followers of Jesus abhorred the innovations of Paul.

(A.D. Ajijola, The Myth of the Cross)





“Paul quickly saw the need to stay in a quiet and peaceful area where he could reflect over his new position. Hence he went to the Southern regions of Damascus… the main problem facing him was to interpret the law and teachings of Jesus in a new form in the light of his own novel experience”.

(Encyclopedia Britannica, Follow Jesus or Follow Paul by Roshan Enam, p. 68-69)





Jesus (pbuh) never intended to establish a new religion on earth. He was sent to revive the Mosaic Law.

A true Jew would have immediately recognized the teaching of Jesus as a reaffirmation of what Moses had taught. (Muhammad Ataur-Raheem, Jesus Prophet of Islam, 1992 edition)
The corrupted Pauline Gospel that exists today has nothing to do with Jesus:



The Tabligh Jamaat can perform a yeoman service by propagating Islam among the masses and establishing Madrasahs to educate the ignorant children along the religious lines and also repeatedly warning them about the perils of this black serpent of kufr which has surrounded them which is seeking for opportunities to send them to perdition by misleading and misguiding them to worship stones and images and uphold myths and fallacies of Roman pagans and Greek philosophers; to believe in a tampered and interpolated version of the divinely rejected Gospel which is bristling with errors, additions and forgeries concocted by copyists and priests and mutilated by Pauline creed of Trinity, Atonement and Crucifixion which were canonized as the true word of God in the Council of Nicea in 325 CE consigning to the flames the numerous genuine Gospels to the Litter dismay of the world, opening the way to infernal and eternal doom!



(The Christian Missionary Menace at http://www.angelfire.com/ny/dawahpage/tm.html)



Conclusion:

We have explicitly demonstrated that Paul invented “Christianity” as revenge against the Jews, and the Roman Emperors. His goal was to overtake the Roman Empire and destroy the Jewish authorities. His religion succeeded, and it’s very unfortunate that the true followers of Jesus were defeated.



The Pauline Church later became known as the ‘Roman Catholic Church’, it was wholly controlled by politics and not a religious foundation. Christianity was made the official religion of the Roman Empire by Constantine; he used the Church for his own political purpose and he never became a Christian.



Constantine changed the Sabbath from Saturday to Sunday to commemorate the day of the sun-god. Constantine introduced the pagan ‘trinity’ which he borrowed from his own religion. The Romans, the Egyptians, and the Hindus believed in ‘trinity’ before Christianity existed.



When the Council of Nicea took place, the Emperor Constantine



- Declared the Roman Sun-day to be the Christian Sabbath

- Adopted the traditional birthday of the Sun-god, and the twenty-fifth of December, as the birthday of Jesus;

- Borrowed the emblem of the Sun-god, the cross of light, to be the emblem of Christianity;

- And, although the statue of Jesus replaced the idol of the Sun-god, decided to incorporate all the ceremonies which were performed at the Sub-gods birthday celebrations into their own ceremonies.

(Jesus, The Prophet of Islam, Muhammad Rahim, pp.101)



The scholar Maurice Bucaille states a very good question:



It is quite reasonable to ask what Christianity might have been without Paul and one could no doubt construct all sorts of hypotheses on this subject. (The Bible, The Quran, and Science, p. 70)



The answer is quite obvious:



If Popea had only accepted Paul’s offer of marriage, Christianity would probably not exist today.

8:36 PM  
Blogger tehtarik said...

Whoa, I realise the only postings which you hadn't commented on bohtea were the ones on jazz! :)

How about dropping me a name and your email address if you are really interested in asking questions?

Cheers!

12:10 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home