John V. Peter

Post Reply New Topic

Who is better? use whatever measurements you want explain if you wish. I may explain why I'm asking later.

Pete who? John who?

ruveyn

john the baptist, peter who was i think saul at one point?

That was Saul of Tarsus who later called himself Paul.

So your question is now John vs. Paul. That is like choosing between a bad skin condition and intestinal rot.

ruveyn

bah one sec i'll go and use google to see who the f*ck I'm talking about.

Peter the apostle, as for the whole two diseases thing, meh.

You may want to edit the poll to say 'John the Baptist' - There are two Johns who play major roles in the New Testament, and probably most people are going to think of the "other one".

For the sake of the poll, I'll go with John the Baptist - purely on the question of personality. He was the first (alright, the first after Simeon and Anna) to recognize Christ for who He was, and stood up and said so. And he kept on speaking up, on that and other things, until he was killed for it. He doesn't strike me as the kind to deny truth out of fear for his life, the way Peter did.

can't edit the poll

Better is to whom for what.

John the Baptist is an eccentric probable ennea-7 fool for God. Not my personal style, but unquestionably important.

Paul < Saul is a keenly intelligent ennea-1 who manages to transcend 1-ness into mystical union. I would not want to share an office but he is very good of his kind and important.

John the Beloved is a rather incoherent mystical ennea-4 who somehow attracted a following - rare for the 4. I get on well with 4s, like him the best though it is not alays clear where he is coming from.

Simon aka Rocky is a hick workingclass ennea-8, not that into anything but street smarts but with a big heart capable of more humbling than is usual for the 8. I have shared an office with one pretty much like him. Good guy.

Hope that helps

Paul set out to destroy Christianity (as Jesus taught it) and he succeeded. How? By taking a Jewish reform movement and putting in the hands of Gentiles. Paul wins and the Ebeonites lose. James is vanquished.

ruveyn

Hmnn.

John was Jesus' cousin.

Peter betrayed Jesus.

Hmmm

Actually Peter denied Jesus. He did not betray Jesus. That was more in Judas Iscariot's department.

ruveyn

Paul set out to destroy Christianity (as Jesus taught it) and he succeeded. How? By taking a Jewish reform movement and putting in the hands of Gentiles. Paul wins and the Ebeonites lose. James is vanquished.

ruveyn[/quote]

I would not say that [after his conversion] Paul was out "to destroy Christianity". It is very true that Paul was NOT one of the twelve in attendance and had to get his Christianity 2nd hand or by direct revelation, so a lot is his take. It is very true he was filled with Pharisaical [prime sense] and Hellenistic learning which impinged on his take. AND in that he WAS ennea-1 and in the midst of the inevitable rise of the organization church he predictably put in a lot of rules and structure which had nothing to do with Jesus who [whether on not we see him as instituting the priesthood] was NOT running an organization.

I do not see the letting in of the Gentiles as that big a deal and certainly not as contravening anything Jesus taught, lost sheep or nay.

peter... because that's my name.

If you were to believe the bible, Jesus sent Paul to the church through visions and stuff, so it was Jesus' plan all along.

Now, if you don't believe the bible, then they may all as well be fictional characters.

Well the question allows for either so whatever floats your boat.

Both sound hot to me but peter gets my vote ok.