Paul's limited understanding!

HebrewVaquero · Dec 28, 2015

thecolorsblend said:
Did it ever occur to you that maybe you're just wrong?

Are you saying Foxes Book of Martyrs is fiction?

thecolorsblend · Dec 28, 2015

HebrewVaquero said:
Are you saying Foxes Book of Martyrs is fiction?

Good question. Let's review my original post.

thecolorsblend said:
Did it ever occur to you that maybe you're just wrong?

Nope, I don't see anything about the Book of Martyrs in there.

Now to get back to my question, did it ever occur to you that maybe you're wrong?

HebrewVaquero · Dec 28, 2015

thecolorsblend said:
Good question. Let's review my original post.

Nope, I don't see anything about the Book of Martyrs in there.

Now to get back to my question, did it ever occur to you that maybe you're wrong?

It always occurs to me, lucky you are not cursed with the same problem.

thecolorsblend · Dec 28, 2015

HebrewVaquero said:
It always occurs to me, lucky you are not cursed with the same problem.

Not so lucky. It took 34 years to join the Church. I read about a jew who joined the Church when he was 98. Some people just need time.

Righttruth · Dec 30, 2015

Wgw said:
Try proving that in the specific case of the St. Thomas Christians of India. Seriously, try. I expect articles from major scholars, and a review of the relevant Syriac and Malayalam texts.

Yes, the witnesses of the Last Supper never wanted that to continue as a ritual to proclaim Lord's death as advised by Paul to Corinthians. Churches and people prefer easy rituals than being obedient to Jesus' commandments. Therefore, Gentile world accepted that conveniently. Apostle Thomas didn't preach this kind of ritual as administered by Paul. Unfortunately, Indian Christians soon picked up these easy rituals forgetting the spirit behind in observing that according to John 6!

Righttruth · Dec 30, 2015

The Boxer said:
The context of the gospel narratives requires that the term " all nations" be restricted to all the nations where the Jews lived. Your definitions are both biblically and historically inaccurate. See also Acts 2. It says that Jews from "all nations under heaven" had heard the word preached on Pentecost. Their mandate was to reach Jews from all nations. This was the great commission to them.

Jesus EXPLICITLY told them to NOT go to the gentiles. Paul was the apostle to the gentiles and to kings and to the house of Israel. Paul had a greater scope of authority than the other apostles.

Your extrapolated insertion of the word Jews is not acceptable by any standard of understanding! You seem to mix up the authority and role of Jesus before and after ascension, again unacceptable!

Righttruth · Dec 30, 2015

Strong in Him said:
They had a disagreement and split up to go their separate ways for a while, but seemed to reconcile later. In 1 Corinthians 9:6 Paul says, "or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?" Their disagreement was not over doctrine, theology or the work of Christ, but only over who should accompany them on a particular journey.

How can there be a disagreement if we assumed that everyone was moved by the Holy Spirit?

People disagree sometimes.
You started this thread which is in the controversial theology section of the forum. Either you deliberately started it in this forum, or it was moved there because the things in the OP are controversial. Something which is controversial is bound to cause disagreement and division - is this thread therefore a work of Satan too.

So the heated arguments and division caused by Paul should be the work of Satan too according to your logic!

Yes, Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life. Jesus is revealed in the Bible - foretold in the Old Testament, presented in the Gospels, taught, proclaimed and explained in the epistles.

Paul has definitely deviated from the preaching of the Gospel that led all disputable doctrines unsupported by Jesus and others who have contributed with their writings. People love 'ear tickling' and cozy doctrines dished out from his disputable epistles!

Inspired by the Holy Spirit.

How much is the inspiration of the Holy Spirit can only be realized by the Holy Spirit!

Paul preaches the Gospel so that is a good reason to listen to, and trust, him.
Paul was accepted as an apostle. There is no Scriptural evidence that Peter said, "here, Paul, you can be called an apostle"; neither is there any evidence that Paul said, "I think I deserve, and am going to assume, the title of apostle." So as I see it, you can only be assuming that he appointed himself to be one - i.e "Paul calls himself an apostle, there is no record of him being made one so he must have self-appointed."
You've just said that you ignore assumptions.

Yes, his apostleship was an his own making. Many of his views that don't complement the Gospel are also big assumptions!

They may be, but they are not Holy Scripture; nothing can be added to, or taken from, Holy Scripture.

Canon is man-made.

Judge Paul by his fruits then - major writer of NT books; hundreds, if not thousands, of lives changed as a result of his writings.

Yes, for the worse since it stalls the sublime message of Jesus!

Wgw · Dec 30, 2015

Righttruth said:
Yes, the witnesses of the Last Supper never wanted that to continue as a ritual to proclaim Lord's death as advised by Paul to Corinthians. Churches and people prefer easy rituals than being obedient to Jesus' commandments. Therefore, Gentile world accepted that conveniently. Apostle Thomas didn't preach this kind of ritual as administered by Paul. Unfortunately, Indian Christians soon picked up these easy rituals forgetting the spirit behind in observing that according to John 6!

Another entirely unsubstantiated allegation. With special emphasis on the word "entirely." Seriously, where do you get this stuff?

How is it charitable and Christian to make basically false or unverifiable accusations against people?

Righttruth · Dec 30, 2015

Hank77 said:
Yes, but are those second chances always identical to the first chance? Are they in the same place, at the same time, with the same people, etc.?
If I remember correctly Paul and Silas were thrown in prison on this journey. God may not have wanted Mark with Paul in this situation, he was young and needed to grow. He got this opportunity with Barnabas.Yes, Paul asks Timothy to bring Mark with him when he came. We see a mature Mark grounded in faith and strength. I'm not sure why you would think that Paul was desperate when he had Luke and Timothy, rather his asking for Mark as well was a sign of his admiration for Mark. That Mark had grown so much that he would be qualified to minister to Paul would be like Newton asking a graduate student to share in a new project because he had something important to offer.

All these are thoughts are meant to defend Paul at any cost ignoring the Jesus' way!

What scripture tells you that he gave up on reaching them?

From Acts 13:44 onwards.

Righttruth · Dec 30, 2015

Wgw said:
Another entirely unsubstantiated allegation. With special emphasis on the word "entirely." Seriously, where do you get this stuff?

How is it charitable and Christian to make basically false or unverifiable accusations against people?

It is the Holy Spirit prompting.

thecolorsblend · Dec 30, 2015

Righttruth said:
How can there be a disagreement if we assumed that everyone was moved by the Holy Spirit?

A question Protestants everywhere should be asking themselves.

Wgw · Dec 31, 2015

Righttruth said:
It is the Holy Spirit prompting.

It is unsupported and unsubstantiated. What you are asking us to do is basically take your word for it as to (a) the accuracy of what you say and (b) its divine origins.

Strong in Him · Dec 31, 2015

Righttruth said:
How can there be a disagreement if we assumed that everyone was moved by the Holy Spirit?

People who are filled with the Holy Spirit are still human. We can still make decisions, choices and mistakes.
If the passage had said that Paul didn't know who to take along on the journey, he prayed about it, the Spirit had said "take John Mark" and Paul disagreed and disobeyed - that would be a lot more serious. But we are not told that Paul prayed about his choice of companion.

Righttruth said:
So the heated arguments and division caused by Paul should be the work of Satan too according to your logic!

It depends on what they were.
When Paul preached the Gospel to Jews, it caused division. For example, "When they heard about the resurrection of the dead, some of them sneered, but others said 'we want to hear you again on this subject'," Acts 17:32. Division. When Paul was in Ephesus, laying hands on people to be filled with the Holy Spirit. This caused "the name of the Lord Jesus to be held in high honour" Acts 19:17. People turned to the Lord and "openly confessed their evil deeds", (v18) along with those who had practiced sorcery. As a result of all this, a local silversmith, who made a lot of money selling images of the goddess Artemis, was afraid that people would stop worshipping that goddess and stirred up the crowd to believe that Paul was dissing their idol. There was a riot.
Were these, and other events, caused by Paul? Indirectly, I suppose, since he preached the Gospel - the truth.
Were they Satanic in origin? Undoubtedly. Satan doesn't want people to hear the Gospel so if he can cause division, by whatever means, he will. The people will focus on the division and the cause of the unrest and forget the amazing Gospel truths they have just heard.
Does this mean that Paul was false or from the devil? Not at all.

Look what happened when Jesus proclaimed the Good News and taught people. Some were for him, listened and followed; some were against him and tried to kill him - Mark 3:20-22; Mark 12:12;John 9:40-44. People were certainly divided after hearing Jesus speak and seeing his miracles.
Did Jesus cause that? Indirectly, I suppose. If he hadn't preached, people would have remained in ignorance and the Pharisees wouldn't have felt challenged.
Were the divisions and arguments from the devil? Undoubtedly. He wanted to stop Jesus from preaching the Gospel, and above all from going to the cross, where Satan would be defeated. Satan is the bad shepherd, the thief who comes to steal and destroy - of course he is going to oppose those who speak the truth, stir up trouble and division and try to silence them.
Does this mean that Jesus was from the devil, because he "caused" division? Of course not!

Your words in this thread; some agree, it seems that most disagree. Have you caused a division? Yes. Does that mean you are Satanic or from Satan - of course not.

Righttruth said:
Paul has definitely deviated from the preaching of the Gospel that led all disputable doctrines unsupported by Jesus and others who have contributed with their writings.

Paul preached the cross, the Gospel and the Lord Jesus.
Jesus spoke of his death, that he had come to save sinners, that his life would be given as a ransom for many, that his blood was of the New Covenant, shed for the forgiveness of sins, and that he would be raised to life again.

If Paul reached any doctrines that were "unsupported by Jesus" and contrary to his teaching, then the Holy Spirit and early church have made a mistake by allowing them into the Bible.

Righttruth said:
How much is the inspiration of the Holy Spirit can only be realized by the Holy Spirit!

The Spirit inspired men to write the Gospels and epistles - Scripture is God-breathed, 2 Timothy 3:16. Yes I know that when Paul wrote that they had mostly only the OT Scriptures, but I believe we can say it about the NT, and his epistles too. Peter said that ignorant and unstable people distort Paul's writings, as they do the other Scriptures.
The Holy Spirit also inspired people when they were deciding what books to include in the canon of Scripture - it is the written word of God which reveals God to us; God is not going to make them make a mess of it, mislead us and misrepresent himself.
The Holy Spirit can help us as we read God's word, explain it to us and apply it to our lives and hearts.

Righttruth said:
Yes, his apostleship was an his own making.

Can you prove that?
Why did the other apostles accept him as an apostle and dear brother if he wasn't one? Why do we have no passage which tells of Peter challenging Paul and saying "you cannot call yourself an apostle. Servant/slave of Jesus, follower, disciple (learner), child of God, yes; apostle, no way"?

Righttruth said:
Yes, for the worse since it stalls the sublime message of Jesus!

People's lives have been changed for the worse after they have read Paul's epistles??
"nothing can separate us from the love of God" (Romans 8:39), "love is patient, kind" etc, (1 Corinthians 13:4-8) "the Spirit testifies with our spirits that we are children of God",(Romans 8:16-17) "it was while we were still sinners that Christ died for us", (Romans 5:8) "it is by grace that you have been saved",(Ephesians 2:8) "Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:3).
These have all changed people's lives for the worse? Can you give an example of this - of one person who has been left worse off after reading that love is kind and eternal?

thecolorsblend · Dec 31, 2015

Strong in Him said:
People who are filled with the Holy Spirit are still human. We can still make decisions, choices and mistakes.

So the Holy Spirit cannot protect from error?

Righttruth · Dec 31, 2015

Wgw said:
It is unsupported and unsubstantiated. What you are asking us to do is basically take your word for it as to (a) the accuracy of what you say and (b) its divine origins.

My support is the preaching of Jesus, not self-claims and proclamations by a rank outsider!

Righttruth · Dec 31, 2015

Strong in Him said:
People who are filled with the Holy Spirit are still human. We can still make decisions, choices and mistakes.

Yes, believers are filled with the Holy Spirit, yet the measure of filling depends on a person. How much one is submissive or egoistic. Paul was hindered by his scholarly egoism.

If the passage had said that Paul didn't know who to take along on the journey, he prayed about it, the Spirit had said "take John Mark" and Paul disagreed and disobeyed - that would be a lot more serious. But we are not told that Paul prayed about his choice of companion.

That was his big mistake of not seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

It depends on what they were.
When Paul preached the Gospel to Jews, it caused division. For example, "When they heard about the resurrection of the dead, some of them sneered, but others said 'we want to hear you again on this subject'," Acts 17:32. Division. When Paul was in Ephesus, laying hands on people to be filled with the Holy Spirit. This caused "the name of the Lord Jesus to be held in high honour" Acts 19:17. People turned to the Lord and "openly confessed their evil deeds", (v18) along with those who had practiced sorcery. As a result of all this, a local silversmith, who made a lot of money selling images of the goddess Artemis, was afraid that people would stop worshipping that goddess and stirred up the crowd to believe that Paul was dissing their idol. There was a riot.
Were these, and other events, caused by Paul? Indirectly, I suppose, since he preached the Gospel - the truth.
Were they Satanic in origin? Undoubtedly. Satan doesn't want people to hear the Gospel so if he can cause division, by whatever means, he will. The people will focus on the division and the cause of the unrest and forget the amazing Gospel truths they have just heard.

There are bound to be divisions between sheep and goats, believers and non-believers and so on.

Does this mean that Paul was false or from the devil? Not at all.

Paul's ministry before he was introduced to the Jerusalem church had come to naught. The support from the chosen apostles was not that overwhelming. But once he got their support, he sensed gain and authority, and he went beyond limits to propagate his ideas unsupported by the preaching of Jesus on many counts.

Look what happened when Jesus proclaimed the Good News and taught people. Some were for him, listened and followed; some were against him and tried to kill him - Mark 3:20-22; Mark 12:12;John 9:40-44. People were certainly divided after hearing Jesus speak and seeing his miracles.
Did Jesus cause that? Indirectly, I suppose. If he hadn't preached, people would have remained in ignorance and the Pharisees wouldn't have felt challenged.
Were the divisions and arguments from the devil? Undoubtedly. He wanted to stop Jesus from preaching the Gospel, and above all from going to the cross, where Satan would be defeated. Satan is the bad shepherd, the thief who comes to steal and destroy - of course he is going to oppose those who speak the truth, stir up trouble and division and try to silence them.
Does this mean that Jesus was from the devil, because he "caused" division? Of course not!

Jesus did not cause division among chosen apostles. Paul did!

Your words in this thread; some agree, it seems that most disagree. Have you caused a division? Yes. Does that mean you are Satanic or from Satan - of course not.

The trend in Christendom is to call a person satanic if he disagreed with their blind beliefs! I am glad you don't go with that flow!

Paul preached the cross, the Gospel and the Lord Jesus.
Jesus spoke of his death, that he had come to save sinners, that his life would be given as a ransom for many, that his blood was of the New Covenant, shed for the forgiveness of sins, and that he would be raised to life again.

They are the goodies people want to grab. It no way elaborates the preaching of Jesus; for example: Sermon on the Mount.

If Paul reached any doctrines that were "unsupported by Jesus" and contrary to his teaching, then the Holy Spirit and early church have made a mistake by allowing them into the Bible.

Tendency to dilute and deviate from the preaching of a leader in any religion--for that matter--begins right from the day he departs. Ignorant Gentiles gladly grabbed the compromises offered by Paul. However, John, who wrote later indirectly hinted (like a parable) the false claim of Paul. James wrote against the tenet of Paul's 'faith alone'!

The Spirit inspired men to write the Gospels and epistles - Scripture is God-breathed, 2 Timothy 3:16. Yes I know that when Paul wrote that they had mostly only the OT Scriptures, but I believe we can say it about the NT, and his epistles too. Peter said that ignorant and unstable people distort Paul's writings, as they do the other Scriptures.

Scripture in the NT refers to the OT only. Disputed 2nd Peter cannot offer any support to the biased interpretation.

The Holy Spirit also inspired people when they were deciding what books to include in the canon of Scripture - it is the written word of God which reveals God to us; God is not going to make them make a mess of it, mislead us and misrepresent himself.

I don't think it happened with Marcion who started this canon business.

The Holy Spirit can help us as we read God's word, explain it to us and apply it to our lives and hearts.

One cannot call manipulated, mistranslated, misinterpreted records as God's words.

Can you prove that?
Why did the other apostles accept him as an apostle and dear brother if he wasn't one? Why do we have no passage which tells of Peter challenging Paul and saying "you cannot call yourself an apostle. Servant/slave of Jesus, follower, disciple (learner), child of God, yes; apostle, no way"?

Because they were not arrogant like Paul. No chosen apostle called him another apostle. In fact, Paul even did not have the qualifications set out for choosing the replacement for Judas Iscariot.

People's lives have been changed for the worse after they have read Paul's epistles??
"nothing can separate us from the love of God" (Romans 8:39), "love is patient, kind" etc, (1 Corinthians 13:4-8) "the Spirit testifies with our spirits that we are children of God",(Romans 8:16-17) "it was while we were still sinners that Christ died for us", (Romans 5:8) "it is by grace that you have been saved",(Ephesians 2:8) "Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:3).
These have all changed people's lives for the worse? Can you give an example of this - of one person who has been left worse off after reading that love is kind and eternal?

Look at the Protestantism that has replaced Jesus by a pot bellied Santa Claus, suffering cross by glittering tree and great resurrection with Easter eggs fun! Is Bible a comic book to amuse the children?

Wgw · Dec 31, 2015

Righttruth said:
My support is the preaching of Jesus, not self-claims and proclamations by a rank outsider!

Nowhere does our Lord say anything which has the effect of validating your historically dubious claims about the St. Thomas Christians. I have asked, and will continue to ask, that you provide some actual evidence in support of your claims; otherwise I am forced to dismiss them as uncharitable, prejudicial irrelevance.

Strong in Him · Dec 31, 2015

thecolorsblend said:
So the Holy Spirit cannot protect from error?

Yes of course he can - if we ask him to.
There is no record that Paul spent some time in prayer asking God who should accompany him on their next journey.

thecolorsblend · Dec 31, 2015

Strong in Him said:
Yes of course he can - if we ask him to.
There is no record that Paul spent some time in prayer asking God who should accompany him on their next journey.

Interesting point.

There's also no record of him ever going to the bathroom. Does that prove he's a space alien?

Strong in Him · Dec 31, 2015

thecolorsblend said:
Interesting point.

There's also no record of him ever going to the bathroom. Does that prove he's a space alien?

?? No, of course not.
The point was made that Paul caused divisions, and these verses, where he quarrelled with Barnabas, were quoted as an example. The forummer then said that divisions are from Satan. His whole starting point seems to be "Paul is untrustworthy, a manipulator and troublemaker, and here are some verses that prove that."

I agreed that there was an argument on that occasion, but said that that doesn't prove that Paul was causing trouble and was not filled with the Spirit. In answer to a question I agreed that the Spirit can prevent people from making mistakes that cause arguments - if we ask him to. There is no record that Paul did ask him about who they should take on that journey. We could assume that he did; that he and Barnabas prayed about it, but then why the argument? If the Spirit was guiding Paul, why the "sharp dispute"? It may have led to two missionary journeys instead of one, but it also led to two anointed apostles falling out with each other.

Paul's limited understanding!

Active Member

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?

Active Member

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Pray For Brussels!

Regular Member

Regular Member

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?

Pray For Brussels!

Great is thy faithfulness

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?

Regular Member

Regular Member

Pray For Brussels!

Great is thy faithfulness

If God is your Father, who is your Mother?

Great is thy faithfulness

Similar threads