Let’s say that Paul’s letters contain the seeds of things that can lead to very problematic theologies. But Paul himself, with his emphasis on freedom and his rejection of moral sanctity and literalism, isn’t so bad. His main problem, in my opinion, is his almost pathological fear of scandal, which leads him to accept too many things from his society in order not to offend anyone.
Eh, the moral sanctity of faith > works? Paul was selling. He wanted to be the guy, so he massaged the message a bit to make it more marketable. You can make an argument for moving away from the stricter OT observances, but again the result was an overcorrection.
Let’s say that Paul’s letters contain the seeds of things that can lead to very problematic theologies. But Paul himself, with his emphasis on freedom and his rejection of moral sanctity and literalism, isn’t so bad. His main problem, in my opinion, is his almost pathological fear of scandal, which leads him to accept too many things from his society in order not to offend anyone.
Eh, the moral sanctity of faith > works? Paul was selling. He wanted to be the guy, so he massaged the message a bit to make it more marketable. You can make an argument for moving away from the stricter OT observances, but again the result was an overcorrection.
If you put intentions on people, it’s easy to dismiss any idea.
And if you ignore all the evidence, it’s easy to dismiss obvious intentions.