Sola scriptura has no strong and reliable foundation!

[Righttruth]

Did Paul mislead people in his epistles?

In a way yes, because verses are being considered piece-wise for convenience. His letters were specifically addressed to specific congregations that were growing in spiritual knowledge with specific problems, and, therefore, they cannot be blindly applied to fully grown churches of today and make them universally applicable.

 

[Righttruth]

In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul preaches the same Gospel message as Christ in Luke 24:40ff.

Paul also quotes the Lord here in 1 Corinthians 11:

1 Corinthians 11: KJV

23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

The apostle Paul stated he was taught directly by Jesus Christ :

Galatians 1: KJV

11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:

14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,

16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.

21 Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia;

22 And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ:

23 But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.

24 And they glorified God in me.


Taking into consideration the above, one can only come to two conclusions:

1. Paul is faithfully delivering the message of Jesus Christ.

2. Paul is deceiving the Galatians.

There is no wiggle room here. Paul threw down the gauntlet in Galatians chapter 1.

So what is it? #1 or #2?

They are unrelated. His epistles miss out the very important essence of Jesus' preaching. Many of his claims are not supported by other sources.

 

[ToBeLoved]

They are unrelated. His epistles miss out the very important essence of Jesus' preaching. Many of his claims are not supported by other sources.

The other apostles validate Paul. How much closer can you get than those who were with Christ?

 

[Righttruth]

It is ludacris to think that Christ had to say everything before Paul could. There are not even that many words of Christ in the Bible when compared with the rest of the New Testament. That is not proof of anythiing.

Also, give a thought to that if Paul wrote 1 Timothy also, he would know what he had written.

The Holy Spirit was sent to remind of Jesus' words not supplements from a rank outsider.

The authorship of all pastoral letters are disputed.

 

[Righttruth]

The other apostles validate Paul. How much closer can you get than those who were with Christ?

Who says that? The authorship of 2 Peter is disputed. Marcion might have had a hand on that! John says any other claim of apostleship is a lie.

 

[ToBeLoved]

The Holy Spirit was sent to remind of Jesus' words not supplements from a rank outsider.

The authorship of all pastoral letters are disputed.

I never mentioned the Holy Spirit. I was talking about Christ's words and then Paul's. Please address that.

 

[redleghunter]

In a way yes, because verses are being considered piece-wise for convenience. His letters were specifically addressed to specific congregations that were growing in spiritual knowledge with specific problems, and, therefore, they cannot be blindly applied to fully grown churches of today and make them universally applicable.

Please look at my post again.

Either Paul is outright misleading the Galatians in chapter 1 or he is telling them the truth that he was directly taught by the Risen Christ.

Which is it. There's no wiggle room here.

 

[redleghunter]

They are unrelated. His epistles miss out the very important essence of Jesus' preaching. Many of his claims are not supported by other sources.

Absolutely related. Paul preaches the same Gospel as Christ and the disciples who walked with Christ. This is abundantly clear:

Acts 15: KJV

7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.

8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;

9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

1 Corinthians 15: KJV

15 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand;

2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain.

3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;

4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:

6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.

7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.

8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.

9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.

10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

11 Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.

Luke 24: KJV

44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behooved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:

47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

48 And ye are witnesses of these things.

 

[Philip_B]

Just to remind myself

 

[~Anastasia~]

Thank you for your kind welcome.

Just out of curiosity - is it considered "goading" or "flaming" speech when somebody tells lies about your Church?
Can posters here lie about the beliefs or history of a particular church just to be antagonistic??

For example, if I were to tell a fellow poster that every single one of their adherents was a flaming homosexual and that their church was founded by Satan worshippers - without producing one shred of proof - would that be okay?

OR, is that kind of post considered "goading" or "flaming"?

I'm trying to help you out here - I'm not your enemy.

I think pm is better.

 

[Righttruth]

I never mentioned the Holy Spirit. I was talking about Christ's words and then Paul's. Please address that.

All writings will have to be understood with the help of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Righttruth]

Please look at my post again.

Either Paul is outright misleading the Galatians in chapter 1 or he is telling them the truth that he was directly taught by the Risen Christ.

Which is it. There's no wiggle room here.

That is his claim. Take the help of the Holy Spirit to verify all writings and claims.

 

[redleghunter]

To prove anything you need at least two witnesses or two other sources. Not based on the self-claims. Luke is another rank outsider and close friend of Paul, so his endorsement has no much value.

Peter and James confirmed the ministry of Paul and Barnabas at the council of Jerusalem. Acts 15.

 

[Righttruth]

Peter and James confirmed the ministry of Paul and Barnabas at the council of Jerusalem. Acts 15.

The beginning of the ministry was one thing and subsequent letters to specific congregations and their problems is another thing. You know many deserted Paul later. His letters were, I think, after Acts 15

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

This thread is closed for staff review. ​

 

[98cwitr]

MOD HAT

Thread has been reopened for now. Please be respectful towards others, and refrain from being rude toward one another:

1 Cor. 10 I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought.

You dont have the agree with one another, but you can converse without being rude Im sure! Happy posting​

 

[redleghunter]

The beginning of the ministry was one thing and subsequent letters to specific congregations and their problems is another thing. You know many deserted Paul later. His letters were, I think, after Acts 15

Many? How many? Other than Barnabas and Mark going to Crete, show me.

 

[Philip_B]

ummmmm, I suggest you READ my statement again:
It wasn’t until the 4th century that the Church under the guidance of the Holy Sprit declared the Canon officially. There was only ONE Christian Church in the 4th century - and that was the CATHOLIC Church. There was no Orthodox, Protestant or any other. If YOU can show me proof of another - be my guest . . .

I have no desire to contest with you, but I would ask that you approach the Forum more as a place of reasoned conversation with a touch more respect for people with alternative views, which may not be as much at odds with your proposition as you might first immediately think.

You say 'there was only one Christian Church in the 4th Century'. It would of course be more honest to say that the Church was one in the Fourth Century. There was of course the Church surrounding the Patriarch of Jerusalem, and the Church surrounding the Patriarch of Antioch, and the Church surrounding the Patriarch of Alexandria, and the Church surrounding the Patriarch of Constantinople, and the Church surrounding the Patriarch of Rome. And that does not mean that there was not significant division within the Church, not least of which might be seen in the disputes that gave rise to the two great Oecumenical Councils of the 4th Century, Arianism and Manicheanism, the Councils in question being the 1st Council of Nicaea in 325 and the 1st Council of Constantinople in 183.

The sense of the Catholic Church of which you appear to speak is a more modern phenomenon, which perhaps might see it's origins in the greater assertion of the Petrine Office, through a series of events that lead to the Great Schism in 1054.

Augustine and others certainly regarded the Canon of scripture set in the period following the 1st Council of Constantinople. Some part of this may have to do with the promulgation of the Vulgate from around 382, and the work of St Jerome. The canon was essentially the canon affirmed at the Council of Trent in your tradition and again at Vatican II in your tradition.

I have indicated to you previously that you posts are made more difficult to read as a result of the radical use you make of various text formatting options, I would simply ask again for the benefit who are trying to understand what you are saying that you exercise some restraint in it.

Pax dominus vobiscum

 

[ToBeLoved]

All writings will have to be understood with the help of the Holy Spirit.

You are not addressing my question.

 

[ToBeLoved]

It's not truth that concerns me about your posts - it's heresy . . .


No - they just weren't considered to be inspired Scripture.
Do you think that everything that is not Scripture is false??

What a limited view of life . . .

ummmmm, I suggest you READ my statement again:
It wasn’t until the 4th century that the Church under the guidance of the Holy Sprit declared the Canon officially.

There was only ONE Christian Church in the 4th century - and that was the CATHOLIC Church. There was no Orthodox, Protestant or any other.

If YOU can show me proof of another - be my guest . . .

At the fancy of "callers"?
It is the will of Almighty God that confects the Eucharist.

It's unfortunate that YOU refer to him as a "caller" . . .

Sounds like YOU need to brush up on your Greek.
Jesus used the literal words Flesh, indicating that we were to EAT it - and Blood, indicating that we were to DRINK it.

Absolutely.
Unfortunately for YOU - Jesus didn't guarantee the individual that the Holy Spirit would guide him to ALL Truth. He only guaranteed the CHURCH as a whole.

The fallacy that individuals are guided to ALL Truth is why you have almost 50,000 disjointed, perpetually-splintering sects - ALL teaching different doctrines yet ALL claiming to have the "Truth."

And you're not going to find that in any of those divided sects . . .

And rejecting of Christ's Church is rejecting of HIM.

I have - and you're perverting it.

Uhhh, no.
I'm talking about the scales that cover your eyes - like the ones that fell from Saul/Paul's eyes when he woke up to the truth . . .

Try to remember which sub-forum you are in. This is "Controversial Christian Theology" this is the sub-forum where people can get controversial.

It helps to use Bible verses rather than our own words sometime.