Aaron Abke and Paul.

The amount of energy to just get to this point feels huge. The point of finishing up the last of the three posts I set myself.

I did the Ryan Gable one. Then the Stefan Molyneux one. Now I want to write on Aaron Abke. 

Youtube: dallas: Aaron Abke is wrong about Paul: October 17th 2025:

https://youtu.be/ik9JSnS7D60?si=xYe1uEQVLRg20nY0

I realise as I mention this that it might be better for the readers to have knowledge of where I have been with this. The questions I have had about Christianity and what my faith kind of is. But I am not going to go through that now. So when I talk about this it might seem as though there is something missing. 

This video from dallas. Is covering a previous video by Aaron Abke which I watched and enjoyed and still remember. Not just the factual information but the emotional connection to the information. 

Aaron explained by going through some bible quotes this story of how Paul talks about the disciples. That he called them out infront of each other which is not what you are meant to do. That the story Paul puts forward is a certain one but reading between the lines. This might not be what the situation being described is. It might be in fact that Paul is being unpleasant and the other people in the room are responding as though that is the case.

BUT, as dallas points out. Aaron has strategically quoted here. Not strategically quoted in a way that doesn't matter. Strategically quoted in a way that really changes the story.

What Paul actually says is that he had a disagreement with Peter in Jerusalem. Then he doesn't handle it at the time. He handles it later when Peter comes to Antioch. 

This COMPLETELY changes the story. The narrative that Aaron is putting forward.

Also, looking more at what is being said. Before I was under the impression that it was just a conversation and disagreement between peers of a sort. But the actual text when fully quoted is to do with the disciples having a kind of in group preference for those whom are "circumcised". Whereas Paul wants to make clear that even those uncircumcised are 'worthy of Christs love in a sense'. 

This, along with things I have found from other more pro Paul perspectives. Definitely adds a positive dimension to Pauls teachings. 

Take away:

When you are involved in this much abstraction. Which is inevitable with any serious look at biblical sources because there is a LOT of history and context in a lot of the literature. I often find I have to come back to what I know. That I cannot gain any kind of clarity in the mess of such things. Christianity was kind of secondary in my life. It feels like I am trying to get a foothold in it. It is very relevant, and very powerful. But it doesn't quite make sense at the same time. 

What I have valued then, what I fall back on. Is that logically makes sense to me and the Law of One. 

Listening to an Aaron Abke video recently. I decided to stop doing Communion and immediately felt absolutely awful. Like, I just didn't love a lot of the things in life that I know are good for me. I was unmotivated. It was a little bit of a 'death'. 

And Aaron Abke might have been right. It is not clear where the idea of Communion came from but Pauls letters said it before the gospel. Plus, the taking in, drinking, of "holy" material is very much a pagan thing. 

I don't know why it is good though. But I know it is. I do it because it is talked about in the Law of One. Perhaps that is all I need to do. My spirituality is just a trial and error of what works for me. It is also a following of the Law of One. I pray; when I don't, I get ill. So I pray.

This is the same way I feel about most of Christianity. So much of it is just lost and does not make a great deal of sense. I still feel that people that legitimately follow Jesus should be able to energy heal. He told his disciples to do that. They should be able to do it. 

Norse mythology actually satisfies a lot of these same requirements. It has prayer, it has a kind of communion that is done very frequently I think. It does not have Monotheism. Which is heavy in the Law of One. And kind of non negotiable I think. But it does have other things. For instance, it has a list of nine nobel virtues instead of the commandments:

Courage, Truth, Honour, Fidelity, Discipline, Hospitality, Industriousness, Self Reliance, Perseverence.

It has far less emphasis, perhaps no emphasis. On the pacifist and non violent ways of Jesus. This is a big plus to me. 

Not that this is a serious idea. But it is something worth thinking about I think.