Did Paul Teach Heresy?

[Starcrystal]

I think this would go in this forum... if not it will be moved to the appropriate forum

When Paul speaks of "another gospel" in Galatians 1:6 - 12, is he perhaps exposing himself? First off, I don't mean to say every teaching of Paul is a lie, for much of it is true, but there are many parts of pauls letters in the New Testement which are filled with confusion, opinion, and heresy.
Romans 7 reveals Pauls confusion, and his own confession in verses 15 - 25 that he does evil things he doesn't want to do, and the good things he wants to do he doesn't do! Prior to this in the same chapter he introduces his heresy regarding marraige ~ claiming the "law" binds a woman to her husband as long as he lives. What law? According to the law of God written by Moses, a divorce was permitted, the woman could then go be another mans wife, and it was even considered "abomination" for her to return to her first husband after she'd been married to another man. (Deuteronomy 24:1 - 4)
Paul continues his heretical tirade in 1 corinthians 7 where he instructs on various rules of marraige, while making claims like, "I speak this of permission, not of commandment," (verse 6) "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord." (verse 12) "I have no commandment of the Lord, yet I give myjudgement." (verse 25) These comments should raise a spiritual red flag for anyone who reads them!
Paul again contradicts the law in 1 Corinthians 7:39 saying a woman is bound by the law as long as her husband lives" then in verse 40 he makes the outrageous and rather funny remark, "After MY judgement, and I think also that I have the spirit of God." He THINKS??
Maybe Paul should have considered what he wrote later in 1 Corinthians 14:33: "God is not the author of CONFUSION, but of peace!" 1 Corinthians 7 is FILLED with confusion, personal opinion, and contradiction of the law (heresy) - and ironically Paul himself in numerous places speaks ill of the law (Romans 7:4 -6, Galatians 3:10 - 13) while elsewhere he praises the law as good! (Romans 7:12) 1 Corinthians 7 has been used by Preachers and churches to teach 4 completely different doctrines on divorce and remarraige, dividing the church and causing great discord and suffering among people who are trusting Christ for salvation and guidance!
Paul also introduces heresy in 1 Timothy 2:11 - 15, which he also briefly alludes to in 1 Corinthians 14:34 - 35. Again he proclaims personal opinion which is inconsistant with Christs teachings in the 4 gospel books. He claims "I suffer not a woman to teach or to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." (verse 12) He speaks of Eve being the one who was deceived and in transgression, not Adam, thus contradicting his own words in Romans 5:12 - 19 where he repeats 8 TIMES that it was by Adam, ONE MAN who sinned (verses 12, 14, 16) who committed the offence (verses 15, 17, 18) and who was in TRANSGRESSION (verse 14)
No one told the woman at the well in John 4 to be silent, and she spoke of Jesus to her community and many of her people beleived because of her testimony! I wonder how Deborrah the judge, the ancient spiritual leader of Israel would have reacted to Pauls obvious chauvanism?
Peter makes an interesting remark in 2 Peter 3:16 saying that Paul wrote some things that were hard to understood, and that unlearned and unstable men twist his words as also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Most preachers are convinced Peters comment endorses Pauls letters AS SCRIPTURE - but could it be Peter was WARNING people that Pauls writings could easily be misunderstood and twisted, being compared to the scriptures as well? Could Peter be saying that Paul writes about some of the same things he does, but in a confusing manor? Are Peters words actually a subtle warning about Pauls confusing and opinionated writing?
To conclude: Much of Pauls writing does appear to be knowledgeable and even inspired at times, although he tends to place more emphasis on Christs crucifixion than on worshipping the Father in Spirit and in Truth, being born again, and learning spirituality by practical observation of life, as Jesus described in his parables. When reading anything by Paul we need to ask the Holy Spirit to help us discern whether what we read is from God or from the man himself.
We shouldn't discount all of Pauls writings. There are many gems and some garbage. By the Holy Spirits wisdom we can pluck the gems from the garbage, and disregard the confusion and heresy that appears in some of Pauls letters. We need to focus on things revealed by Spirit and separate ourselves from erroneous teachings formulated by mens minds. This includes the heretecal portions of pauls letters, some of which I have exposed here.

 

[Individual-KesTrel]

Perhaps pauls words have been modified to certin peoples likings through time.

If its not logical, its probally not correct.

 

[Wayfarer]

Yes.

 

[Lifesaver]

May God forbid you for the repeated insults against St. Paul.

From your first "objection", it is clear that you have not even read the Gospels, for the indissolubility of marriage is to be found in their pages.

 

[Noor Saffiyah]

Second yes.

 

[Atomagenesis]

No he did not.

The Bible is not open to interpretation for lay people who do not have the authority given by Christ to his one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church (Matthew 16). That is why after the reformation we have 20,000+ Protestant denominations all claiming the truth they teach is the real teachings of Jesus Christ.

 

[peaceful soul]

Second yes.

What do you base this upon?

 

[Petr]

third yes.
Paul was an inspired author, however he wasn't God.

 

[Petr]

From your first "objection", it is clear that you have not even read the Gospels, for the indissolubility of marriage is to be found in their pages.

Really?
Matthew wouldn't agree with you:
Whoever puts away his wife, apart from a matter of fornication, causes her to commit adultery.

Luke and Matthew wouldn't agree with you that marriage exists in the resurrection and after resurrection.

And answering, Jesus said to them, The sons of this world marry and are given in marriage.
But those counted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage.

Matthew explains that
"For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but they are as the angels of God in Heaven."

In both Luke and Matthew, Jesus explains, that marriage only matters on earth in this age, not the world beyond and the age that will follow.

 

[Radagast]

...We shouldn't discount all of Pauls writings. There are many gems and some garbage. By the Holy Spirits wisdom we can pluck the gems from the garbage, and disregard the confusion and heresy that appears in some of Pauls letters...

What's your definition of heresy (if it doesn't relate to the Bible or the tradition of the Church)?

...We need to focus on things revealed by Spirit and separate ourselves from erroneous teachings formulated by mens minds...

So we musn't accept Paul's ideas, but we must accept yours? You can't really mean that!

-- Radagast

 

[Socialist_Christian]

Romans 7 reveals Pauls confusion, and his own confession in verses 15 - 25 that he does evil things he doesn't want to do, and the good things he wants to do he doesn't do!

A case of Sod's Law overiding God's Law? (British joke)

 

[Socialist_Christian]

May God forbid you for the repeated insults against St. Paul.

From your first "objection", it is clear that you have not even read the Gospels, for the indissolubility of marriage is to be found in their pages.

The Epistles were writen before the Gospels, so Paul was not refering to the Gospels when he was talking about the law. The Law he was refering to was the Torah where divorce is specifically allowed.

 

[Arthra]

The Book of Acts and some of Paul's letters do reveal some interesting issues in the developement of early Christianity, there were apparent tensions between Peter and Paul for instance.

But I think it's not appropriate to introduce the concept of "heresy" in connection with Paul or the other figures of the early church at that time...

Heresy as a concept developed later after the church became better organized...and there were Bishops with administrative boundaries and so on. The later church fathers invoked "heresy" against the Gnostics, Marcionites and later the Manichaeans.

I believe that the early church in Jerusalem accepted Paul. The New Testament should be accepted as inspired.

- Art

 

[Starcrystal]

Lifesaver,
May God forbid you for the repeated insults against St. Paul.

From your first "objection", it is clear that you have not even read the Gospels, for the indissolubility of marriage is to be found in their pages

Not only have I read the gospels numerous times in the past 20 years, I have studied some of the background history, the Greek, and all 4 (or possibly 5) different teachings on divorce and remarraige. Jesus taught that the ideal marraige union is forever, but if it is broken by infedelity (a cheating spouse) then a divorce is permitted. Preachers tend to go to Mark 10 where the part about divorce allowed for unfaithfulness is not included... but you will find it in Matthew. You do know mark is sort of a condensed version of Matthew, being directed at Gentiles, while matthew was directed towards the Jews??

Atomagenesis,
No he did not.

The Bible is not open to interpretation for lay people who do not have the authority given by Christ to his one Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church (Matthew 16). That is why after the reformation we have 20,000+ Protestant denominations all claiming the truth they teach is the real teachings of Jesus Christ.

In Christs day there were no "lay people" ~ and I will agree that there are thousands of Protestant denominations that all cannot agree on things and are filled with division. But I will not endorse any organized Church, be it Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, or other, as having the cornerstone of truth when it comes to things of God.

In fact about 10 years ago I had a Catholic friend who was also Native and wanted to know what her church thought about dream catchers and other native items. I called 3 different Catholic churches. The first said it was an unimportant issue. The second said anything superstitious was condemned by the Church. The third said their Priest had a big dream catcher hanging on his office door. All the same Church, yet 3 differing opinions amongst the Priests.

Back to the Bible and lay people: 1 John tells us we have no need for any man to teach us, because the Holy Spirit teaches us all things. I know some try to say the Holy Spirit teaches through men, or a preacher, or priest, or Pope. Nope ~ not according to Jesus own words found in 3 chapters, John 14 - 16. The Spirit APART from man will teach, guide & show things to come.

Man is fallible, I don't care who he is or what he claims. To submit ones self to a man or group of men because some organized church tradition says so is no different than what was happening with the Pharisees in Jesus day.

I pray to the one Holy Lord God that the Holy Spirit shine through the blindness and darkness that enshrouds organized religion, its self imposed limitations, its quenching of the Spirit, and it's misguiding of people. In the name of Jesus Christ, who alone can enlighten by the Spirit.

 

[Starcrystal]

What's your definition of heresy (if it doesn't relate to the Bible or the tradition of the Church)?

So we musn't accept Paul's ideas, but we must accept yours? You can't really mean that!

-- Radagast

Heresy would be where someone comes along and changes, adds to, or detracts from what God has revealed consistantly down through the ages, and specifically that which Jesus endorsed during his ministry. Not a dictionary deffinition, but basically thats it. In later times it came to be known as something that didn't fit into mans organized teachings of theology.

In RE: to your second comment I'll refer you to Acts 17:11, where the people listened to the message but searched the SCRIPTURES daily to see if they were indeed true or not. Notice how Luke, the writer of Acts, has no problem saying that lay people could search the scriptures on their own with the guidance of the Spirit, in order to determine whether or not what was being taught was true. I would encourage the same. DON'T take my word for it, please. Search the scriptures, and that means comparing scripture to scripture ~ not just picking 1 or 2 verses to make a point. Look at the Law, the Prophets (which Jesus considered scripture) then look at Jesus life & teachings, and see if you don't see a few inconsistancies with Pauls letters.

And I'm not saying Paul was not saved, all I'm saying is sometimes he wrote confusion and went astray from what God desired of him at times. He ADMITS this problem in Romans 7, and the erroneous teachings are evident in some of his other writings. Comparison of scripture with his letters makes it clear.

 

[peaceful soul]

Not only have I read the gospels numerous times in the past 20 years, I have studied some of the background history, the Greek, and all 4 (or possibly 5) different teachings on divorce and remarraige. Jesus taught that the ideal marraige union is forever, but if it is broken by infedelity (a cheating spouse) then a divorce is permitted. Preachers tend to go to Mark 10 where the part about divorce allowed for unfaithfulness is not included... but you will find it in Matthew. You do know mark is sort of a condensed version of Matthew, being directed at Gentiles, while matthew was directed towards the Jews??



In Christs day there were no "lay people" ~ and I will agree that there are thousands of Protestant denominations that all cannot agree on things and are filled with division. But I will not endorse any organized Church, be it Catholic, Protestant, Orthodox, or other, as having the cornerstone of truth when it comes to things of God.

In fact about 10 years ago I had a Catholic friend who was also Native and wanted to know what her church thought about dream catchers and other native items. I called 3 different Catholic churches. The first said it was an unimportant issue. The second said anything superstitious was condemned by the Church. The third said their Priest had a big dream catcher hanging on his office door. All the same Church, yet 3 differing opinions amongst the Priests.

Back to the Bible and lay people: 1 John tells us we have no need for any man to teach us, because the Holy Spirit teaches us all things. I know some try to say the Holy Spirit teaches through men, or a preacher, or priest, or Pope. Nope ~ not according to Jesus own words found in 3 chapters, John 14 - 16. The Spirit APART from man will teach, guide & show things to come.

Man is fallible, I don't care who he is or what he claims. To submit ones self to a man or group of men because some organized church tradition says so is no different than what was happening with the Pharisees in Jesus day.

I pray to the one Holy Lord God that the Holy Spirit shine through the blindness and darkness that enshrouds organized religion, its self imposed limitations, its quenching of the Spirit, and it's misguiding of people. In the name of Jesus Christ, who alone can enlighten by the Spirit.

Thank you Starcrystal. We now have yet another denomination to add to our growing list of the lost and distorted. The next thing that you can do is to put your material into print and create you own bible. After that, you can get a following and create your own church. Isn't that how its done: disagree with Bible and then make your own gospel? How about sticking to the material that God said that He gave us. Perhaps that is not enough of a challenge for you.

So far Arthra makes the best argument. Your condemnation of the church as a whole is erroneous. Yes, the mainstream church is full of what you say, but there are so many small chruches in out-of-the-way places that actually do the true teaching of Christ as per Bible. People tend to think that what they normally see on TV and even hear on radio is the real Christainity. It is embarassing to me to see such cheapening of God's word.

 

[Fuzzy]

People tend to think that what they normally see on TV and even hear on radio is the real Christainity. It is embarassing to me to see such cheapening of God's word.

Maybe not the "real" Christianity, but certainly the defacto Christianity.
Whoever has the loudest voice is heard the most.

 

[peaceful soul]

The Book of Acts and some of Paul's letters do reveal some interesting issues in the developement of early Christianity, there were apparent tensions between Peter and Paul for instance.

But I think it's not appropriate to introduce the concept of "heresy" in connection with Paul or the other figures of the early church at that time...

Heresy as a concept developed later after the church became better organized...and there were Bishops with administrative boundaries and so on. The later church fathers invoked "heresy" against the Gnostics, Marcionites and later the Manichaeans.

I believe that the early church in Jerusalem accepted Paul. The New Testament should be accepted as inspired.

- Art

The problem with the early church is the same as we have now: perversion of the Gospels. People just can not keep from putting their opions into the pure Word and passing it off as part of the message given forth from the Book. The Jews did the same thing with the Torah. They started to put their own thoughts into how to fulfill the Torah and they ended up distorting it. They lost the spirit of the law and made it into a religion. That is why Jesus was offended by the Pharisees, in particular.

This same trend bore its fruit with Paul and his detractors. James also tried to distort the Gospels when he tried to get the Jews to accept the teachings of Christ and still maintain the works of the Torah. This is what we refer to "watering down" the Gospels. Once Paul got word of that, he went to correct James and his followers. If you read James' material, you will see where He tries to bridge some of the teachings of the Torah with the teachings of Christ. If it was not for God raising up Paul, the Gospels would have been destroyed. Also, we can note that Paul did compromise in a couple of areas. I will discuss that later.

It is no wonder that we continually see these things play out throught history. It is not the Word that has changed: rather, the unwillingness of man to let the Gospels to speak to their hearts and souls. This gets back to the essence of sin. Without God's laws, man can only become more corrupt. It is by the grace of God making a covenants with us that we can even be as bridled as we are. The judgement of people making up their own rules is eternal damnation, judgement - katakrima.

We can see how the Gospels and the Torah were viewed by formation of the many sects that developed around this era.

 

[Atomagenesis]

Christ: "Who do you say that I am?"

Paul the only one who answered said "thou art Christ the son of the living God."

"Blessed are you Simon Bar-Jona for flesh has not revealed this to you but my father in heavem. And thou art Peter and Upon this rock, Peter, I will build my church (the catholic church) and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" Matt 16.

Christ here is saying that Peter is guided by the Holy Spirit to indentify who Christ really is, that flesh didn't reveal it to him but the Holy Spirit, that is the basis for the Catholic Church being guided by the Holy Spirit.

But let me get one thing straight here, the teachings of the Church are infallible not the actual clergy people, they are still subject to fall.

St. Ignatius of Antioch was the first bishop to call the Church Catholic and yes he was alive when some of the apostles were still alive.

Yes there were lay people in Christ's church once He ascended into heaven, if there weren't why would the apostles have been writing to other Church's in the epistles, obviously because there were lay people. If you want to say there weren't lay people while Christ lived is ok but there still were people who followed him who weren't apostles so they can be considered lay people.

 

[Starcrystal]

Peaceful Soul,
Thank you Starcrystal. We now have yet another denomination to add to our growing list of the lost and distorted. The next thing that you can do is to put your material into print and create you own bible. After that, you can get a following and create your own church. Isn't that how its done: disagree with Bible and then make your own gospel? How about sticking to the material that God said that He gave us. Perhaps that is not enough of a challenge for you.

So far Arthra makes the best argument. Your condemnation of the church as a whole is erroneous. Yes, the mainstream church is full of what you say, but there are so many small chruches in out-of-the-way places that actually do the true teaching of Christ as per Bible. People tend to think that what they normally see on TV and even hear on radio is the real Christainity. It is embarassing to me to see such cheapening of God's word.

In RE: your first paragraph, you couldn't be farther from the truth! In no way would I wish to create yet another denomination or write another Bible. Just because a small percentage of Pauls writings are erroneous does not mean we throw it all out. Just because some preachers like to quote Eliphaz's words from Job as gospel truth yet God himself passes judgement upon the man and his words does not mean we throw Job out either. All scripture must be discerned by the Spirit & in proper context. The important issues are really whether Christ has set you free from sinful bondage, and if you are really living according to his teachings. This includes helping others, releiving the oppressed, even helping strangers....

How many of you who call yourself Christians will pick up a hitchiker that you never met before? How many will reach into their pocket and give that spare change or a couple bucks to the beggar who asks? (Please don't let me hear "I don't give because I know they'll buy booze with it," etc, etc.) Jesus says give and don't let your left hand know what your right hand does. If they buy booze thats between them and God. You've done your obediance part.

On your second paragraph I'll give a healthy "AMEN" to that. Some smaller independant churches and home churches do walk in the Spirit. I happen to attend one myself. There are also true beleivers in every church, even the mainstream denominations. But there will come a day God gives them a choice to "come out from among them and be separate" and in that day they will need to choose between religious bondage, or freedom in the Spirit along with greater faith, power, and the working of blessings & miracles that will accompany it.