Who is the founder of Christianity?

[Grace Seeker]

What verses, other than written by Paul, clearly put forward the Christian "plan of salvation" with belief in Jesus as God incarnate and his death as the redeeming sacrifice for cleansing past, present and future mankind their sins?

If you are looking for the exact phrase "plan of salvation", you will only find it once in the entire Bible: "Meanwhile, we've got our hands full continually thanking God for you, our good friends—so loved by God! God picked you out as his from the very start. Think of it: included in God's original plan of salvation by the bond of faith in the living truth. This is the life of the Spirit he invited you to through the Message we delivered, in which you get in on the glory of our Master, Jesus Christ." (2 Thessalonians 2:13)

But here's the thing, even to get that phrase, I had to search multiple different English translations till someone chose to use that particular turn of a phrase, and that translation (The Message) was actually a paraphrase. (Compare with how the NIV & KJV translate the same verse: NIV--"But we ought always to thank God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth." KJV--"But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth.")


The point being that not even Paul puts forward in so many words what you question is ever put forward by others. Rather, we Christians interpret Paul to have proposed a "plan of salvation". And I agree that indeed Paul does do that. So, I am not saying that The Message was incorrect in their use of that phrase. Rather I am saying that if we understand what others are saying, they too are putting forward what you speak of as "the Christian 'plan of salvation' with belief in Jesus as God incarnate and his death as the redeeming sacrifice for cleansing past, present and future mankind their sins." But you aren't going to find it expressed as "Here is the plan of salvation" by them any more than you did by Paul, for not even Paul says it that way -- Look at what The Message version of 2 Thessalonians 2:13 says about this "plan of salvation", nothing about Jesus' redeeming sacrifice at all, but God's picking of us and life in the Spirit.

Now repeatedly you will find the message that Jesus did die and was raised again from the dead in NT writer after writer. Several times in Acts we have Peter delivering sermons and addressing the Sanhedrin declaring this as both part of God's plan, and that belief in Jesus is a means for salvation. Though the terms "redeeming sacrifice" are not mentioned there, how is this message so different from Paul's? Look at what Peter says in his own letter:

1 Peter 1

1Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,
To God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, 2who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood:
Grace and peace be yours in abundance.

3Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade—kept in heaven for you, 5who through faith are shielded by God's power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. 6In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. 7These have come so that your faith—of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire—may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed. 8Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, 9for you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls.
10Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, 11trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. 12It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things.

who have been chosen -- see how similar this line is to Paul's in 2 Thessalonians, "God chose you", which The Message turns in its paraphrase to the only reference by Paul to a "plan of salvation".

sprinkling by his blood -- a beautiful reference to the temple's blood sacrifices that were indeed for redeeming the people from their sins. I know you know enough about both Judaism and the Tanakh to understand this reference without me going on about it in detail.

he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead -- but whereas the blood sacrifices just gave temporary relief, Jesus' sacrifice gives permament redemption in the form of a "new birth" (a phrase found not only in Paul, but also in John)

the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls -- if the object of faith for Paul is salvation, how much more so does Peter assert the same thing here.




But it is not just Peter and Paul, the unknown writer of Hebrews has the same essential message:

Hebrews 2
14Since the children have flesh and blood, he [Jesus] too shared in their humanity (incarnation) so that by his death he might destroy him who holds the power of death—that is, the devil— 15and free those who all their lives were held in slavery by their fear of death. 16For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham's descendants. 17For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement (redeeming sacrifice) for the sins of the people.

And then turning to John:

1 John 1
1That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked at and our hands have touched—this we proclaim concerning the Word of life. (incarnation) 2The life appeared; we have seen it and testify to it, and we proclaim to you the eternal life, which was with the Father and has appeared to us. 3We proclaim to you what we have seen and heard, so that you also may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4We write this to make our joy complete.
Walking in the light
5This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. 6If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth. 7But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin. (redeeming sacrifice)

There are, I believe, three other writers besides Paul: Peter, John, and the unknown writer of Hebrews that I believe clearly put forward what you asked for regarding a Christian "plan of salvation", a belief in Jesus as God incarnate and in his death as a redeeming sacrifice for sin. There are more verses scattered throughout scripture if you want me to keep listing them.

 

[syed saboor]

Hello, again. I just wanted to let all of you know that there is a great book written by a Jewish scholar, Hyam Maccoby. The book is called "The Mythmaker: Paul and the Invention of Christianity." The book does a very good job in outlining how Paul used pagan philosophy and ideas to come up with the Christian religion. In addition, Bart D. Ehrman, a preeminent expert on Christianity, wrote several books in which he examines, to a certain extent, the role Paul had in the creation of the Christian religion. My advice to all of you is to go on amazon.com and look up both of these authors.

I just wanted to add about this whole discussion about who founded Christianity. It is true that Paul helped to found the Christian religion, but it would be unfair just to limit it to Paul. Afterall, there were other people involved in the creation of the Christian religion as well. For instance, the early Church fathers and the Emperor Constantine. They developed Christian belief and put the final touches to this man-made relgion.

For two thousand years, Christianity has been a religion that has evolved and
adapted itself to the local circumstances that it came across. Islam has remained unchanged for fourteen hundred years. I think everybody in this post, did a good job in contributing to an excellent topic that needs serious study and contemplation.

 

[ricardo_sousa]

They developed Christian belief and put the final touches to this man-made relgion.

Islam also also made by mans. Muhammad was a man. And all the biographers that write about the life of Muhammad were men. Now of course, Muhammad was under the "influence" of Allah... But in the end he was just a man.

So all religions were "man-made". Because the Christians claim that the men that "build" the foundations of Christianity were also under the influence of God. That argument don´t permit a fair discussion. Is like the "prove vs disprove God".

 

[MustafaMc]

Islam also also made by mans. Muhammad was a man. And all the biographers that write about the life of Muhammad were men. Now of course, Muhammad was under the "influence" of Allah... But in the end he was just a man.

So all religions were "man-made". Because the Christians claim that the men that "build" the foundations of Christianity were also under the influence of God. That argument don´t permit a fair discussion. Is like the "prove vs disprove God".

Yes, there is no question that Muhammad (saaws) was a man and that he was the Messenger of Allah through which Islam was established as the way of life that is approved by Allah (swt). However, I would have to disagree that Islam is man-made. In my opinion, it takes a smaller "leap of faith" to believe that Muhammad (saaws) was preaching and practiced a Divine Message that was revealed by Allah (swt) through the Angel Jibra'il to Muhammad (saaws) than it does for Christians to believe that their religion traces back to God without corruption from pagan influences.

 

[syed saboor]

It's one thing to call a certain religion a man-made religion, but man-made religions in particular have the characteristic of being reflective of human desires and qualities. No where is this most evident than in Christianity. The Christian religion has anthropomorphized God to such an extent, that God has become like a man in every aspect of the word. He eats, he drinks, he gets emotional, and what have you.

The Quran is mostly written in the first person, whereas the Bible is written in mostly the third person. If one reads the Bible, they come across numerous stories depicting graphic displays of human sexuality, which are not to be found in the Quran. Now, tell me, which is the word of God. Yes, the hadeeth does graphically describe sex, but as a part of the education of Muslims, and it is not the word the God; the Quran is. In fact, many atheists have denounced the Bible, along with Muslims, as a book of pornography. For further research on this topic, please consult Ben Akerley's book, "The X-Rated Bible."

Lastly, the Quran is direct on theological issues. If one reads the Bible, for instance, one does not really get an idea of what a Christian is to believe in, whether it's the trinity, or the divinity of chirst, or what is right and what is wrong. The Quran is the ultimate and final revelation, which does more to cover what is right and what is wrong. Also, related with this, is the fact that as Muslims, we believe Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) is our example, and in Islam we have a religion and a way of life, by following the sunna of Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h.).

Paul, when he wrote his epistles, left mankind in the dark about many things concerning Prophet Isa. In fact, even to this day Christians don't what to believe and how to conduct themselves in life.

 

[MustafaMc]

Interesting that I could find few references to "saved" in the 4 gospels or in Acts. ​

In the Gospel according to Matthew, the angel said that Jesus will save people from their sins, but doesn't say how. Mt 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name JESUS; for it is he that shall save his people from their sins.​

In the Gospel according to John, salvation is through believing "on the name of the only begotten Son of God", but there is no mention of believing that he died on the cross for one's sins. Jn 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life. 17 For God sent not the Son into the world to judge the world; but that the world should be saved through him. 18 He that believeth on him is not judged: he that believeth not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God. and in 10:9 Jesus says he is the door to salvation, but does not mention his death. I am the door; by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and go out, and shall find pasture.​

In the Gospel according to Mark, before Jesus' accension he sent the disciples out to preach the "gospel", but does not define what the gospel is. Mk 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to the whole creation. 16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned.​

In the Gospel according to Luke, Jesus told the publican Zacchaeus that he and his household was saved even before Jesus' "death" with no mention of it to occur later. Lk 19:9 And Jesus said unto him, To-day is salvation come to this house, forasmuch as he also is a son of Abraham. 10 For the Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost.​

In the Acts of the Apostles, after Jesus' accension Peter says in 2:21And it shall be, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. with no mention of believing that Jesus died for one's sins.​

Notice that nothing approaching what can be recognized as the Christian "plan of salvation" is written until Romans 5:8-9, 10:9-10, I Cor 1:18. The first time that I see gospel is defined is in I Co 15:1 Now I make known unto you brethren, the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye received, wherein also ye stand, 2 by which also ye are saved, if ye hold fast the word which I preached unto you, except ye believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which also I received: that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 and that he was buried; and that he hath been raised on the third day according to the scriptures;​

My perspective is that the plan of salvation is poorly defined until the letters written by Paul. I understand that we disagree on this point.​

 

[Grace Seeker]

My perspective is that the plan of salvation is poorly defined until the letters written by Paul. I understand that we disagree on this point.​

​

Ah, but we don't necessarily. In this case you added an adjective that I can accept. Yes, some of the concepts are poorly defined apart from Paul's articulation of them. However, I contend that such articulation was NOT the genesis of these ideas. You did after all find some references in other's writings. I particularly look to see what was being preached in Acts before Paul came on the scene.​

 

[Zarmina]

Paul is the true founder of Christianity. Jesus only wanted to clean up Judaism, he did not want to start a whole new religion.

 

[ricardo_sousa]

It's one thing to call a certain religion a man-made religion, but man-made religions in particular have the characteristic of being reflective of human desires and qualities. No where is this most evident than in Christianity. The Christian religion has anthropomorphized God to such an extent, that God has become like a man in every aspect of the word. He eats, he drinks, he gets emotional, and what have you.

and why that is not the correct "definition" of God? Maybe God do drink and do get emotional.... Why not? Because of the Koran? But for Christians the Koran have no meaning. So you say that a religion is "man-made" because it definition of God is "human".

So if a say that God is a "green creature that eat stones" and call my religion "Non-Sense", my religion is valid under your definition, because God is far away from being a human?

 

[Grace Seeker]

Paul is the true founder of Christianity. Jesus only wanted to clean up Judaism, he did not want to start a whole new religion.

Jesus preached a message about the Kingdom of God. I'm not sure that is what I would call cleaning up Judaism, after all he did institute a whole new covenant in the Lord's Supper:

Luke 22:19-20
19And he took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and gave it to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me."

20In the same way, after the supper he took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you.

And the use of the term "Christian" was not one that Paul or any other Christian took upon themselves, but was applied to them by outsiders with derision. However those who were "followers of the way" accepted the label and we still use it. What Paul did was to be among the first to focus on the value of the cross as a means that God used to accomplish his redemptive purposes. But, again, he was not alone in this for many other NT writers picked up on that focus as well. If Paul had not had the support of the other disciples, I don't think that he would have had the impact that he did. Therefore, I don't think that it is possible to identify any one person as the "founder" of Chrsitianity. Rather, it was the ethos of the community itself that gave rise to the religion that revered Jesus as THE Christ and claimed that those who put their faith in him could have a new and reconciled relationship with God through the Christ. I believe Jesus himself put that in motion when he met with two of his disciples on the road to Emmaus "and beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he explained to them what was said in all the Scriptures concerning himself" (Luke 24:27).

 

[Yanal]

Most Christians think Christianity was found by Paul a preacher or Jesus(Prophet Isa).

 

[Grace Seeker]

Most Christians think Christianity was found by Paul a preacher or Jesus(Prophet Isa).

Most Christians would probably say Jesus. And most secular schoolbooks in western countries would probably say the same as well. But obviously that isn't the case, as Jesus was no longer on earth when Christianity finally emerged as a separate sect onto itself.

I'm just suggesting that you can't say it was Paul either. I think the problem is with the word "Founder". Christianity wasn't exactly "founded" at all.

Jesus made the following promise to Peter: "I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church" (Matthew 16:18). So, if anyone, we should probably consider Peter the founder. But in reality, it seems to have been more of a movement, starting small and growing. There were multiple leaders at the time. Peter was the chief of the apostles. But James was the head of the Church in Jerusalem and ruled over the earliest councils. While Paul spread it farther and wide across the Roman empire. And forgotten in all of this are the other disciples who took the faith to Egypt and India and other parts of the non-Roman world. My contention is that it was not any ONE person, but a group effort.

For a poor parrallel, look at the United States of America. Who founded it? We refer to George Washington as the "father of our country." But it was Thomas Jefferson who wrote the Declaration of Independence and James Madison who largely crafted the Constitution. Then what of Samuel Adams who gave leadership to the 1775 revolts in Boston? Some might want to point to one figure or another, but again it seems to me it was a group effort. Hence we refer to our Founding Fathers in the plural. I believe this is every bit as true of Christianity. And those who read more than a surface history of the Church can surely see this for themselves.

 

[Yanal]

Very clever question indeed. I think in your religion from a Christianity view I saw Jesus told Paul who preached many people and spread the religion massively over Europe because in my social studies text book we learn about Paul and how he spread the word,by mailing,walking and openly preaching.

That is my perspective and I will try to answer any questions redirected to me by this post.

 

[Danah]

I voted according to what I have been told by many Christians and read on the internet. Its Paul!

 

[Musilman]

Paul

 

[Yanal]

^can you explain why and not look at the majority of answers because each answer is right in a way.

 

[i love allah]

i dont know and dont like any of the options

 

[i love allah]

but first question is which christianity we are discussing here.

if you talk about original christianity, then God gave through jesus (pbuh) guidance called Injeel.

but if you talk about present day christianity (with all its corruption), then its Paul.

 

[Grace Seeker]

but first question is which christianity we are discussing here.

if you talk about original christianity, then God gave through jesus (pbuh) guidance called Injeel.

but if you talk about present day christianity (with all its corruption), then its Paul.

I understand that you see present day Christianity as different from what you think that Jesus taught. But I don't understand why Paul gets charged with making that change and not Jesus' disciples? After all, Paul was originally a hater of Christianity as taught by the disicples and had to be converted to it. And the thing that he hated was that the disciples were lifting up Jesus as Lord and worshipping Jesus as they did God. It was the disciples, not Paul, who first claimed that salvation was found in no other name than Jesus, a clear violation of the the 1st Commandment as far as Paul was concerned. Paul only became a Christian when he was convinced that Christians were not breaking the first commandment.

 

[Danah]

I understand that you see present day Christianity as different from what you think that Jesus taught. But I don't understand why Paul gets charged with making that change and not Jesus' disciples? After all, Paul was originally a hater of Christianity as taught by the disicples and had to be converted to it. And the thing that he hated was that the disciples were lifting up Jesus as Lord and worshipping Jesus as they did God. It was the disciples, not Paul, who first claimed that salvation was found in no other name than Jesus, a clear violation of the the 1st Commandment as far as Paul was concerned. Paul only became a Christian when he was convinced that Christians were not breaking the first commandment.

thanks for that note....I wanted to make sure about what Christians think about Paul at the beginning