Did Paul Teach Heresy?

[billwald]

Paul taught a different theology than the Jerusalem Church. Recall that the Gospels were written after Paul's letters. If Paul was correct, then why do the Gospels have Jesus saying that he did not come to end the Law?

 

[Starcrystal]

Acts 15:36 - 40 shows that Pauls controversy with Barnabus over John Mark causes them to go their separate ways. "But Paul chose Silas and departed," shows Paul initiated the division of the team. Now look back to Acts 13:2 where the Holy Ghost says, "Separate Barnabus and Saul (Paul) for the work whereunto I have called them." It seems after Pauls decision to over-ride the Holy Ghosts commission, that the Holy Ghost begins to actually forbid Paul from going to places he wanted to go.

We can speculate all we want, finding reasons to defend Paul, but fact is, Paul made a choice that was outside of Gods original plans for him and Barnabus. Now God still works all things for good, and we see fruit borne of Pauls ministry. This still does not sanction his actions and later his writings which go against God.

We must also remember Paul, as with many Christians, starts off on track and later deviates from the strait path. Pauls New Testement letters are mainly written from prison in Rome, after his journeys recorded in the book of Acts. If we look at letters written to Gentiles in Acts 15:23 - 29 giving simple instructions - not new doctrines and divisive heresy as Paul later wrote from Rome, we discover Paul indeed does add things of his own opinion to Gods word.

In 1 Corinthians 5 Paul judges a man and instructs the church to cast him out, literally. (Yet Christ received sinners and said "judge not that ye be not judged.") 2 Corinthians 2:4 - 9 addresses the aftermath of pauls act, where he tries to clean it up and actually admits that he wrote the instructions in the first letter to prove the Corinthians obedience!

Its hard to beleive the same man who wrote 1 Corinthians 5 also wrote such beautiful (and true) passages as Romans 12:9 - 21 and Colossians 3:12 - 14. Who was Paul to judge that man? Yes, he had committed acts of immorality. That wasn't good. But Jesus himself associated with the woman at the well who was in an ongoing immoral relationship! Is Paul above Christ now?

Its interesting in Revelation chapters 2 and 3 where Christ rebukes and warns the 7 churches (Ironicly churches established directly or indirectly by Paul!) he never once mentions Paul. Jesus only mentions Antipas his faithful martyr. (2:13) The true prophet, John, who was the disciple Christ loved, never mentions Paul in Revelation!

Jesus appears to have commissioned Peter in Matthew 16:17 - 19 and John 21:15 - 17 to establish His church. Peter - not Paul! Peter - not a Pope, but a simple fisherman who was fallible like anyone else. Jesus simply told Peter, "Feed my sheep." as John records.

Somehow the catholic church rallied around Peter and proclaimed him a Pope, creating asystem of religion built upon a man long after he had died. The Protestant churches rallied around Paul and exalted him, proclaiming Paul as the true builder of the Christian church!

Where is God in all this? Where are Christs teachings? I truly wish Paul were here today to respond to this - then we might get to the bottom of it once and for all. Perhaps he would confess and repent to the surprise of many!

 

[Crispie]

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.

What I find funny is, if thi sis true, that only the Holy Spirit is to teach you, not the Holy Spirit teaching people through other men, then everything Paul teaches is null and doesnt count.

 

[Crispie]

Paul taught a different theology than the Jerusalem Church. Recall that the Gospels were written after Paul's letters. If Paul was correct, then why do the Gospels have Jesus saying that he did not come to end the Law?

It also says he came to fulfull the law, meaning, to finish the law.

 

[Lifesaver]

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

Causes her to commit "adultery".

How can man separate what God binded together?

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

And I never said it did.
You just raised this to pretend you had a point.

 

[ravenwolf]

So, if Jesus' said he did not come to end the law....and then he says he came to fulfill the law, meaning finish it, then isnt that a contradiction???

 

[peaceful soul]

What I find funny is, if thi sis true, that only the Holy Spirit is to teach you, not the Holy Spirit teaching people through other men, then everything Paul teaches is null and doesnt count.

Not only that, as I think that I have mentioned; it makes the Bible void as God's word. That implies that it can not be authoritative on any level, which would make Jesus Christ a fake. The "Word" and the "Spirit" can not disagree period; that is what Starcrystal is claiming. Starcrystal is pouring more gasoline onto an already destructive fire and he/she is in the midst of that fire.

 

[ravenwolf]

maybe you should all quit being so judgmental. I think perhaps that is the biggest turn off of Christianity....the judgmentalism and self-righteousness.....becuase u would have to be self righteous to think you can judge somebody else.

 

[peaceful soul]

So, if Jesus' said he did not come to end the law....and then he says he came to fulfill the law, meaning finish it, then isnt that a contradiction???

No. The law is still God's standard of holiness. His standards do not change. Only the legalistic means of fulfilling it did. Christ was able to do all of the laws, thus completing them. To be able to keep all of the laws continually meant that you were not under God's judgement. That meant that you are complete as God is. God's point was to show the Jews that they could never measure up to His standards no matter how hard they tried.

With Jesus' mediation on our behalf, we no longer have to labor in legalism to honor God; instead, we now labor in faith. What faith? The faith of Christ; for He unconditionally gave His life that we may be removed from the burden of our own works to obtain righteousness before God. Now our righteousness comes from God, Himself through the intercession of the Holy Spirit. We only need to trust in Christ as His mediation with His Father covers us. Faith is the only true means of a relationship. Doing rules for compliance is not trust; it is comformity to law. God has always wanted trust from us. That can only come through love - not ritualistic behavior as a set of rules mandate.

So, anyone who insists on obtaining their salvation by keeping all of the Mosaic laws are going to be judged by that standard, but those who accepts Christs mediation will be judged by their faith in Him. Christ has already completed the work; so, why should we want to do it on our own. That very idea is arrogant and can only lead to a judgement against you as guilty; for you can not be holy on your own.

I hope that helps.

 

[ravenwolf]

oh, that makes sense then, tho i dont agree
Blessings
~ravenwolf

 

[peaceful soul]

maybe you should all quit being so judgmental. I think perhaps that is the biggest turn off of Christianity....the judgmentalism and self-righteousness.....becuase u would have to be self righteous to think you can judge somebody else.

Who is being judgemental? Is this in reference to Starcrystal?

 

[ravenwolf]

yes.

 

[ravenwolf]

Starcrystal is pouring more gasoline onto an already destructive fire and he/she is in the midst of that fire.

that is a judgement.

 

[peaceful soul]

that is a judgement.

Did not Starcrystal make a judgement? Judgements have to be made; how else can you tell good from bad?or right from wrong? How can a person discern if they do not have a standard of comparison? Explain that one to me.

Selfrighteousness is making your personal standard the one to follow while purposely ignoring all other considerations. When we make ourselves a judge above scripture, then you have a point. As long as we are making our judgements in line with scripture, there is no justification to object.

According to you, I can not even comment. For that matter, you can not even object to anything anyone else says. When you agree with someone, you are also making a judgement. Think about it, Ravenwolf. You can not live without judging some one or some thing. It is not the judgement that is wrong; rather it is the kind of judgement that makes it wrong.

 

[ravenwolf]

I did not say making a judgment...i said judging SOMEONE...there is a difference. Yes we all have to make judgemnts. But I dont think it is right to judge someone else and say they are in the midst of fire liek u said, or things such as they are not of God, or so and so is going to hell, or ur religion is not the correct one. I see those judgments OF PEOPLE here all too often. So it is not the fact that one is judging, but what it is they are judging that bothers me.
Blessings
~ravenwolf

 

[ravenwolf]

Also, this is my take on the whole judgment thing. You can judge obvoise things, such as this action is right and this action is wrong, or you can make judgemtns about the Bible that you erad, because all of these things are observable. But u can not observe soemones inner soul. Threfore you cannot make a judgment of where they stand. You made a judgemtn of Starcrystal and it implied that he was not in a good place(menaing his heart...or inner soul) yet you cannot even observe this. There are things we can judge, yes, those things which we can observe, but niether u or i can observe anothers heart and sou and where they stand with themselvs, God and the Universe.

Blessings
~ravenwolf

 

[Starcrystal]

Ravenwolf,
maybe you should all quit being so judgmental. I think perhaps that is the biggest turn off of Christianity....the judgmentalism and self-righteousness.....becuase u would have to be self righteous to think you can judge somebody else.

I partly feel guilty for introducing this subject, although I am not trying to be Pauls judge. Only God can be that. I am only pointing out areas where he introduces doctrine that contradicts Jesus, Peter (as I plan to explain) and even himself. If we are going to take written words as Gods absolute truth than we need to be sure it is truth. If not, we have the right - no, the obligation to offer insights into why it is or isn't true.
I also realise some have passed judgement on me for what I've written... thats Ok. I forgive them, and I even understand because 15 years ago I would have been blasting away here in defence of pauls legalistic teachings simply because thats how the church taught me....
Thanks Ravenwolf.... you're right, no one can judge someones inner soul. And as far as Pauls standing with God, thats Gods business not mine. Personally I beleive he has eternal life because I saw him in a vision in the 7th realm along with Moses & John 10 years ago during an astral journey.


Now to the subject I'd planned to discuss.

I'm surprised that those of you who are Catholic are so quick to jump to Pauls defence. You claim Peter as the first Pope, yet paul in Galatians 2:11 - 14 publicly rebukes Peter. theres the nonsensical firstfruits of denominationalism there.

While I don't erecognise Peter as a Pope, I do see from the gospel that Peter was the one commissioned to carry on Christs teachings and feed his sheep, as I posted yesterday. Acts chapters 2 - 5 show Peter doing just that.

Its also interesting that Luke records in Acts 11 and Acts 15:7 - 11 Peter claiming HE was the one chosen by God to preach to the gentiles, and in Acts 15 he goes so far as to refute the very thing Paul accuses him of doing in Galatians 2! Paul also contradicts Peters claim in Galatians 2:7. Is Paul usurping authority over Peter here, claiming he and not Peter is chosen to preach to the gentiles?

Are we to beleive Peter or Paul? Theres an obvious contradiction between what is recorded about or by the 2 men. And consider Peters subtle warning in 2 Peter 3:15 - 17 - a passage thats been misinterpreted for centuries....

What we do see is Peter defending Pauls position in Acts 15, then Paul later writing the galatians claiming Peter was actually one of the leaders who caused the dispute! Obviously there's a problem here. On these issues we can certainly seek the spiritual truth and pass a judgement on the teaching. Let God judge the people, for only God knows why all this happened. But we have churches instructing Christians using some of pauls words which have caused divisions & downright hatred through the centuries.

Maybe we should put aside these confusing and contradicting issues and just get along in Spirit. But yet some still will defend error and in doing so cause harm to those who just desire to walk in the spirit.

 

[Talmidah]

It also says he came to fulfull the law, meaning, to finish the law.

That's really interesting...that someone came to finish the law that G-d had said was perpetual, everlasting. What does that make G-d?

 

[peaceful soul]

I did not say making a judgment...i said judging SOMEONE...there is a difference. Yes we all have to make judgemnts. But I dont think it is right to judge someone else and say they are in the midst of fire liek u said, or things such as they are not of God, or so and so is going to hell, or ur religion is not the correct one. I see those judgments OF PEOPLE here all too often. So it is not the fact that one is judging, but what it is they are judging that bothers me.
Blessings
~ravenwolf

That is ludicrous, Ravenwolf! You are telling me that now I can not even make comparisons. You are not even rational if you are trying to disallow me that choice. When you say that obedience to Jesus Christ is not the only way to salvation, you are making a judgement too, for example. By your analysis: making a judgement and not telling someone is OK. Your intent is a component of a judgement too according to the Bible.

If I judge you by scripture, there is no recourse for you except to accept it. You have no grounds to get mad. If you do, then it is your own problem. No one here has any intent to harm you. Of course, there are always exceptions, but they should be obvious. We are trying to hold a conversation based upon a Biblical perspective.

Eye opener:

1) You are going to hell.
2) You are going to hell if you do not accept Christ as your saviour.

1st sentence is without warrant unless the person making the statement knows adequate information about the other person. If the other person makes statements denying Jesus Christ and His glory, he or she is going to be separated from God. He or she would be going to hell. If this information is not available to make such a judgement, then the judgement is made in error. That type of judgement is forbidden in scripture unless it is an honest mistake.

2nd statement is not problematic because the stipulation is made based upon the Bible. There were no assertions outside of the scriptural domain. That would not be a personal opinion trumping scripture.

I should not have to explain this to you either. What can not you understand?

 

[peaceful soul]

Also, this is my take on the whole judgment thing. You can judge obvoise things, such as this action is right and this action is wrong, or you can make judgemtns about the Bible that you erad, because all of these things are observable. But u can not observe soemones inner soul. Threfore you cannot make a judgment of where they stand. You made a judgemtn of Starcrystal and it implied that he was not in a good place(menaing his heart...or inner soul) yet you cannot even observe this. There are things we can judge, yes, those things which we can observe, but niether u or i can observe anothers heart and sou and where they stand with themselvs, God and the Universe.

Blessings
~ravenwolf

There is no Biblical basis for what you say, Ravenwolf. Judgements are just that - judgements. Without a standard set aside by God, we can not discern morality or anything else with any certainty. How are you going to be conscious of everything you do in order to implement what you say? You can't. You are not God. We are all prone to false judgements if we do not depend opon the wisdom that our Heavenly Father teaches us.

The inner-soul argument is too often abused. If that is the case, you can not judge me on what I said to Starcrystal. Do you know my inner soul? Do you know whether I am being truthful or not if it is so vital to probe my inner self? We make judgements based upon what comes out of the person's mouth and his or her actions, from their beliefs, etc. I am making judments on Biblical terms. When I go out of context of scripture, you have permission to confront me.

If you judge the Bible, you are still using your criteria as the standard instead of the scripture as the standard since you do not believe in it. You are then guilty as we are if we are judging. Do you know the inner workings of those who wrote down the scriptures? Do you know if they were lying as you imply by not accepting what they say? Are you considering how offensive they may be if they could sit down and talk to you right now?

Ravenwolf, you can not justify what you believe - at least on Biblical grounds. Your own standards may warrant it, but do not try to prevent me from being sincere and honest in my using my Bible to make discernment of myself and others. That is one of the reasons my Heavenly Father gave me the Book as a guideline in the 1st place.

Any way, enough of this. If you do not agree with making judgements. Let us just disagree and continue with discussing OP. That is more than fair.