[kosta50]

That's right. The other possibility is that Paul was not teaching in accordance with what Christ revealed to him, and was therefore in the service of satan!

No, not necessarily. The Bible is full of instances where unsuspecting individuals, sometimes unbeknowns to them, serve God's purpose, or for that matter any purpose.

Let's be brutally frank: without +Paul there would be no Christianity. But, by the same token, Pauline Christianity is not the Judaism preached by Jesus Christ.

[Forest Keeper]

FK: "The other possibility is that Paul was not teaching in accordance with what Christ revealed to him, and was therefore in the service of satan!"

No, not necessarily. The Bible is full of instances where unsuspecting individuals, sometimes unbeknowns to them, serve God's purpose, or for that matter any purpose.

Well, that would raise the possibility of teaching against what Christ taught actually serving God's purpose in His Holy word. Wouldn't that make the word unholy? It would also put a very strange twist on the concept of inerrancy.

Let's be brutally frank: without +Paul there would be no Christianity. But, by the same token, Pauline Christianity is not the Judaism preached by Jesus Christ.

You know how much I love Paul and what he taught, but I would never give him this much credit. The only one indispensable to Christianity is Christ. ......... Would you say that Paul contradicts Christ, or taught in a complimentary, but different way? It just isn't possible that Paul contradicts Christ.