A Curious thing.....Paul in cahoots with the Romans?

[Georges]

Can someone please tell me why Paul salutes....

Rom 16:10 Salute Apelles approved in Christ. Salute them which are of Aristobulus' [household].

These are Herodians....Roman lackeys who ruled the area of NW Syria.....those responsible for Thaddeus and John's (brother of James) death.....

The Sadducean High Priest was in Cahoots with both the Herodians and the Romans. Paul worked for the High Priest as a policeman. Did he work for the Herodians, or the Romans also? This would possibly explain why he choose Damascus to travel to....If he was related to the Herods in anyway.

Since James the brother of Jesus was killed by the High Priest (A Sadducean appointed by Rome and in cahoots with the Herods) in Jerusalem, did the death of James occur so Paul could advance his brand of non hostile Christianity? After all, it was very convienient for Paul that James had died. With the passing of James, there wasn't anyone to question Paul or hold his teachings in check.

 

[Imagican]

Boy George, you really DON'T believe in the Bible do you?

 

[Imagican]

Didn't mean to call you Boy George, what I meant was Boy, George. He he he

 

[ÃÂoppleganger]

:angel:

 

[Georges]

Boy George, you really DON'T believe in the Bible do you?

:-D The Boy George comment is pretty funny, obviously not the first time for that...Back in the 60's it was "Hey, there Georgie girl"...plenty of school boy kidding going on there.

.....OT I accept as very much pure....as much as possible...I think editing has been kept to a minimum....the standards for copying text were pretty strict.

The NT I used to think the same way about....don't anymore....it has it's edits....additions and subtractions....Gotta ask yourself why the late date on the canon? Why no Hebrew books epistles or gospels to be found? Still as I've said, I don't throw the baby out with the bathwater....I'm just more careful when I read the NT.....except of course Revelation...which I think is pretty much accurate as a Jewish book.

 

[Georges]

Well as a brief study, in the commentaries I read, that these were of the household of Aristobulus. Apparently, some of these converts were of Roman or even Idumean origen. Some were even converts before Paul.

The article on Aritobulus from http://www.jewishencylopedia.com:

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view. ... ristobulus

The family politics of the Herods is very soap operish.....Herod, as well as his successors usually sent their children to Rome for education and future political gain....What i find interesting about Herod and family, he married 2 of the High Priests daughters...seems he was trying to win a political and religious coup.

Romans being converted should come as no surprize. Rufus Pudens, and some of Claudius' household were also. The movies The Robe and Ben Hur also come to mind. Often times, these people had no choice, but to work for there slavemaster's. They were taxed at a 50% rate I hear. In the 11th verse afterward, Paul says Salute Herodion my kinsman. Greet them that be of the household of Narcissus, which are in the Lord. Here apparently, the majority of the household of Narcissus have followed Christ's teaching's. Whereas, in verse 10, he just salutes Apelles, who was approved in Christ, and doesn't mention anyone else specifically in Aristobulus' household.

Rom 16:10 Salute Apelles approved in Christ. Salute them which are of Aristobulus' [household].

Dopp....come on now....Those of the Household of David can be anyone of David's descendants. Just because he doesn't mention anyone in Aristobulus by name may be because there are too many to name.


This Aristobulus apparently wasn't one of the 70 sent out in Luke 10:10 thats mentioned in historical accounts.

Doubtful since this is written to the Romans....the Sadducean High Priest connection between Paul and the "Herods" may be to coincidental to be ignored.

This Thaddeus? Jude the Son of Cleophas, who died a martyr, and Mary who stood at the foot of the Cross, and who annointed Christ's body after death. Brother of Saint James the Lesser. Nephew of Mary and Joseph; blood relative of Jesus Christ, and reported to look a lot like him. May have been a fisherman and apostle. Who was beaten to death with a club, then beheaded post-mortem in 1st century Persia? He spoke only one time in the Gospels, John 14:22-23. At the Last Supper he asked Jesus, " Lord, how is it that you will show yourself only to those that love you? Why not the whole world? Jesus answered him, "If a man loves me he will keep my word and my father will love him and we will come to him.

:-?

And it was James the brother of John with the sword that the Herodians slew.
Although the brother's of this and that get really confusing sometimes.
Pickey, Pickey! This aint the straw that will break the camel's back!

But it does need to be addressed.....to avoid confusion....and to get the straight skinny as much as possible.

 

[ÃÂoppleganger]

:P

 

[wavy]

I have about three theories about Paul myself.

(1) He spoke the truth but Yahweh designed his letters in a way so that they could be specifically hard to understand, as Peter states.

(2) Paul is a heretic that needs to be exluded from the bible since his teachings are the first ones people run to for doctrine and for defense from what's written in the rest of the book; specifically with things that seem "too Jewish" (like the torah, etc).

(3) Paul did not write many of his epistles at all. They were forged, or written by some one claiming to be Paul.

 

[ÃÂoppleganger]

:evil:

 

[Georges]

Well, you believe everything's a conspiracy. I just believe Paul welcomed anyone particularily Gentiles who wanted to become Christian's. A brief reference doesn't prove anything. That people in unfortunate circumstances happen to worship Christ is no big deal. Besides you have to prove the supposed connection not just infer it, because some of his household were Christian's. In a time so divided between extreme's, no doubt had Paul infered was a Christian, obviously not being saved, there would have been great condemnation of Paul. But we see none. Stop trying to imply stuff that don't exist!

Of course I'm a conspiracy guy......gunman on the grassy knoll, Roswell coverup.... :silly: Actually, I have to know how/why things work....If everything jives, great...if it doesn't then how come? Paul is definitely at odds with the Boys of the Jerusalem Church....why? Of course you are entitled to believe Paul welcomed all....of course he welcomed all....all should be welcomed.

Actually, I don't have to prove anything......I threw a question out there with a name, possible connections, and some suspicious facts.....

I'm not the one who "salutes those of the house of Aristobulus", Paul does. I'm not the one who made up the Herod family connection with Rome and the High Priesthood, that's historical fact. I'm not the one who made up the apparent connection between Paul and he High Priest, or Paul and the house of Aristobulus. I'm not the one benefiting from James` death at the hands of the High Priest, Paul is.....

 

[Imagican]

And then, Paul too was murdered by these 'Romans' that you would offer indication that he was 'in cahoots' with. Strange, if he was doing 'their' bidding, why kill him? Why throw him in prison, thus separating him from the people whom he was offering his/their influence?

And if ANYTHING, Paul's teachings offer exactly what one would expect Christ's teachings to offer to the 'Gentiles'. What is often overlooked by those that 'insist' on Torah is that the Gentiles NEVER had Torah. God had not offered 'them' the law that had been given to the Jews. May seem like a 'trivial' difference to many, but the truth is, with time, man WILL learn what 'true love' is without the law. How much time is the question. By the time of Christ, man's understanding had much evolved.

I believe that since we were created in the 'image' of God, given enough time, His basic principles of existence would be learned with or without His influence. It's unavoidable that with enough time, man's understanding will eventually evolve, through his knowledge, into that of his Creator. The biggest problem with this reality is that, with this 'being created in His image' is that this coupled with the 'pride' of men, there is always this to encourage him to be his 'own' God.

Paul offered the 'understanding' of EXACTLY what Christ performed. Christ was no longer 'here' to explain. Obviously that's why He chose Paul. Christ offered the 'example' of the 'love' that is expected of us, Paul came along and explained it.

 

[Georges]

And then, Paul too was murdered by these 'Romans' that you would offer indication that he was 'in cahoots' with. Strange, if he was doing 'their' bidding, why kill him? Why throw him in prison, thus separating him from the people whom he was offering his/their influence?

Good question.....Was Paul Murdered by the Roman's? He may have been....nothing mentioned about it in Acts. Lord knows, the Romans were a murderous bunch...so were the Herods. Shoot, they didn't think anything about murdering their own relatives...I don't know if Paul was doing their bidding but he certainly used them to achieve his purpose....I do believe an indepth study will show that Paul created a new religion that was "roman friendly" as opposed to "Messianic Judaism" who were expecting the arrival of the Messiah to overthrow Rome. What really happened to Paul? Did he run afowl of the Ceasar's, and if so how? Presumably, he was murdered under Nero's reign....was he murdered as a cover up for Nero's fire, as the Christians were blamed?

Also, Paul wasn't in prison...he was under house arrest....and as the political climate was always changing that would account for his arrests and releases...

Question, why did Paul appeal to Ceaser at his trial? Obviously, if Paul was guilty of a civil crime against Rome, I would expect that they would have executed him there in Israel. I'll have to research the Roman appeals process, and see what crimes were appealable to Ceasar.


And if ANYTHING, Paul's teachings offer exactly what one would expect Christ's teachings to offer to the 'Gentiles'. What is often overlooked by those that 'insist' on Torah is that the Gentiles NEVER had Torah.

Did Christ teach the Gentiles?.....I thought his ministry was to the lost sheep of Israel....And contrary to poplular belief...the Jews had a very aggresive proselyte program....that expected Torah observence.

as seen in...

Act 15:21 For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.

Ideally, the Messianic Christians (Church at Jerusalem) wanted prosyltes to be Torah observant, this was a difficult task for new believers not used to that many requirements...James then required a more lax Torah version know as the Noahide Laws...Acts 15:20 for them to observe, "with the intent" on bringing them from "Milk to Meat". That is Noahide law to Torah Law.


God had not offered 'them' the law that had been given to the Jews. May seem like a 'trivial' difference to many, but the truth is, with time, man WILL learn what 'true love' is without the law. How much time is the question. By the time of Christ, man's understanding had much evolved.

Also....according to Jewish historians...the Torah was given to the Gentiles as well at Sinai....The thunderings were consided the Torah given in the 70 known languages of the time.

I believe that since we were created in the 'image' of God, given enough time, His basic principles of existence would be learned with or without His influence. It's unavoidable that with enough time, man's understanding will eventually evolve, through his knowledge, into that of his Creator.

That's a little too mystic for me....

The biggest problem with this reality is that, with this 'being created in His image' is that this coupled with the 'pride' of men, there is always this to encourage him to be his 'own' God.

Paul offered the 'understanding' of EXACTLY what Christ performed. Christ was no longer 'here' to explain.

Yes.....Christ's teaching was so confusing that he needed Paul to clear it up.....NOT! The Disciples that were with him daily were so stupid that it took Paul, someone who never met Christ, to explain what Christ was about....NOT!

Obviously that's why He chose Paul.

If he chose Paul....why did he waste his time with the other disciples?

Christ offered the 'example' of the 'love' that is expected of us, Paul came along and explained it.

I don't have a problem with a "love" message....it's the differences that Paul taught apart fromt the Church at Jerusalem that is the problem.

 

[JM]

If he chose Paul....why did he waste his time with the other disciples?

The question is, why did God chose anyone of us?

 

[Imagican]

I'm still confused as to 'why' you would think that Paul would spend the rest of his life devoted to something other than Christ and the 'truth'? I have NEVER met ANYONE with the devotion that Paul offered.

Paul appealed to Rome because he was 'also' a Roman citizen. And, who knows, perhaps it was just another of those things that God does in order to further His plan. Maybe even Paul himself was unaware of the 'purpose' of his trip to Rome. It often happens that God brings us to the places that we are 'meant' to be without us even being 'aware' of the purpose until it has already been achieved. Nothing new.

And I am forced to agree with a 'part' of your point. But only from the 'trinitarian' angle. If Jesus WERE God, then how would it have been possible that He didn't 'know' that He was sent to the Jews as WELL as the Gentiles? There is MUCH indication through the Gospels that Christs' understanding was simply that; that He was sent to offer the Word to HIS PEOPLE. Why then did it take someone like Paul to 'spread the Word' to the Gentiles. I understand the answer, but I'm curious as to the explanation that would be given by a 'trinitarian'.

 

[JM]

Paul keeps telling us that what he is giving to us in terms of revelation was not predicted in the OT, that seems to be the big problem so many of us have in understanding the Scripture.

Rom 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, AND THE PREACHING OF JESUS CHRIST, ACCORDING OT THE REVELATION OF THE MYSTERY, which was kept secret since the world began,

Peace.

 

[Georges]

I'm still confused as to 'why' you would think that Paul would spend the rest of his life devoted to something other than Christ and the 'truth'? I have NEVER met ANYONE with the devotion that Paul offered.

I don't know what Paul's motives were....It is very obvious that he didn't preach the values espoused by the Church at Jerusalem (that is unless he was forced to (ie Acts 15).

Paul appealed to Rome because he was 'also' a Roman citizen.

Agreed...he also preached to submit to the Roman government...something the Pharisic Christians (Church of Jerusalem) didn't agree with...The Church of Jerusalem were expecting the return of the Messiah to defeat the Romans....of course the Romans would tolerate Paul....and that's why James (the head of the Church at Rome) was killed...

And, who knows, perhaps it was just another of those things that God does in order to further His plan. Maybe even Paul himself was unaware of the 'purpose' of his trip to Rome.

Paul knew what he was doing when he appealed to Rome...he was already in hot water with the James, Peter and the Church at Jersalem because he preached "freedom from the Torah"...Rome was Paul's only way out...

It often happens that God brings us to the places that we are 'meant' to be without us even being 'aware' of the purpose until it has already been achieved. Nothing new.

Agree there...but it doesn't appear so in this case...If Paul preached more Torah obedience instead of faith only....I would agree more with your statement.

And I am forced to agree with a 'part' of your point. But only from the 'trinitarian' angle. If Jesus WERE God, then how would it have been possible that He didn't 'know' that He was sent to the Jews as WELL as the Gentiles? There is MUCH indication through the Gospels that Christs' understanding was simply that; that He was sent to offer the Word to HIS PEOPLE. Why then did it take someone like Paul to 'spread the Word' to the Gentiles. I understand the answer, but I'm curious as to the explanation that would be given by a 'trinitarian'.

Question that needs to be answered.....

 

[protos]

Romans 16:5-17

Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my wellbeloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ.

Greet Mary who bestowed much labour on us.

Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

Greet Amplias my beloved in the Lord.

Salute Urbane, our helper in Christ, and Stachys my beloved.

Salute Apelles approved in Christ. Salute them which are of Aristobulus' household.

Salute Herodion my kinsman. Greet them that be of the household of Narcissus, which are in the Lord.

Salute Tryphena and Tryphosa, who labour in the Lord. Salute the beloved Persis, which laboured much in the Lord.

Salute Rufus chosen in the Lord, and his mother and mine.

Salute Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermas, Patrobas, Hermes, and the bretheren which are with them.

Salute Philologus, and Julia, Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints which are with them.

Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you.

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
[/quote]

I don't see what the problem is.

As for how Jesus was God, yet didn't know things:

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/mk1332.html

Short explanation of article:

The key for me lies in the verses that indicate a "subordinate" position of Jesus to God the Father. (Like, "The Father is greater than I.") Skeptics often ask how this equates with Jesus being "God" -- the question misses something; we regard Jesus as "God the Son". More literally, Jesus is the Word and Wisdom of God incarnate.

...Jesus does not know the day or the hour because the Father has not yet "spoken" the word yet (in the temporal realm, related to the human nature; this does not speak to knowledge in the eternal realm and the divine nature) that declares the day and hour. But Christ emptied himself of his divine power to come to earth -- as would be needed, for had he not done so, even practically speaking, it would destroy the world! So in this context, the Father has given some signs to look for, but that is all.

There are answers Georges, and it is good to question things, but questioning is not the same as assuming the opposite in a stubborn position.

 

[Georges]

Romans 16:5-17

Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my wellbeloved Epaenetus, who is the firstfruits of Achaia unto Christ.

Greet Mary who bestowed much labour on us.

Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

Greet Amplias my beloved in the Lord.

Salute Urbane, our helper in Christ, and Stachys my beloved.

Salute Apelles approved in Christ. Salute them which are of Aristobulus' household.

These people are Herodians.....kin to Herod....a Roman lackey...who was responsible for installing the illegitimate High Priests in Jerusalem as a political move to appease Rome....with is verse you made a critical tie between Paul and the Herods.....conspiracy...?

[color=red]Salute Herodion my kinsman. Greet them that be of the household of Narcissus, which are in the Lord.




Salute Tryphena and Tryphosa, who labour in the Lord. Salute the beloved Persis, which laboured much in the Lord.

Salute Rufus chosen in the Lord, and his mother and mine.

Salute Asyncritus, Phlegon, Hermas, Patrobas, Hermes, and the bretheren which are with them.

Salute Philologus, and Julia, Nereus, and his sister, and Olympas, and all the saints which are with them.

Salute one another with an holy kiss. The churches of Christ salute you.

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

I don't see what the problem is.

As for how Jesus was God, yet didn't know things:

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/mk1332.html

Short explanation of article:

The key for me lies in the verses that indicate a "subordinate" position of Jesus to God the Father. (Like, "The Father is greater than I.") Skeptics often ask how this equates with Jesus being "God" -- the question misses something; we regard Jesus as "God the Son". More literally, Jesus is the Word and Wisdom of God incarnate.

Well, again I'm not a trinitarian....so....subordianate is just that...Jesus was the Agent of God...and in Jewish leagalese, as a representative of the Father is seen as the Father without being the Father...I do agree that Jesus is the word (Jewish, Memra).

...Jesus does not know the day or the hour because the Father has not yet "spoken" the word yet (in the temporal realm, related to the human nature; this does not speak to knowledge in the eternal realm and the divine nature) that declares the day and hour.

Jesus didn't know, just like the Bridegroom doesn't know the day of his marriage until the Father tells him.

But Christ emptied himself of his divine power to come to earth -- as would be needed, for had he not done so, even practically speaking, it would destroy the world! So in this context, the Father has given some signs to look for, but that is all.

Not sure that is scriptural.....is it?

There are answers Georges, and it is good to question things, but questioning is not the same as assuming the opposite in a stubborn position.

And I appreciate your comment....I always question....gotta know...gotta know. I gotta know how it all fits together....and it does fit together.

[/quote]

 

[Georges]

Here is an interesting history on Paul from...

http://www.essene.com/History&Essenes/NazarAnthro.htm

Paul appears to be a Herodian....and well connected in Roman community. As a Herodian (of some Jewish descent), he would be well connected with the Sadducean (Herodian placed) High Priest line...

According to Eisenman, Paul, who was originally named Saul, was the Saulus referred to in Josephus. This Saulus was the brother of Costobarus, the son of Cypros (wife of Antipater II, whose sister Bernice (1) is the grandmother of the Bernice (2) who, along with Agrippa, interviews Paul in Rome--as reported in Acts). This makes Paul the grandson of Costobarus (the Idumaean) who married Salome the sister of Herod the Great and explains Paul's reference to himself as having kinsmen among the Herodians and, of course, Paul's efforts to root out and kill the Christians in Jerusalem before his conversion. Saulus had a brother Costobarus (2) and sister Cypros (3). Their mother Cypros (2) was married to Antipater (2) (the son of Costobarus (1), the Idumaean, who married Salome (1), the sister of Herod the Great (which Salome had also been married to Joseph, the uncle of Herod (a brother of Antipater (1) whose wife was also named Cypros). Bernice was married to Aristobulus (4) the son of Herod the Great and his wife Mariamme (1) who was executed by his father, when Herod was trying to kill off all those who might lay claim to the Maccabaean High Priest's office. Mariamme was the Maccabean princess and sister of the High Priest Jonathan whom Herod had drowned just after he was installed as HP (and she too was killed by Herod--kicked to death, I think--who had accused her of infidelity with his uncle Joseph, the husband of Salome (1)). Bernice (2) was reputed to be the wealthiest woman in Palestine. Paul dignifies her by referring to her as a "Jew" in Acts although she had, in fact, already renounced Judaism as her religion by that time.

Paul's Herodian background, a connection that Paul himself makes in his writings, explains the protection he gets from the Romans when he's assailed by Jews who are out to get him, and his various references to other Herodians, like Bernice, who seem somewhat sympathetic towards him. Paul's acquaintance and friend Epaphroditas, might well be the person of the same name who was a secretary to Nero (and who helped Nero commit suicide). He's greeted in one of Paul's letters (Phil. 2:25-30; 4:10-18) along with "Caesar's household". Epaphroditus served the next two Caesars but was put to death by the second one (Domitian) around AD 95 for his role in Nero's "suicide" (there was some suspicion that he may not merely have "helped" Nero fall on his sword, but may have actually killed him) and perhaps for being a secret Christian as well. He was, by the way, the reputed publisher of Josephus's works, and Josephus disappears from history about the same time.

Eisenman also believes Paul to have been the "Liar" referred to in several of the Qumran scrolls, the enemy of the "Teacher of Righteousness" (who is, of course, according to Eisenman, none else but James the brother of Jesus). This equating of the early following of Jesus with the Qumran community is unorthodox, but if one accepts this claim, it does really cast some of the writings of Paul and their stark contrasts with the Epistle of James into an intriguing light. Paul clearly did find himself at odds with James and the "Jerusalem Assembly" as reported in Acts over issues such as whether Gentile converts had to conform to the Law (eg., whether they had to be circumcised to be "Christians" and over the issue of whether it is polluting to eat with Gentiles, even converted ones). Paul's enmity with Peter, whom he calls a hypocrite for the fact that he customarily ate with Greek Christians _until_ other Brethren showed up from Jerusalem. Paul repeatedly asserts that he is a true apostle even though he lacks the supporting paperwork from James and is not "an Apostle of men" and that he should be seen as having the same rights as do the other Apostles and he denies repeatedly that he is an Enemy of a "liar", while James (who Eisenman portrays as an upholder of the Law) condemns as an "Enemy" those (like Paul) who make themselves "friends of the world". Eisenman plays on all this as being a manifestation of the Qumran Teacher of Righteousness versus the "Enemy" or "Liar". Whether they were synonymous or not, the parallels between the Qumran writings and early Christian views intriguing. Throwing out his claim that they were the same people, the scrolls still give us a lot of interesting information about the social and religious context within which Christianity arose.

Just some interesting items.....

 

[gingercat]

George,

You give me a headache. Would you stop nitpicking Paul? Remember Jesus selected him as His servant? I hope you are not obsessed with ostracizing him.