How should we read Paul?

[civilwarbuff]

Please seek that, it will not be automatically administered to you!

I have sought....and found.....

 

[civilwarbuff]

I have sought and continue to seek from past four decades with studies, fellowship and discussions.

So it is your own belief system?....not a put down just trying to understand where you are coming from.....

 

[Extraneous]

There are three things in the Great Commission: reaching out, baptizing and preaching the words of Jesus. So called evangelists are interested only in the first two points for their statistical boasting. They are least bothered about the words of Jesus. Instead they extensively quote Paul for convenience and comfort!

Regardless, Paul does mention baptism quite often, so your argument against him seems invalid.

 

[redleghunter]

He would have, if he had the final authority!

Who was in authority over Luther to trump him. He ditched the Pope.

 

[redleghunter]

No. Paul was commissioned to preach to all, Gentiles and Jews. Paul on his own took the easy short cut of confining to ignorant Gentiles that were easily made to accept compromises. This was not possible with Jews.

Sorry this is a poor argument. You will need to show us. Form a polemic and get back to us.

 

[redleghunter]

I don't need appendix for my system to work.

Perhaps if we knew what that system was...

 

[nomadictheist]

So you are denying that Jesus is the only one truth that God revealed through Him. You appear to believe different sources like different gods of Pagans!

No I'm not denying the Jesus is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. But truth is also revealed through the Holy Spirit. Jesus Himself said so.

If you're going to accuse me of believing in other gods, please cite your evidence from my posts.

That is nothing but the Holy Spirit speaking on behalf of Christ, part of Godhead's sharing and deed.

Those were Jesus' words, not mine.

That is what all claim to push their propaganda!

Paul was not pushing propaganda. He was preaching the Gospel.
Paul was called by Jesus Himself, attested also by Jesus to Ananias, confirmed by the apostles, suffered and nearly died for his faith many times... shall I go on?

No, I am arguing with Paul.



Paul was not there when Jesus gave these guidelines to understand the expected attitude and interaction with others of believers in the Lord. With an air of egoism, he directly accosted Peter openly though he may be right. I am questioning is blunt approach in this problem!

Jesus never said that you should never directly address a brother concerning sin. You are reading egoism into the events.

One ex: Gift of interpretation!

How is this a white lie? I would like your biblical proof please.

As I had pointed out earlier, the authorship of 2nd Peter is disputed. There are two things here: scripture and Paul's letters. They are not the same. Heretic Marcion, the first man to make his own canon, might have introduced these words!

The authorship of 2nd Peter is not widely disputed. It is only disputed by a few with an agenda to push.

He called men to preach what He had commanded, not their own pet theories!

You have yet to prove that Paul taught anything contrary to Jesus. Until you do, there is no credibility to anything you are saying. You are simply mounting non sequitur, ad hominem, a priori, and similar fallacious attacks that have no scriptural basis or support.

 

[Berean777]

Paul's teachings are hard to interpret, because they were catered to cultures and their primary discourses. Paul became what they wanted him to be in order to win them over to Christ, therefore context of culture plays a tremendous part to why Paul said what he said and to whom.

Don't believe what I say, just read his letters to determine how he caters his message to recipients of that culture and place.

 

[Righttruth]

Show us that. Give us evidence in the form of scripture.

Again, where is your evidence?

I cannot repeat over and over again same points to different friends. Please consider reading "Did Saint Paul Deviate From The Gospel." I can clarify further later.

 

[Righttruth]

People have been asking you what exactly you see in pauls words that go against the Lords words.

Ex: Jesus said that there is only one Teacher, that is, Jesus Christ. Paul speaks of teachers in a congregation!

1 Corinthians 12
28 And God has appointed in the church, first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, administrations, various kinds of tongues.

29 All are not apostles, are they? All are not prophets, are they? All are not teachers, are they? All are not workers of miracles, are they?

Ephesians 4
11 And He gave some as apostles, and some as prophets, and some as evangelists, and some as pastors and teachers,

 

[Righttruth]

Paul's teachings are hard to interpret, because they were catered to cultures and their primary discourses. Paul became what they wanted him to be in order to win them over to Christ, therefore context of culture plays a tremendous part to why Paul said what he said and to whom.

Don't believe what I say, just read his letters to determine how he caters his message to recipients of that culture and place.

Therefore, Paul should be considered in the context of time and people involved. All his letters were meant to specific immature congregations with problems. They cannot be blindly generalized and applied universally. One cannot come to a conclusion of a problem by just hearing one sided conversation in a phone!

 

[Righttruth]

Walking in the spirit is not compromise, its the only way for Jew or Gentile.

Then why did he confine only to Gentiles?

 

[civilwarbuff]

Therefore, Paul should be considered in the context of time and people involved. All his letters were meant to specific immature congregations with problems. They cannot be blindly generalized and applied universally. One cannot come to a conclusion of a problem by just hearing one sided conversation in a phone!

Paul had phone.......

 

[Righttruth]

Show us how you understand the Lords parables better than Paul did. Lets see some evidence.

Which parable Paul has explained?

 

[Righttruth]

1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

Right.

Matthew 3:11 "As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

Now Tom, Dick and Harry are claiming to baptize with the Holy Spirit resulting in speaking gibberish!

 

[Righttruth]

They were not all fisherman. I believe one of them was a tax collector, if im not mistaken.

You are right. Another was a zealot. However, all of them were not well known scholars in scripture as Paul was.

 

[Righttruth]

Paul had phone.......

No, but that is how his letters are interpreted now with all kinds of speculations!

 

[Righttruth]

I have sought....and found.....

You cannot stand there. You need to strive forward for perfection.

 

[Righttruth]

So it is your own belief system?....not a put down just trying to understand where you are coming from.....

We have the personal Savior. Blind mass-belief system is not truth.

Matthew 7
13 "Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it.

14 For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

Luke 13
24 "Strive to enter through the narrow door; for many, I tell you, will seek to enter and will not be able.

 

[Righttruth]

Regardless, Paul does mention baptism quite often, so your argument against him seems invalid.

My point is that he gave up administering baptism on his own--against the dictum of Jesus Christ.