Are we prisoners of sin

yes, she has! It's called the synoptic gospels: Matt, Mark & Luke. If you read them you'll find that Jesus never taught he was an atonement sacrifice, never taught about the original sin affecting future generations and never taught about the need to have faith in the notion of himself as a means of absolving past and future sins. Paul introduced all that, not Jesus. Don't you guys read your bibles? No he wasn't! He just said he was. maybe, but he failed to tell us (and his disciples) that a few years after his death there would be the need for a new person -one who had never even met Jesus- to come and tell us about all these other doctrines that Jesus had clearly forgotten aboutGood job the Spirit of Truth is there to fill in the gaps, eh?!

---

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

You're saying that the one and only God who sent his only Son to die in order to save mankind failed to ensure that all of his teachings were captured in the sole accounts of his ministry?! So Jesus realised later on that were a few things about sin and stuff that weren't written down, slapped his forehead and said "dear God, how did I miss that? Hey Paul matey, come here a minute I've got a favout to ask" ?! Powers and miracles were also given to Simon Magus, Apollonius of Tyana, Joseph Smith and a number of Indian gurus, amongst others. I take it then that you consider all those people to have been working with Gods spirit, just like Paul and the Apostles, right?!

---

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

But the bible wasn't compiled by God - it was compiled by men. Actually there are many bibles, though probably the one you worship was compiled by the council of Nicea, 4th century AD, about 300 years after Jesus's death. So because something is in the bible doesn't mean it's inspired, it just means some bishops decided it should be there! Not true, they did disagree with Paul, some of them vehemently! Haven't you read James, Jesus's own brother? He explicitly declared that deeds and actions are the mechanism of salvation and NOT faith only, in a deliberate and direct contradiction to Paul's statements. He not only made his point, but went so far as to use the exact same words as Paul, in the exact same sequence and syntax, using the same scriptural references and examples. LOL! Have you ever thought about how many people in the world claim that God talks to them and that unexplained things happen to them? How many people claim that they've seen or performed miracles? Following your reasoning, they're all working for God and we should start following their teachings!This is no evidence, just wishful thinking on your behalf!

---

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

That doesn't address my point. You claimed that not all that Jesus taught was penned in the gospels. I counter-claimed that this would nullify the whole purpose of Jesus's life. If Jesus came to die in order to redeem us why didn't he say so himself? Why did he wait for years later for another man (who didn't even know Jesus and who is never mentioned by Jesus) to make this, most important teaching of Jesus's ministry? It's just absurd. It's making Jesus/God to be some kind of forgetful, make-it-up-as-we-go-along charlatan. Again, you're not addressing my point. You claimed that:

quote:

---

But what proved that Paul and the other Apostles wrote under inspiration is that they were given the holy spirit and given powers and miracles

---

so I'm saying that there are many other people throughout the ages who were given powers and miracles, therefore by your reasoning they were inspired by God. Whether they believe in your God or not is neither here nor there, if anything it's something that should get you thinking about the validity of your beliefs. If there is only one God and he gives powers and miracles to people who don't even believe in him then maybe you should reconsider your stance. Ofcourse there could be many Gods, each granting power and miracles to their followers.Either way,you must surely concede that performing miracles doesn't qualify one as inspired by the NT God.

---

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

Actually the "forgiveness of sins" bit is added only in Matthew and is widely acknowledged as redactional. There are many accounts of Jesus preaching to crowds in the synoptics, including the Sermon on the Mount -arguably his longest sermon to his largest audience- and not once does Jesus feel the need to mention the 'atonement sacrifice' idea. Given that, as you believe, this was the lynchpin of his very existence on earth, you would have thought that this teaching would have come up at least once (and more than just a reference in passing) in the three separate accounts of his ministry. This raises the interesting question of "how can you tell which is which?" If there is indeed a Satan who possesses great power and opposes God what better way for him to discredit Jesus by sending a born-again miracle worker to 'complement' and 'spread' the word of Jesus? And how exactly can you tell whether something originates with God? - let me guess: if it's found in the bible then it's God's, if not then it's sorcery and witchery. Sorry, but that's a bad case of circular reasoning if I ever saw one.At the end of the day many people from different backgrounds and religions have been claimed to perform miracles and there's no way you can tell which ones are God-inspired and which ones aren't. This applies to Paul as much as to anyone else.

---

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

Neither was Paul. So did Paul, if by Christian teachings you mean Jesus' teachings. Neither did Paul have any eye witnesses to the event he claims happened to him.Yet to choose to believe one and not the other. Why the double standards?BTW, Smith did actually provide eye witness testimony for the golden plates, 8 witnesses IIRC, although most of them recanted later. That's still more than Paul managed.

---

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"

The NT is full of Pauline theology (as your references attest) which proclaims the atonement sacrifice of Jesus. What I've been saying all along is that Jesus himself, in the three direct accounts of his ministry, doesn't teach this doctrine or even brings it up, apart from the one brief instance you mentioned which is clearly a redaction. In fact, when directly and explictly asked what one needs to do to gain eternal life Jesus doesn't say "have faith in me for I'll die for your sins", he says "love God and your neighbour as yourself". Jesus not teaching such rubbish actually makes a lot of sense, as he was a devout Jew preaching to other Jews and the idea of Him as an atonement sacrifice is ridiculous on a number of levels, from a Jewish perspective. That's just self-fulfilling prophecy. You believe Paul to be empowered by God because he says he's the last one to perform miracles ?! This could equally be claimed by anyone at any time. It means absolutely nothing.

---

"We must respect the law, not let it blind us away from the basic principles of fairness, justice and freedom"