How should we read Paul?

[civilwarbuff]

Institution of communion. Jesus never said to 'remember' his Last Supper with a ritual. the word 'remember' is Paul's invention, not supported by apostles who were present on the occasion.

Luk_22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
Got nothing to do with Paul.....

 

[Righttruth]

Paul was rejoicing in the LORD that despite his Christian Persecutions the LORD came through for him. He wrote it to comfort other believers who could have been suffering similar hardships.

Suffering is part and parcel of a true Christian life. If someone offers a way out, he is bound to offer compromises!

I'm sorry there was no time Paul exalted himself above the LORD Jesus if anything he admonished him and the LORD used him as His vessel. (2 Corinthians 1:21-24)

Then why did he claim exclusive apostleship? It was not necessary for a humble servant of Jesus.

He wasn't writing the Letters because he "wrote better" but because He loved writing the works of God.

I see how easy it is to read through all Paul's letters from a subjective mind and subject him to the kind of things you display on this forum. It's easy to view him as a self-centered, egocentric and narcissistic individual who pursued his individual revelations of the Gospel.

Christianity is life, not theory!

In fact, it's easy to see how he took dominance of the NT when compared the "Original" apostles hence your "ranking outsider."

Who doesn't like cookies?

Well, I think you have suffered sibling rivalry that displayed something close to this. Paul was just a servant of God who preached love, peace and unity to all the saints around the world. He's a very warm guy and feared the Judgment of the LORD more than anything else in this WORLD. (1 Corinthians 5)

No wonder he gave another candy title of 'saint' to all sundry in return for recognition of his apostleship. Pretty crafty!

 

[Extraneous]

The NT word "Saint" simply means a person who is set apart, different from the world, or holy. We are all called to be set apart from the world and be holy. Please get over your obsession with saints. We are all saints.

Not only are you angered because Paul called all believers saints, without any favoritism, but you seem to be ranting against protestants as well. It sounds as if you may be a disgruntled Catholic.

http://biblehub.com/greek/40.htm

 

[Righttruth]

I don't think we actually know that, do we?
Paul studied under Gamaliel who is also mentioned in Acts 5:34. Is it possible that Paul was a student Pharisee when Jesus was teaching?
Even if he wasn't, the important thing is that he met the risen Jesus and the apostles accepted this.

Not being a student of Jesus makes a big difference. Post resurrection issue is different. The issue is how much of the essence of the preaching Jesus Paul knew?

That doesn't matter. The apostles taught the cross and Jesus as Lord, not the parables.

Lots of preparation go with sharing the words of Jesus. The insight one would get depends on what truth actually heard.

If they didn't, and they were thought to contradict the teaching of Christ and the apostles, they wouldn't be in the NT.

Canon is man made. That is why why we have different versions for different groups.

If Paul didn't preach the Gospel, then, by his own words, he would be condemned to hell.

Why speculate on who goes to hell or heaven. Our salvation is through by being obedience to Jesus' words.

 

[Righttruth]

You do know that Paul's epistles were written before the Gospels? So Christians would have been reading about the Last Supper and the cross long before the Gospel writers recorded them. In fact, 1 Corinthians 11 is the earliest account of the Last Supper that we have.

True, Paul wrote earlier. The chosen apostles were observing communion based on John 6. Paul brought in an imaginary word 'remembrance' to begin a religion of ritual in the Gentile world!

 

[Extraneous]

Manipulation is the name of this game, i must assume.

 

[Righttruth]

How do you know that the congregations were immature? How do you justify your position? Evidence please!

1 Corinthians 3:
1 And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ.
2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able,

Explain why Paul's teaching should not be taught? Where is your evidence from the Lord in making this claim?

Jesus warned about false prophets. Anyone who claims titles other than what was given by Lord ought to be suspected.

Jesus said to the apostle, who was reluctant to receive Paul, that Paul is his CHOSEN INSTRUMENT to proclaim the gospel to the Jews, Greeks and Gentiles.

Right, but why Paul wanted the status of an apostle? Why did he stop proclaiming to Jews on his own?

Now let me ask you a question....If Jesus says that Paul is authorised as an authoritative figure to proclaim the gospel by the teachings written in his letters, to all the churchs, then do you regard the Lord's word, as the final authority in this regard, by accepting Paul as an authoritative figure?

OK as a chosen vessel sharing words of Jesus, not his suppositions.

If your reply is no, then you don't really obey the Lord's instruction. I mean if the apostle couldn't contend with the Lord in regards to how he complained about Paul being a man who persecuted the church back then, how is it that you contend against the departed saint, when he hasn't done anything to you?
What is your agenda here?

Protestants are dividing themselves mostly based on Paul's part or a few verses-- a sign of satanic decay and destruction. It is time to come out of that fission for our salvation. My thrust is not accept Paul when he writes against the preaching of Jesus.

 

[Extraneous]

1 Corinthians 3:
1 And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ.
2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able,

Paul's words never lead me away from Christs words, never. If they lead you away from Christs words then perhaps you are not ready for solid food yet

 

[Berean777]

1 Corinthians 3:
1 And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ.
2 I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able,

Paul is making his intentions known that he is going to speak straight forward in addressing the faith in layman's terms, so that the foundation of faith can be understood by all, as a pillar to build upon. Your intention is to presume that these men were ignorant. What about other places and letters, were they also ignorant according to your standards, in categorising them. You realise that you have pulled a verse out of context from one letter.

Jesus warned about false prophets. Anyone who claims titles other than what was given by Lord ought to be suspected.

So is Paul like the congregations he preached to all false prophets, because after all members of these Churches in different places were given a hierarchy of elders and titles associated with those responsible roles.

Right, but why Paul wanted the status of an apostle? Why did he stop proclaiming to Jews on his own?

Your not making sense, you need to further elaborate what you mean when Paul claimed to be an apostle. Paul would have been instructed by the church in Jerusalem just like any other apostle and given duties to perform to a specified group. The church made the decision for him, just like how Peter tells him to shave his head and go to the temple with three other people to perform in Jewish ceremonial services. Paul was accountable to the church, he was not free Lancer as you make him out to be.

OK as a chosen vessel sharing words of Jesus, not his suppositions.

There are no suppositions, if the Lord says that Paul is the instrument he will use to deliver the gospel to the Jews, Greeks and Gentiles then that is the end of the matter, case closed.

Protestants are dividing themselves mostly based on Paul's part or a few verses-- a sign of satanic decay and destruction. It is time to come out of that fission for our salvation. My thrust is not accept Paul when he writes against the preaching of Jesus.

That is purely your opinion and judgement call. I don't know if you are in a position to make that judgement call, but the Lord will have his final say in regards to you personally. I am not a protestant.

 

[Righttruth]

Neither of these is Jesus speaking. I asked for a scripture where Jesus explicitly called anyone an apostle by name.

You show me where Jesus called Paul an apostle, instead of 'chosen vessel' I think I will show what you are asking! Don't you know apostleship is a status and responsibility--not for presumptions and usurp authority!

There is nothing wrong with boasting of Jesus Christ. That is, in fact, the only thing we're supposed to be boasting about.

Where does Jesus asked something like in the manner of Paul? We are to imitate Christ, not Paul as demanded by him!

I do not judge Paul based on the fact that he was afflicted by a messenger of Satan. Neither do I assume that the other apostles either were or were not afflicted in such a way. The Lord deals with each in His own way, and has not decided to make that known to us in His word.

So you simply accept self-claims without considering integrity of a person? What happened to the ministry of Paul immediately after conversion in Arabia without the support from the Jerusalem church?

There is no evidence that Matthias was close to the ministry of Jesus. Nor was Luke or Mark.

Are you that ignorant of the act of choosing Matthias by disciples of Christ? Luke was the only Gentile writer in the entire Bible. It is well known that Mark was closest to Peter and he was part of the ministry of Jesus.

Peter said that Paul wrote "according to the wisdom given Him." And that wicked and unstable people twisted his words to their own destruction.

Divisions and denominations are signs of Satan. Jesus shows only one way to truth.

Negative. Scripture. Not a book written by a Paul-hater.

You are happy with writers of Paul mania!

No I don't. I accept Jesus and Paul, who is His "chosen vessel."

No, you admit his self-claim as an apostle!

Provide scripture. Claiming that you've provided scripture and pointing to your paul-bashing book does not prove anything. Of course Paul-bashers are going to bash Paul. It's what they do. Prove from scripture that Paul deviated even an iota from the teaching of Jesus.

The very claim of apostleship is misleading to begin with. What more you want. Do you test the cooking by devouring the entire piece of meat?

If you can't argue from scripture and put your Paul-bashing book on the shelf, then it's clear that neither you nor your Paul-bashing book. Having read some of this book and looked at your posts, I'm guessing, based on your posts and either lack of knowledge of or unwillingness to go to scripture, that your "extensive study" consisted of this book and no more. However, the fact that the author if this book starts the book off by stating that Paul couldn't have understood Jesus' teachings because he was a "rank outsider" -which he identifies - as you do - as someone who was not close to Jesus ministry here on earth - is evidence of his bias from the outset.

A typical reaction from a group that believes in redundant OT and Paul's appendix totally side tracking the Gospel!

 

[Righttruth]

Yes, i just love hearing how i don't need dunked in water (your interpretation of paul words) My ears just itch to hear that! I hate water so much, its just so difficult to get wet.

I understand. Probably, you hate even water baptism. You may be expecting Jesus to eat for you on your behalf with 'faith only gimmick'!

Although i haven't read your book, it sounds, by your own complaining, that it must be a horrible bunch of lies. Paul never stopped preaching to Jews. You are so misinformed by that wretched book of yours. Maybe you have never read these words from Paul.

That is presumptions in tune with Paul! Have you read Acts? Do you have your own historical books to show Paul, apart from calling himself as an apostle for uncircumcised, continued with Jews?

Whats your beef with protestants anyway? Are you Catholic?

I am a believer in Jesus. Proclaiming truth is my duty!

1 Timothy 6:3-4New King James Version (NKJV)

Error and Greed
3 If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which accords with godliness, 4 he is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words, from which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions,

Paul should apply that to himself!

 

[Righttruth]

Paul's words never lead me away from Christs words, never. If they lead you away from Christs words then perhaps you are not ready for solid food yet

The very first misleading step you take when you accept his self-declaration of apostleship! Nothing more need to be said.

 

[Righttruth]

Paul is making his intentions known that he is going to speak straight forward in addressing the faith in layman's terms, so that the foundation of faith can be understood by all, as a pillar to build upon. Your intention is to presume that these men were ignorant. What about other places and letters, were they also ignorant according to your standards, in categorising them. You realise that you have pulled a verse out of context from one letter.

You are underestimating the notoriety of Corinthian church! John has revealed the seven churches in Revelation.

So is Paul like the congregations he preached to all false prophets, because after all members of these Churches in different places were given a hierarchy of elders and titles associated with those responsible roles.

No wonder many called themselves, apostles, teachers, etc. with Paul's direction!

Your not making sense, you need to further elaborate what you mean when Paul claimed to be an apostle. Paul would have been instructed by the church in Jerusalem just like any other apostle and given duties to perform to a specified group. The church made the decision for him, just like how Peter tells him to shave his head and go to the temple with three other people to perform in Jewish ceremonial services. Paul was accountable to the church, he was not free Lancer as you make him out to be.

Immediately after conversion Paul did his ministry in Arabia. Nothing clicked there. Only after bringing him to Jerusalem Church though apostles were reluctant to accept to him, he started monopolizing the semi-literate apostles with his scholarly background of the OT sans spirituality! He wanted the title of apostleship to push his agenda in ignorant Gentile groups.

There are no suppositions, if the Lord says that Paul is the instrument he will use to deliver the gospel to the Jews, Greeks and Gentiles then that is the end of the matter, case closed.

If he is trying to impersonate as an apostle, case cannot be closed unless it is brought to the book.

That is purely your opinion and judgement call. I don't know if you are in a position to make that judgement call, but the Lord will have his final say in regards to you personally. I am not a protestant.

It is my duty exalt Christ. I have noticed that non-Protestant groups don't give much importance to Paul's epistles as Protestants do.

 

[Extraneous]

The very first misleading step you take when you accept his self-declaration of apostleship! Nothing more need to be said.

I find Paul's words agree with Christs words. If your beef is that he calls himself an apostle, then that's ok, because paul doesn't like titles anyway. I only follow paul because he helps me follow Christ. Paul is nothing to me, just a servant of the Lord. I dont worship Paul, i just keep his commands because they actually belong to the Lord, not Paul. His words agree with Christ. Not once has Paul words lead me away from a single command that Christ gave, no not once. Paul is not against baptism, preaching to Jews, following the words of Christ or anything else you have asserted. Paul exalts Christ in all things as well. I'll just need to allow to you slander Paul, and me for following Paul's words, because im really tired of reiterating the same things.It seems worthwhile and profitable me to stop debating with you. Jesus said to leave the blind alone because they will fall into a ditch. Proverbs says its good to stop quarreling. Guess what? Paul says the same thing. Is it ok to follow proverbs?

 

[Righttruth]

Luk_22:19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
Got nothing to do with Paul.....

19 And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, "This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me."
20 And in the same way He took the cup after they had eaten, saying, "This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.

Are you not aware of the fact that red words are not found in many early manuscripts? They may have been inserted by Paul's cronies!

 

[Righttruth]

The NT word "Saint" simply means a person who is set apart, different from the world, or holy. We are all called to be set apart from the world and be holy. Please get over your obsession with saints. We are all saints.

Not only are you angered because Paul called all believers saints, without any favoritism, but you seem to be ranting against protestants as well. It sounds as if you may be a disgruntled Catholic.

http://biblehub.com/greek/40.htm

We are called to become saints, not that we claim to be saints with mere belief in Jesus' name! A person is called saint by others; it is not self-claim in conformity with Paul's claims. I am a believer in Jesus without self-claims and identification.

 

[Righttruth]

Manipulation is the name of this game, i must assume.

Nothing can match Paul's

 

[Righttruth]

Paul's words never lead me away from Christs words, never. If they lead you away from Christs words then perhaps you are not ready for solid food yet

That is a delusion for sure! I continue to learn till my last breath.

 

[Righttruth]

I find Paul's words agree with Christs words. If your beef is that he calls himself an apostle, then that's ok, because paul doesn't like titles anyway. I only follow paul because he helps me follow Christ. Paul is nothing to me, just a servant of the Lord. I dont worship Paul, i just keep his commands because they actually belong to the Lord, not Paul. His words agree with Christ. Not once has Paul words lead me away from a single command that Christ gave, no not once. Paul is not against baptism, preaching to Jews, following the words of Christ or anything else you have asserted. Paul exalts Christ in all things as well. I'll just need to allow to you slander Paul, and me for following Paul's words, because im really tired of reiterating the same things.It seems worthwhile and profitable me to stop debating with you. Jesus said to leave the blind alone because they will fall into a ditch. Proverbs says its good to stop quarreling. Guess what? Paul says the same thing. Is it ok to follow proverbs?

Sorry, your ignorance is showing!

 

[Soyeong]

We are called to become saints, not that we claim to be saints with mere belief in Jesus' name! A person is called saint by others; it is not self-claim in conformity with Paul's claims. I am a believer in Jesus without self-claims and identification.

Deuteronomy 33:3 Yea, he loved the people; all his saints are in thy hand: and they sat down at thy feet; every one shall receive of thy words.

Psalms 89:5 The heavens shall confess thy wonders, O Lord: and thy truth in the church of the saints.

Israel was referred to as saints and as church in the OT. The terms are synonymous and refer to to anyone who is a member of God's assembly or chosen people.