Did Paul distort the message of Jesus.. and are the gospels in the New Testament biased towards the gentiles understanding of Jesus' message?
How about James and the Jewish conception of Jesus and his message, which kinda lost out to Paul's interpretation..?

Well, *I* certainly don't think so! :p

I don't see any evidence of a "school of James" which has a "Jewish interpretation" of Jesus at odds with Paul.

Remember, Paul was not a Gentile (that means 'non-Jew'). Paul was not only a Jew but a Rabbi and a Pharisee, trained in Torah and scripture. He was a leader among the "anti-Jesus" party among the Jews before his conversion and led stonings and arrests of Christians. His letters are steeped in Jewish ideas and the learning of the Old Testament.

Paul's Gospel, the one recorded by his assistant Luke, doesn't seem radically different from the others and in fact it is John's Gospel, not Luke's that seems to stress themes like Jesus' divinity more than the others.

In any case, all the evidence we have is that the other Apostles accepted Paul as a full apostle with them and that all the early leaders of the Church accepted his authority too. We have records of meetings of the Apostles in the Book called "Acts" and the First Letter of Peter mentions "our brother Paul".

I don't think there was any distortion at all.

And in any case, the whole idea of a "school of James" and similar notions is I think an invention of modern scripture scholars with too much imagination and too much time on their hands.

I don't think there was any distortion at all.

And in any case, the whole idea of a "school of James" and similar notions is I think an invention of modern scripture scholars with too much imagination and too much time on their hands.

Will you elaborate , please?

I think scholars who study the Bible AND THE QURAN ALSO without the perspective of religious faith, tend to come up with a lot of "fancy theories".

To them, there isn't a divine explanation for the religions, so they have to come up with a human one.

The problem with many modern Bible scholars is that they come up with any number of different theories and they theories they come up with tend to contradict each other and to change over the years.

And their theories are all based on the assumption that they are dealing with a merely human material and history.

This theory about Paul and James is attractive to Muslims because it tends to support their idea of a "distorted Bible".

But of course, if James really contradicts Paul, why did ALL CHRISTIANS keep the letter of James in the Bible? Why didn't we "distort it" out and get rid of it?

I think scholars who study the Bible AND THE QURAN ALSO without the perspective of religious faith, tend to come up with a lot of "fancy theories".



This theory about Paul and James is attractive to Muslims because it tends to support their idea of a "distorted Bible".


Dear Jeff,
We are here to learn from each other, we wish to find truth.
Hope you have no disagreement with this thesis.
We are here not to mock or make fun with others believe.
Your faith un to you.

Oh, no, I wasn't making fun.

I think this kind of thing is true for all of us.

Everyone tends to more easily believe that things that make their religion look good and strong and the others to look less so. This is a human failing that we all share.

I think the question is very reasonable and many have asked it. But in the end, I think it doesn't lead anywhere helpful. And I've just tried to explain why, that's all.