Paul, the False Apostle: Rebuttal of Point 3

[FredVB]

I originally posted:
I don't see Paul adding to or taking away anything, as what was required of gentile believers was already stated. There is more that gentile believers could do, but it was not to be required of them nor were they to be judged in those things. There was indeed expectation that some gentile believers, in the cities that they knew of, with synagogues, would go to hear the scriptures being taught on sabbaths. I understand it that way although there is difficulty with Christian believers in more recent times seeing that. I have given the Sabbath more thought, and recently was more convicted, to do more with it than just think. I found a relevant scripture passage and posted in these forums asking about it, in the thread, What of these passages, do they make you think?, in the Sabbath and the Law forum. The response, with me only asking about it, was with several who responded all accusing me of spreading heresies, and other intolerant things. Clearly there is lack of understanding that we are not to judge each other in these things. But response was with telling me that obedience to Sabbath observation is impossible, no one is doing it, those saying they do are hypocrites. Yet I do agree that the commandments are desirable for us.

That we are not to have blood with the meat from animals is indeed from the covenant through Noah and is for all of humanity since then. Yet who are observing that? As meat from animals was not available for food in the original design from God, which was perfect, and it is only provisionally available for a time, after the flood, in God's promised restoration such won't be available, and sacrifice of animals is no longer to be done since Christ came and the atonement is accomplished, to be food is not why animals are in this creation. They are innocent, it is sin, from us who are fallen humanity, that is the reason that there is death in this world. But why should we still contribute to death? It is not why Christ came. I can see that laws might pertain to a vegetarian diet. And we could indeed grow with learning more in obedience.

How do you interpret Matthew 28:18-20?

I think I have the right view of it, commandments that Christ taught are for all of us who are believers, that we are to do to follow him, and to teach. Yes, I can understand that some don't see that the same way.

So would you agree that Messiah in Mt 28:18-20 commanded that both ethnically Jewish and ethically Gentile believers are to observe the same things, that there is no distinction between either group? Additionally, do you recognize that all 12 apostles were here sent to teach the Gentiles?

I would agree that all are to be taught to observe all the things that Messiah has commanded, that is not that the gentiles were to be made Jewish. Being Jewish might just mean being of the religion of Judaism. Ethnically identified people associated with that might be called Hebrew, but that is basically of a culture or language, or called Israelite. There is no gentile ethnicity, gentiles are of many ethnicities and are such by not being Jewish. There are distinctions, as there are still distinctions between men and women, but we are not separate by distinction in Christ. We are not to treat each other as unequal, or as equal but separate. The twelve apostles were left by the Messiah over all the church of all believers. Paul, who you doubt, was sent to gentiles, answering to the twelve.

I see there is different levels, from doubts, to distrust of Paul, to virulent hatred of him, past rationality to not tolerate others with different understanding. In Christ, the Messiah, there is life, this is of the most importance. This subject in this thread should be discussed with us reasoning together, if it will be discussed at all. It shouldn't be if it can't be reasonably discussed.

 

[ananda]

... But response was with telling me that obedience to Sabbath observation is impossible, no one is doing it, those saying they do are hypocrites. Yet I do agree that the commandments are desirable for us ... That we are not to have blood with the meat from animals is indeed from the covenant through Noah and is for all of humanity since then. Yet who are observing that?

I do not see God as demanding perfect observance of His commandments ... He only requires diligent observation. Diligent observation of those commandments which apply to us is not impossible for faithful believers. For example, "Ye shall diligently keep the commandments of the LORD your God, and his testimonies, and his statutes, which he hath commanded thee. " Deu 6:17 or "Thou hast commanded us to keep thy precepts diligently." Psa 119:4

I think I have the right view of it, commandments that Christ taught are for all of us who are believers, that we are to do to follow him,

Would you agree that to "follow Him" means to do as He did, to believe as He believed, to love as He loved, etc, as diligently as possible?

The twelve apostles were left by the Messiah over all the church of all believers. Paul, who you doubt, was sent to gentiles, answering to the twelve.

How do you reconcile this with Paul's claim that Peter, John, etc. were sent to the Jews only (in contradiction to Messiah's command in Mt 28:18-20), and Paul himself to the rest of the Gentile world (Gal 2:7,8)?

I see there is different levels, from doubts, to distrust of Paul, to virulent hatred of him, past rationality to not tolerate others with different understanding. In Christ, the Messiah, there is life, this is of the most importance. This subject in this thread should be discussed with us reasoning together, if it will be discussed at all. It shouldn't be if it can't be reasonably discussed.

 

[TorahMan]

I do not see God as demanding perfect observance of His commandments ... He only requires diligent observation. Diligent observation of those commandments which apply to us is not impossible for faithful believers. For example, "Ye shall diligently keep the commandments of the LORD your God, and his testimonies, and his statutes, which he hath commanded thee." Deu 6:17 or "Thou hast commanded us to keep thy precepts diligently." Psa 119:4

Good point. I looked up the definition of diligent, which is "showing care and effort". It certainly is achievable with only modest effort. It certainly does not mean perfection.

I used to be one of the pack which claims that the law is impossible, it's a curse, you lose your salvation, etc etc. But it wasn't until I tried it out that I discovered the naysayers have no idea what they're talking about.

The law is easy, nothing much to remember at all. Much easier than being in the Pauline prison, with all its rules and expectations. And best of all, I can relate to Yeshua one-on-one, without Paul sticking his nose in and twisting Yeshua's words to assign meanings which He never intended.

Life is good!

 

[ananda]

Good point. I looked up the definition of diligent, which is "showing care and effort". It certainly is achievable with only modest effort. It certainly does not mean perfection. I used to be one of the pack which claims that the law is impossible, it's a curse, you lose your salvation, etc etc.

Exactly. I don't know where the assumption comes from that there must be perfect observation.

But it wasn't until I tried it out that I discovered the naysayers have no idea what they're talking about. The law is easy, nothing much to remember at all. Much easier than being in the Pauline prison, with all its rules and expectations. And best of all, I can relate to Yeshua one-on-one, without Paul sticking his nose in and twisting Yeshua's words to assign meanings which He never intended. Life is good!

It is the Law of liberty, as James stated ... obedience brings liberty, whereas rebellion brings penalty and death. It is the same in the civil realm.

 

[Phantasman]

Phantasman said:


Thanks for your input Ph-man... Do you think it was hypocritical then for Paul to circumcise Timothy then in Act 16:3?

Sheraldo

Hypocritical or reasonable? It seems Paul did it for a reason to not cause dissenting attitudes by the "Jews in that quarter". But since they knew Timothy's father was a Greek, there just isn't enough to pass judgement that it was done out of hypocrisy. His mother was a (believing) Jew.

Since circumcision is a Jewish ritual, it's physical and has nothing to do with spiritual gnosis.

 

[JesusMartyr]

I reject the idea that rejecting Paul is rejecting Christ. Many were saved before Paul ever appeared on the scene, and I will contend that he continues to be non-essential to faithfulness in Messiah.

When did God the Father die then?

Thanks for your personal opinion.

I don't give personal opinions. They would be worthless. That way, it isn't me that is rejected.

Yes, any who reject Paul's message reject Christ, for they are ONE. One Body. One Spirit. One Gospel.

The "FATHER" never died. Whoever told you that has no concept of scriptures. But the HUSBAND TO BARREN ISRAEL DIED ON THE CROSS. Just as Jesus showed, just as Paul showed.

That is how his old Jerusalem whorish wife was "released" from that old Lawful Marriage. That is ALSO how the ten tribes of the dispersion of divorced Israel is now free to marry Him raised from the dead.

That is HOW ALL OF US ARE FREE TO MARRY HIM. For the OLD Marriage Law being done away with, because Israel was barren, being abolished, now allows ALL of us to Marry Christ raised from the dead.

Understanding this is Salvation. It is the Gospel.

"FATHERING" never occurred until after Jesus Came bringing the "Promise of the Father" into His Church Wife at Pentecost.
(which concept could never become evident to a trinitarian polytheist)

(Luk 24:49) And behold, I send forth the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city, until ye be clothed with power from on high.

(Rev 12:1) And a great sign was seen in heaven: a woman arrayed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars;

Abraham represented Christ in his marriage to barren Sarah, aka barren Israel. Under the Law, Israel was barren and worthless and cast out and divorced eventually, exactly as was the bondwoman Hagar, (natural type of old Israel). That is why it all happened. Paul explains it clearly in Galatians 4.

But we who are Married to Christ are the TRUE Israel Wife, and we aren't barren, but CONCIEVE of His Holy Spirit, and bring forth the Son of
God in our Temple Bodies. That is the entire N.T. message, it is the Gospel.

It is hidden from those who say their "eyes are opened" because this kind of beauty is the Pearl of Great Price, and we don't easily lend it to being trampled in the mud by the swine.
So read, study, pray, get your concordance out, and ask Jesus to fill you with HIS HOLY SPIRIT (not some "other" holy spirit of a trinity gaaah...!) ...and He will reveal all these things to you out of scriptures.

But first, He will require you to throw away all your pamphlets and man made theologies and present yourself pure to Him in all intent. For He will not excuse anyone who pushes man's traditions and theologies in replacement of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, as also perfectly presented by the Apostles, especially Paul.

 

[FredVB]

I am sorry to say at the start that I have this longer post this time, but it is with something bothering me. I can notice and did notice this time that a post I composed in this thread which was submitted and shown, with response to it, on May 26, was removed and is not there, for no basis whatsoever, I have never been offensive to anyone in these forums, nor said anything inappropriate. If the post is not or can not be returned by the party in CF responsible for that, it would be right to see an apology for that, as there would be no reason for its removal. And I recommend to other posters to watch your posts, as post removal seems to be possible through this, with nothing giving notice of this. I rerun through what I have said with this, including the removed post, nothing is said in offense at all, but I answer recent responses to me at the end.

As Christ said, "Whoever hears these words of mine, and does them, I liken to a wise man who built his house on the rock, and it did not fall." He also spoke of being perfect, as his Father in heaven is. We can have grace from God, but if we conclude that we should not pursue that obedience, with his work in us, we are deceived. Any teaching this do not have that light. I think Paul agrees with this. If he is not agreeing, then Paul is wrong. That would be the issue.

I say, in my own opinion, that Paul wanted believers to obey Christ, the same as what Christ said. Paul did say, in Romans 6, What shall we say then? Shall we sin that grace abound? Certainly not! Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! And so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.

Gentile believers were not to be told to be circumcised to be Jewish, or be required or judged in the matter of Jewish observance, as determined in Acts 15, other than to likewise avoid sexual immorality, to avoid meat from strangled animals or with having the blood, or having anything involving idolatry. It is yet to be understood that Christ and his apostles are to be obeyed in what they teach.

Gentile believers are free from doing what they had not yet done if it was not disobedient to Christ and his apostles, including these four things, and so he was right to say they are not to be judged in those things, whether they observe more of them or not. But what is left that is permissible, not really meaning that is so for everything, though some will read into it that understanding, it is not all profitable, in regard of spiritual growth. All believers must be learning, and growing in obedience.

I am not at all forgetting Romans 6. I haven't been to any church with such problems. Yet I see that there is licentiousness and it would influence some churches. Maybe it has happened more where you live. If churches really provide a place for drinking alcohol and gambling, that would be really bad. I never see Paul like that, at all.

I don't see Paul adding to or taking away anything, as what was required of gentile believers was already stated. There is more that gentile believers could do, but it was not to be required of them nor were they to be judged in those things. There was indeed expectation that some gentile believers, in the cities that they knew of, with synagogues, would go to hear the scriptures being taught on sabbaths. I understand it that way although there is difficulty with Christian believers in more recent times seeing that. I have given the Sabbath more thought, and recently was more convicted, to do more with it than just think. I found a relevant scripture passage and posted in these forums asking about it, in the thread, What of these passages, do they make you think?, in the Sabbath and the Law forum. The response, with me only asking about it, was with several who responded all accusing me of spreading heresies, and other intolerant things. Clearly there is lack of understanding that we are not to judge each other in these things. But response was with telling me that obedience to Sabbath observation is impossible, no one is doing it, those saying they do are hypocrites. Yet I do agree that the commandments are desirable for us.

That we are not to have blood with the meat from animals is indeed from the covenant through Noah and is for all of humanity since then. Yet who are observing that? As meat from animals was not available for food in the original design from God, which was perfect, and it is only provisionally available for a time, after the flood, in God's promised restoration such won't be available, and sacrifice of animals is no longer to be done since Christ came and the atonement is accomplished, to be food is not why animals are in this creation. They are innocent, it is sin, from us who are fallen humanity, that is the reason that there is death in this world. But why should we still contribute to death? It is not why Christ came. I can see that laws might pertain to a vegetarian diet. And we could indeed grow with learning more in obedience.

I think I have the right view of it, commandments that Christ taught are for all of us who are believers, that we are to do to follow him, and to teach. Yes, I can understand that some don't see that the same way.

I would agree that all are to be taught to observe all the things that Messiah has commanded, that is not that the gentiles were to be made Jewish. Being Jewish might just mean being of the religion of Judaism. Ethnically identified people associated with that might be called Hebrew, but that is basically of a culture or language, or called Israelite. There is no gentile ethnicity, gentiles are of many ethnicities and are such by not being Jewish. There are distinctions, as there are still distinctions between men and women, but we are not separate by distinction in Christ. We are not to treat each other as unequal, or as equal but separate. The twelve apostles were left by the Messiah over all the church of all believers. Paul, who you doubt, was sent to gentiles, answering to the twelve.

I see there is different levels, from doubts, to distrust of Paul, to virulent hatred of him, past rationality to not tolerate others with different understanding. In Christ, the Messiah, there is life, this is of the most importance. This subject in this thread should be discussed with us reasoning together, if it will be discussed at all. It shouldn't be if it can't be reasonably discussed.

I do not see God as demanding perfect observance of His commandments ... He only requires diligent observation. Diligent observation of those commandments which apply to us is not impossible for faithful believers. For example, "Ye shall diligently keep the commandments of the LORD your God, and his testimonies, and his statutes, which he hath commanded thee." Deu 6:17 or "Thou hast commanded us to keep thy precepts diligently." Psa 119:4

Would you agree that to "follow Him" means to do as He did, to believe as He believed, to love as He loved, etc, as diligently as possible?

How do you reconcile this with Paul's claim that Peter, John, etc. were sent to the Jews only (in contradiction to Messiah's command in Mt 28:18-20), and Paul himself to the rest of the Gentile world (Gal 2:7,8)?

We who are true believers are covered in Messiah's righteousness, so though we are to seek being perfect, as we do not come to that we still have his righteousness. So with really seeking such obedience we are then being diligent. There will be more for us yet to learn, for what would be needed to be perfect according to his will for us. I think I have been saying it, to follow him is with obedience to him, in what he said, and his example to us, as he is an example for us, so I agree to that.

Looking at that passage, I can see that it makes reference to the time of the council in Jerusalem and what happened after it. Though the gospel was to go to all nations, the apostles and the first church, great as an example though that they were, did not do that. With God directing it to happen, years later a leading gentile who desired to know and do God's will sent for Peter, who was then led to go with whom he had sent, to then see him and proclaim the gospel. That much Peter did, the others of the twelve did not do that much. When Paul and those with him came to the council, it was seen how Paul had effective outreach to gentiles, even as the twelve had already effective outreach to Jews. He was permitted to have this ministry to them, even primarily, as he still appealed to Jews, and the twelve primarily brought the gospel primarily to Jews, though they could do so to gentiles.

Good point. I looked up the definition of diligent, which is "showing care and effort". It certainly is achievable with only modest effort. It certainly does not mean perfection.
I used to be one of the pack which claims that the law is impossible, it's a curse, you lose your salvation, etc etc. But it wasn't until I tried it out that I discovered the naysayers have no idea what they're talking about.
The law is easy, nothing much to remember at all. Much easier than being in the Pauline prison, with all its rules and expectations. And best of all, I can relate to Yeshua one-on-one, without Paul sticking his nose in and twisting Yeshua's words to assign meanings which He never intended.
Life is good!

Exactly. I don't know where the assumption comes from that there must be perfect observation.
It is the Law of liberty, as James stated ... obedience brings liberty, whereas rebellion brings penalty and death. It is the same in the civil realm.

I did say where I saw it, in the thread What of these passages, do they make you think? I did not know how to answer their allegations. I could have been helped, but no other posted contrary to them. Those in CF longer know how to find that thread. Their objection is not my position. But as obedience is important in righteousness, perfection of obedience should be sought. I don't think it should just not then be pursued.

I just don't see Paul twisting the meaning of what Christ, the Messiah, said. But is great to hear, Life is good, it makes that sound attractive.

 

[catlynne333]

Good point. I looked up the definition of diligent, which is "showing care and effort". It certainly is achievable with only modest effort. It certainly does not mean perfection.

I used to be one of the pack which claims that the law is impossible, it's a curse, you lose your salvation, etc etc. But it wasn't until I tried it out that I discovered the naysayers have no idea what they're talking about.

The law is easy, nothing much to remember at all. Much easier than being in the Pauline prison, with all its rules and expectations. And best of all, I can relate to Yeshua one-on-one, without Paul sticking his nose in and twisting Yeshua's words to assign meanings which He never intended.

Life is good!

I agree good points

 

[Phantasman]

Would you agree that to "follow Him" means to do as He did, to believe as He believed, to love as He loved, etc, as diligently as possible?

How do you reconcile this with Paul's claim that Peter, John, etc. were sent to the Jews only (in contradiction to Messiah's command in Mt 28:18-20), and Paul himself to the rest of the Gentile world (Gal 2:7,8)?

I will admit. I do have a problem understanding the split.

What better testimony than a former Pharisee doing miracles in the name of Christ before the Jews themselves.

But, hey, what do I know?

 

[ananda]

I will admit. I do have a problem understanding the split.

What better testimony than a former Pharisee doing miracles in the name of Christ before the Jews themselves.

But, hey, what do I know?

I instead see an ongoing Pharisee (Mt 16:12) doing miracles (Mt 24:24) in the name of a foreign lawless Christ (Mt 24:24).

 

[ananda]

We who are true believers are covered in Messiah's righteousness, so though we are to seek being perfect, as we do not come to that we still have his righteousness. So with really seeking such obedience we are then being diligent. There will be more for us yet to learn, for what would be needed to be perfect according to his will for us. I think I have been saying it, to follow him is with obedience to him, in what he said, and his example to us, as he is an example for us, so I agree to that.

I agree for the most part. Messiah, the Heavenly Husband, is completely righteous, and a faithful believer is seen as One with Him in the Father's eyes, just like an earthly wife is seen as one with her husband in the earthly legal realm. Messiah's righteousness, however, covers only His true wife - the one who is faithful unto Him, walking diligently after Him in loving obedience. Messiah's righteousness does not cover His false bride who, though she claims Him as her own, does not follow Him in diligent obedience and righteousness. Wheat vs tares.

Looking at that passage, I can see that it makes reference to the time of the council in Jerusalem and what happened after it. Though the gospel was to go to all nations, the apostles and the first church, great as an example though that they were, did not do that. With God directing it to happen, years later a leading gentile who desired to know and do God's will sent for Peter, who was then led to go with whom he had sent, to then see him and proclaim the gospel. That much Peter did, the others of the twelve did not do that much. When Paul and those with him came to the council, it was seen how Paul had effective outreach to gentiles, even as the twelve had already effective outreach to Jews. He was permitted to have this ministry to them, even primarily, as he still appealed to Jews, and the twelve primarily brought the gospel primarily to Jews, though they could do so to gentiles.

Your interpretation would work except that it makes the twelve's ministry to the Gentiles optional, instead of something which Messiah required them to do in Mt 28:18-20 (μαθητεύσατε, Mt 28:19, "teaching", an imperative verb).

 

[Sheraldo]

I am so behind on reading all the posts in this thread but I wanted to say thank you to Fred V B for the all the time and effort you put into post #307…I am still trying to process all you have written…

And Netzarim said:

I instead see an ongoing Pharisee (Mt 16:12) doing miracles (Mt 24:24) in the name of a foreign lawless Christ (Mt 24:24).

Great summarization! I agree ….We can't say that we weren't warned….again in Matthew 24:5, "Then Jesus replied to them: “Watch out that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and they will deceive many." Many, as opposed to the 'few' who find the narrow path that leads to (zoe) life.


Peace,

Sheraldo

 

[FredVB]

Your interpretation would work except that it makes the twelve's ministry to the Gentiles optional, instead of something which Messiah required them to do in Mt 28:18-20 (μαθητεύσατε, Mt 28:19, "teaching", an imperative verb).

It is not that I say the twelve did not do that, it is right that Christ the Messiah commanded to go make disciples of all nations, that is, all people that can be reached should hear the gospel of Christ, with which there may be salvation, and should be led to obedience to him, this is for the body of believers to do generally. Peter at least did something to reach some gentiles, from what is shown. There may have been more of such, by him, or the others, once they started in having the gospel go to gentiles, but it is not shown in the Bible. Yet they did designate, for work in various things to be done. We can none of us do it all, but we do if we would what is in our sphere to do, and would be supportive of what others do for that. And this indeed is what the twelve should at least have been doing for that, and they may have been doing more, and James as well, as all that was done is not shown in the Bible, but what is shown there is the most reliable for having things known to us.

I am so behind on reading all the posts in this thread but I wanted to say thank you to Fred V B for the all the time and effort you put into post #307…I am still trying to process all you have written…

Thank you for saying that, Sheraldo. Hopefully you get more out of that from considering it more. If you learn anything from it that is good. I can learn some things too from others' posts. It is good generally to share, if it is in the right spirit. If you wish to, feel welcome to ask me anything more about it. Or share what comments that you think you should. That is do so if it would be in a peaceable way.

 

[ananda]

There may have been more of such, by him, or the others, once they started in having the gospel go to gentiles, but it is not shown in the Bible.

I agree ... Peter ministered to those in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Roman Asia, Bithynia (1Pet 1:1), John also to those in Roman Asia (Rev 1:4), and other extra-biblical traditions placing the other apostles elsewhere in the Gentile world. This begs the question why so many Christians believe Paul was the sole "apostle to the Gentiles". Perhaps this is the implication of Galatians 2:7-9?

 

[FredVB]

I agree ... Peter ministered to those in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Roman Asia, Bithynia (1Pet 1:1), John also to those in Roman Asia (Rev 1:4), and other extra-biblical traditions placing the other apostles elsewhere in the Gentile world. This begs the question why so many Christians believe Paul was the sole "apostle to the Gentiles". Perhaps this is the implication of Galatians 2:7-9?

Peter wrote to the pilgrims of the Dispersion, this suggests that these believers were Jews who converted to Christ in those lands away from the land of Israel. John and Peter, and the others, may have gone abroad reaching gentiles with the gospel, that may be in traditions, we just don't have that told in the Bible. The answer for why Paul was apostle to the gentiles was that he was sent to reach them with the gospel, with others going with him, first from Antioch and then after the first journeys for that, with being so effective, being designated for that by apostles in Jerusalem, both times with it from the Divine Spirit. James and the apostles in Jerusalem at the time anyway had effective outreach among Jews, as shown with many thousands converted to Christ, but nothing actually shown of reaching any gentiles so. But many responsibilities were delegated, Paul had his work appointed to him. So this would be how some gave him that kind of title. What Paul wrote in the Epistle to the Galatians was his early writing, so it was soon after that commission from Jerusalem, where so far anyway his outreach was the effective one to gentiles, though, as it may be overlooked, he reached out to Jews with the gospel every time, giving that priority.

 

[Phantasman]

I am so behind on reading all the posts in this thread but I wanted to say thank you to Fred V B for the all the time and effort you put into post #307…I am still trying to process all you have written…

And Netzarim said:



Great summarization! I agree ….We can't say that we weren't warned….again in Matthew 24:5, "Then Jesus replied to them: “Watch out that no one deceives you. For many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Messiah,’ and they will deceive many." Many, as opposed to the 'few' who find the narrow path that leads to (zoe) life.


Peace,

Sheraldo

We need to understand what Christ is truly saying. Not many can get away with saying "I am the Messiah" over Christ. But many get away with saying "I understand the Messiah, and here's what he says" or "we understand the Messiah, so follow us".

While many follow the large churches, I find it more comforting to seek knowledge everywhere (scriptures), then hide in the closet and shut the door often. Loud voices scare me.

 

[ananda]

Peter wrote to the pilgrims of the Dispersion, this suggests that these believers were Jews who converted to Christ in those lands away from the land of Israel.

I see Peter writing to the believing foreigners/strangers (Gentiles) in 1Pet 1:1.

John and Peter, and the others, may have gone abroad reaching gentiles with the gospel, that may be in traditions, we just don't have that told in the Bible. The answer for why Paul was apostle to the gentiles was that he was sent to reach them with the gospel, with others going with him, first from Antioch and then after the first journeys for that, with being so effective, being designated for that by apostles in Jerusalem, both times with it from the Divine Spirit. James and the apostles in Jerusalem at the time anyway had effective outreach among Jews, as shown with many thousands converted to Christ, but nothing actually shown of reaching any gentiles so. But many responsibilities were delegated, Paul had his work appointed to him. So this would be how some gave him that kind of title. What Paul wrote in the Epistle to the Galatians was his early writing, so it was soon after that commission from Jerusalem, where so far anyway his outreach was the effective one to gentiles, though, as it may be overlooked, he reached out to Jews with the gospel every time, giving that priority.

If you claim Paul was a delegate to the twelve, did Paul teach the Gentiles to observe everything Messiah taught His Jewish apostles to observe, as Messiah commanded?

 

[ananda]

We need to understand what Christ is truly saying. Not many can get away with saying "I am the Messiah" over Christ. But many get away with saying "I understand the Messiah, and here's what he says" or "we understand the Messiah, so follow us".

While many follow the large churches, I find it more comforting to seek knowledge everywhere (scriptures), then hide in the closet and shut the door often. Loud voices scare me.

 

[2ducklow]

We need to understand what Christ is truly saying. Not many can get away with saying "I am the Messiah" over Christ. But many get away with saying "I understand the Messiah, and here's what he says" or "we understand the Messiah, so follow us".

While many follow the large churches, I find it more comforting to seek knowledge everywhere (scriptures), then hide in the closet and shut the door often. Loud voices scare me.

we all will be responsible for the decisions we make in this life when it's all over. No one is going to be able to justify their beliefs by saying well I believed what my church believed, or I believed what my pastor believed. I know some people who think sometimes like that on certain issues. But to reject everything other Christians say is just as bad in my opinion. The best leaders in any field are the ones who listen to every opinion, the best leaders are those who do not surround themselves with yes men. The best leaders are the ones who open themselves up to every possibility and make their decisions based on that. I believe it's the same with interpreting scripture. None of us are so smart, or so anointed of God, that we can't learn something from someone else. Even churches that have what I would consider a horrible doctrine, such as 'name it and claim it" or those who subscribe to the prosperity doctrine, will on some issues have good understanding of some scriptures. No church is totally off the track, and one day God, and Jesus will unite all his people into one body as proclaimed in eph. 4.12.

just my thoughts.

 

[Sheraldo]

I find it more comforting to seek knowledge everywhere (scriptures), then hide in the closet and shut the door often. Loud voices scare me.

Phantasman, thank you! Loud voices scare me too and lot's of voices get confusing…thanks for the reminder to go in the closet and hear the one voice….