"Christianity...(has become) the most perverted system that ever shone on man. ...Rogueries, absurdities and untruths were perpetrated upon the teachings of Jesus by a large band of dupes and importers led by Paul, the first great corrupter of the teaching of Jesus."

On what that Paul wrote did Thomas Jefferson base this conclusion?

Thomas Jefferson was not a Christian nor a Historian.

He in fact rewrote the entire new testament on what he felt was accurate based on his "feelings"... despite his lack of knowledge of texts, writings of the Church Fathers, etc.

So to answer your question: Nothing.

Yes, This is in fact merely one of many things Thomas Jefferson and his writings were said or used to attack Christianity, It is also a letter, not any government document that supported the separation of Church and State ( with actually this suppose to be protecting the Church from the State)

So the statement as note is false and has no value what so ever.

Jefferson did remain loyal to his Anglican\Episcopal upbringing and had an Episcopal minister at his bedside before he died. But the issue is not whether he was a Christian or not.

There were several aspects of Christian teachings that not only Jefferson did not accept but also many others who would deny that they are not Christians…the divinity of Christ comes to my mind.

I agree that Paul took the early church in a different direction than the one Jesus started it in. But, like Jefferson, I base my opinion on intuition rather than expertise.

As I see it, Jesus taught that the whole idea of a "Chosen People" was bogus. Paul missed this point and taught that followers of Jesus were the new "Chosen Ones". Also, he borrowed the "Sacrificial Lamb" model of atonement from the Jewish culture in a misguided attempt to sell Jesus to the Jews. This view casts God as a stern Judge, rather than the loving Father that Jesus sought to reveal.

There are many opinions of bibical teachings, But those that deny the bible as the word of God are not Christian, does not matter what church they claim to be members of. And Jeffersons views denied Jesus virgin birth, which even Muslims accept and is not only in Pauls writings but also all throughout the new testement.

Matthew 24:24
For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.


Many proclaimed Christians say that Churches that deny the trinity are not Christian either, but cult churches.

Jefferson believed in the institution of the church and contributed to the building of Episcopal, Baptist, and Presbyterian churches; he also believed that the church could err in its teachings …To say that he was not a Christian is quite a “Judgment”.

See "Death on the cross a must" post 19. Relates to Paul and his gospel.

Quote:

---

he also believed that the church could err in its teachings …

---

THis is very true. I am a Christian and yet I can readily acknowledge that many churches' teachings are partially or totally erroneous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark_crow

Matthew 24:24
For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.


Many proclaimed Christians say that Churches that deny the trinity are not Christian either, but cult churches.

Jefferson believed in the institution of the church and contributed to the building of Episcopal, Baptist, and Presbyterian churches; he also believed that the church could err in its teachings …To say that he was not a Christian is quite a “Judgment”.

---

As a political person he did many things for his benefit but things such as the virgin birth which he was suppose to talk against is one of the major issues that define a persons faith, since it is not part of pauls teachings but part of the four main gospels.

There were cult groups even during the first several centuries after Christ that did follow a line that Jesus was not God and did not die on the Cross, from those teachings ,we see included into the Quran.

But there is a easy to define a Christian, those that believe and follow the teachings of Christ, those that do not and will not follow his teachings are not. They may do a lot of good, they may help a lot of groups, but they are known by their beleifs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by s_cianci

THis is very true. I am a Christian and yet I can readily acknowledge that many churches' teachings are partially or totally erroneous.

---

And I will even go that all denominations have some incorrect teachings, this is because man and their customs get included over years by all of them. But the defining line is their belief on Christ.

I will wonder here a bit, but this is why as a nation which is mostly christian, we as christians should want to be sure we keep a political leader who represents our faith,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

as a nation which is mostly christian, we as christians should want to be sure we keep a political leader who represents our faith,

---

Yeah, and you could do it too, except for that pesky Constitution (Article VI, section 3):

"...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

Doh!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ordinaryguy

Yeah, and you could do it too, except for that pesky Constitution (Article VI, section 3):

"...no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

Doh!!

---

Well some changes to it, would not hurt either, that right to bear arms need to be a lot clearer also, so the supreme court would stop messing with that. And that part where churches were suppose to be protected from the government, ( not government from the church) need to be written a little more clear also. Most likely the early writters did not expect the courts to rewrite what they were saying though case laws.

But if christians all voted as a block, there would be no need, there is no problem with christians voting their religion, which they should. They should look at the candidates who represent the most moral and most christian view points.

But all that does say is that the government can not require it, but the voters can demand it if they are going to vote for them, If anyone who did not have the right moral values would not get a single christian vote, they would be wasting their time running.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

And that part where churches were suppose to be protected from the government, ( not government from the church) need to be written alittle more clear also.

---

Which part is that, exactly?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ordinaryguy

Which part is that, exactly?

---

The part not really in there but everyone calls it the separation of Church and State.

Saul(St. Paul) was a Pharisee who never met the man called Jesus. He was a highly educated man, educated in Greece and having lived in Greece, and on the road to Damascus he was struck with the idea of blending the teachings of Jesus with the Greek Mysteries and the hopes for Jewish Messiah!

Paul took the teachings of a simple Jewish rabbi, teachings that stressed love over anger, helping the poor by sharing the wealth, not to worry about one's future, to be humble, and so on, and changed that peaceful message into a nightmare of focusing on sin and death, homosexuality, and oppressing females, among other negative things.

Saul founded the religion called Christianity and promoted it first to the Jews then all over the Mediterranean world. Saul was a very ambitious fellow and first corrupter of the teachings of Jesus.

Good question, Crow!

I get a kick out of it when I hear talk of a 'Untied Christian voting Block'. In view of things like this:

Conservative Pastor John Hagee, founder of Christians United for Israel, endorsed John McCain.

Conservative William Donohue, president of the Catholic League called Hagee a "bigot," and said the right-wing pastor has waged "an unrelenting war against the Catholic Church" by "calling it 'The Great Whore,' an 'apostate church,' the 'anti-Christ,' and a 'false cult system.'"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dark_crow

Jefferson did remain loyal to his Anglican\Episcopal upbringing and had an Episcopal minister at his bedside before he died. But the issue is not whether he was a Christian or not.

---

I disagree wholeheartedly. The fact that he was not a Christian - along with the fact that he would discount most of the New Testament as myth, fable and/or innacurate is good reason to not take his comments seriously.

... so to answer the direct question: No, Paul did not "corrupt" the teaching of Jesus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RickJ

I disagree wholeheartedly. The fact that he was not a Christian - along with the fact that he would discount most of the New Testament as myth, fable and/or innacurate is good reason to not take his comments seriously.

...so to answer the direct question: No, Paul did not "corrupt" the teaching of Jesus.

---

I agree, he was a Deist with Christian underpinnings:) …unlike Paine whose beliefs did not have Christian underpinnings. Among other Bible readers that might be mentioned are the foes of the Bible, those who approach it with a critical eye, as often do the agnostic, the skeptic, the infidel, and the atheist.

While purporting to have an objective attitude toward the Bible, more often than not they read for the purpose of finding fault with it, scanning its pages with eagle eye to find instances in which the Bible appears to contradict itself, science or secular history. Thus these hope to discredit the Bible in the eyes of others. The extremes to which these go prove that they are anything but what they make their boast to be—objective. However, Bible scholarship, science and archaeology more and more bring forth evidence refuting all such attacks. Obviously, all such Bible reading is futile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Choux

Saul(St. Paul) was a Pharisee who never met the man called Jesus. He was a highly educated man, educated in Greece and having lived in Greece, and on the road to Damascus he was struck with the idea of blending the teachings of Jesus with the Greek Mysteries and the hopes for Jewish Messiah!

Paul took the teachings of a simple Jewish rabbi, teachings that stressed love over anger, helping the poor by sharing the wealth, not to worry about one's future, to be humble, and so on, and changed that peaceful message into a nightmare of focusing on sin and death, homosexuality, and oppressing females, among other negative things.

Saul founded the religion called Christianity and promoted it first to the Jews then all over the Mediterranean world. Saul was a very ambitious fellow and first corrupter of the teachings of Jesus.

Good question, Crow!

---

All four Gospels talk of SIN, REPENTANCE, FORGIVENESS. St Paul is consistent with this theme.

Read Romans in its entirety, especially 7, 8, 12 . Also 1 Corinthians 13 on love, Galatians 5 ""the only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love" His message of God's love is consistent with the Gospels.