How should we read Paul?

[Strong in Him]

Are you writing a Bible of your own? Out of many disciples, He chose 12 categorizing them apostles who will judge 12 tribes of Jews.

You're obviously not reading, or not choosing to read, what I'm saying. And please don't accuse me of re-writing Scripture.

That is your commentary. How many apostles were reading all the letters of Paul that were written to congregations away from Jerusalem?

I don't know; what's that got to do with what I said?
But the answer is, maybe a few. James, Barnabas etc were called apostles too; a fact you keep ignoring.

Jesus chose Paul not as an apostle.

He was an apostle because he was SENT by Jesus - again, something you are choosing to ignore.

But I have another question.
Paul said that he was an apostle; chosen and sent by the Lord Jesus. If he had no right at all to use the word apostle, then don't you think that either the Lord Jesus or the 12 apostles would have rebuked, criticised or rejected him? If they didn't - and there is no record of this; on the contrary they welcomed, affirmed and accepted him - then why do YOU believe you have a right to pass this judgement?

You admit that Paul was chosen by Jesus - Paul was chosen by the Son of God himself.
But you don't like a word that Paul used for himself - no one else in the NT had a problem with it, neither did the people who compiled Scripture. But almost 2000 years later YOU decide YOU don't like it, which results in you calling Jesus' chosen one a liar and someone who is untrustworthy.
Quite simply, if all those around Paul, plus Jesus himself, did not have a problem with him calling himself an apostle; what gives you the right to judge and condemn? Isn't this a matter between God and Paul? If the Holy Spirit had a problem with the words of an - apparent - liar being used in the NT, why didn't he do something about it?

Like I said before, if you believe that Paul's, or some of Paul's, writings are false, questionable or contain lies, then you are saying that the NT is untrustworthy - which, in turn, raises questions about the Spirit of Truth who inspired it.

 

[jerry kelso]

I am sorry to state that the worst delusion started with Pentecostal movement in USA about one hundred years back which was a relapse of notorious Corinthian church! So I may not be interested in debating with you because you rely on Oneness Doctrine which, I believe, is absurd.

righttruth,

I know you don't want to debate me but since you go by right truth I will ask you again to explain what Paul meant when he said, I die daily and give scripture to harmonize with it to see if you have the right truth. I'll be waiting. Jerry kelso

 

[Righttruth]

He was a Jewish man very zealous for his Jewish kindred and wanted them to all be saved, how on earth can you say that he caused division, after all he was chosen by the Pharisees as the Pharisee of Pharisees.

I am not worried about his favor with his people. That is understandable. I don't think he was chosen as a Pharisee of Pharisees. Of course, he was scholar compared to chosen apostles.

Paul's only guilt was if you want to label it as guilt, was to incite jealousy amongst his Jewish compatriots, by saying look at these Gentiles who don't even have the law, but they by virtue of their belief in Christ do the things that are in the law, as compared to you guys who pretend to do them outwardly, yet inwardly are far from obeying them. This is where Paul talked about the circumcision of the heart.

Jesus had already pronounced His woes on hypocrites.

Paul was spelling it out before the Romans that righteousness is solely tied to Christ and his gospel and that Jews without Christ have no circumcision of the heart. By doing this Paul would be inciting jealousy amongst his Jewish compatriots who had spies in the midst, who ended up delivering the messages to the rabbinical authorities and at the same time indirectly rallied behind the Gentiles to convey this message to the Jews without Christ. In other words Paul was using the Gentiles to indirectly deliver the gospel message to the Jews.

But parting away from the entire race in spite all resistance and violence was not expected.

So we see Paul doing all he can under his obligations to the Jewish people's, while being consigned to be the apostle to the Gentiles. There is absolutely no evidence that Paul was at all spiteful to the Jews or that he loathed them. Evidence points to a man who loved his Jewish people, so much that he would make himself their enemy, in order to incite them to jealousy, in order to jolt them into action, by moving their faith over to Christ. Paul was an excellent apologist that the Christian world has seen and his actions he regarded was to be a servant unto all, even though he made himself an enemy to the rabbinical authority of his days, even to this day it seems, "Khe friend! Shalom"

I don't see this as an approach required because love towards Christ is bound to invite jealousy and hatred from others as warned by Jesus Himself!

 

[Righttruth]

"If you are saying that Paul forgot the commandments of Jesus to reach out to the Jews also, you are mistaken. This man was so zealous for his fellow Jews, that the head of the church prevented him from being an apostle to the Jews.Just read how he is conveying that he is assigned to be an apostle to the Gentiles, though he wished that he could also directly preach to the Jews."

At the outset, Paul was not even an apostle let alone an apostle of Jews! Where do you see the head of the church preventing his preaching? Verse please.

Let me give you versus that not only highlight that he was prevented from preaching to the Jews by the church in Jerusalem, by Paul's own confession, but the Lord himself prevented him from doing so, by giving him a direct assignment to the Gentiles and instruction to leave Jerusalem immediately.

This came up after Paul had already decided to shun Jews and go to Gentiles on his own.

Paul's presence amongst the apostleship in Jerusalem was an uncomfortable one, especially owing to his own admission. At the same time, Paul was not in a position to preach to the Jews who wanted to tear him to bits, after he was seen by the Jews to have defected his post as a Pharisee.

In fact Paul misguided Jews who had gathered in large number by saying that he is a Pharisee even after conversion!

 

[Righttruth]

righttruth,

The reason you don't want to debate me is because you don't have scriptural backing.
I was raised Assemblies of God and my father was an Assembly of God preacher so I did not and don't believe in the oneness doctrine.
My father told me to be like the bereans and see whether or not what one preaches is the truth or not. I believe in correct hermeneutics and correct jewish history and correct hebraic perspective.
I believe denominations are not scriptural but we have them and some great christian people in them and we also have professors in them.
You say you may not be interested in debating which is understandable because you your post show no knowledge how to give a proper rebuttal.
If you think you understand about hermeneutics then I challenge you to tell me what you think Paul meant in 1 Corinthians 15:31 when he said, I die daily and provide scripture to harmonize with it.
Trying to interpret the bible without proper and sound hermeneutics and proper knowledge of history and the hows and whys of God's redemption plan and how it unfolded is absurd. So if you are going to claim to be right or more knowledgable then here is your chance. good luck. Jerry Kelso

Do you believe in speaking in gibberish that needs an interpreter for translation as indicated by Paul in 1 Corinthians?

 

[civilwarbuff]

Do you believe in speaking in gibberish that needs an interpreter for translation as indicated by Paul in 1 Corinthians?

This must be what you are speaking of:
1Co 12:10 to another miraculous results; to another prophecy; to another the ability to distinguish between spirits; to another various kinds of languages; and to another the interpretation of languages.
And your interpretation could not be more wrong....it is self evident what the meaning is unless, of course, 1 Cor 2:14 applies to you. Try reading Acts 2.

 

[jerry kelso]

Do you believe in speaking in gibberish that needs an interpreter for translation as indicated by Paul in 1 Corinthians?

righttruth,
I didn't ask about 1 Corinthians 12-14, I asked you about 1 Corinthians 15:31 in the phrase, "I die daily"!. It was a pretty simple question and in english. Do you speak english? LOL! Just answer the question about 1 Corinthians 15 first then we can get to 1 Corinthians 12-14. Do you understand this? I'll be waiting! Jerry kelso

 

[Berean777]

At the outset, Paul was not even an apostle let alone an apostle of Jews! Where do you see the head of the church preventing his preaching? Verse please.

I have already provided you the versus, after all the head of the church is Christ himself. It is Christ who have him his orders to leave Jerusalem.

This came up after Paul had already decided to shun Jews and go to Gentiles on his own.

I feel that this is your opinion, so it is my turn to ask you for chapter and verse.

In fact Paul misguided Jews who had gathered in large number by saying that he is a Pharisee even after conversion!

I feel that this is your opinion, so it is my turn to ask you for chapter and verse.

 

[Berean777]

I am not worried about his favor with his people. That is understandable. I don't think he was chosen as a Pharisee of Pharisees. Of course, he was scholar compared to chosen apostles.



Jesus had already pronounced His woes on hypocrites.



But parting away from the entire race in spite all resistance and violence was not expected.



I don't see this as an approach required because love towards Christ is bound to invite jealousy and hatred from others as warned by Jesus Himself!

Paul was multicultural and empathetic in his approach to delivering the gospel into the heart of the recipients. This approach in his days was unheard of. Even today teachers struggle to deliver eduction to children through multiple instructions, whilst taking into consideration the primary discourses of the students, owing to context of culture and context of situation. Paul was a professional teacher in using what only a few modern teachers have mastered today, in order to get the message through to people's minds.

How can you say what you say about Paul.

If Paul used his pharisical upbringing and education, to deliver the gospel, gentiles either would become Jews by culture, or they wouldn't recieve his message at all. In fact there would be no gentile living today who can claim to be Christian, rather they would say that they are Jews. This would include the last 2000 years. It would be hypocritical of a gentile to call Paul a hypocrite for using context of culture, in delivering the gospel.

 

[expos4ever]

I agree with all of you who are defending Paul. At the risk of appearing to be cynical, I suggest you are beating a dead horse - I see no evidence that this is a productive exchange of views. Perhaps your energies would be better expended in other threads. And I really do agree with all of you - I just think you are likely wasting time and energy (one has to judiciously pick one's battles).

 

[Berean777]

I agree with all of you who are defending Paul. At the risk of appearing to be cynical, I suggest you are beating a dead horse - I see no evidence that this is a productive exchange of views. Perhaps your energies would be better expended in other threads. And I really do agree with all of you - I just think you are likely wasting time and energy (one has to judiciously pick one's battles).

It's the same statement told to parents, to why they continue to instruct their children, when their children continue to ignore them. Believe it or not, the parents hold out hope that this repeated drumming of truth will effect their children, later down the track, when they are in a position to make an informed and unbiased choice. As for this gentlemen, we as servants of Christ are providing him the same message repeated by many mouths, in the hope that when this gentlemen later down the track is in a position to make a better informed and unbiased choice, that he would reflect on what was preached to him previously. When it comes to delivering the message of Jesus into the hearts of men, there is no efforts that is in vain, rather the Lord sees the efforts of his servants and he in turn, places that individual in a life situation (context of situation), that will enable that person to reflect and to finally come to embrace what was preached to him/her. I believe that this case is no different. We can only hold out hope for @Righttruth. As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it to drink.

 

[redleghunter]

I am not worried about his favor with his people. That is understandable. I don't think he was chosen as a Pharisee of Pharisees. Of course, he was scholar compared to chosen apostles.



Jesus had already pronounced His woes on hypocrites.



But parting away from the entire race in spite all resistance and violence was not expected.



I don't see this as an approach required because love towards Christ is bound to invite jealousy and hatred from others as warned by Jesus Himself!

By your posts I come to the conclusion you think Paul was a false prophet.

Do you discount the Damascus road conversion of Paul and the commission Christ gave him?

Let's cut to the chase shall we?

 

[civilwarbuff]

Don't hold your breath....the only chase here is a dog and its' tail....

 

[Grateful-Nikki]

i am a new beleiver and this question is a question i struggle with. i too before becoming a beleiver was wanting to read only the gospels. i thought that wathever JC says is right. so for example, the letter to corinthians when he talks about marriage or wearing a hat to cover women head out of respect for ministry, in orther words discipleship are not what Jesus talked about. so yes i believe that the whole book is God, but paul was a human, and you know the telephone game......

so please, for a new beleiver, what are we to think of all the rules and regulations given by paul. I knoow a bit of the context, there was difficulty with women in the ministry.... also the way jewish traditions where, women did not have their place in gods worship. so i do beleive that it was in answer to the problems that women were causing by actually taking to much room in the ministry. and since i beleive that the Bible is divinely inspired, the solutions found were too... but that means that those rules are for that ppl in that time period. lets say where i live its not a problem to have women ministry.... then no need to cover her head. soory if im not going deep enough. im very very new. and in no way mean to teach anyone, i am just putting my thoughts out.

 

[redleghunter]

At the outset, Paul was not even an apostle let alone an apostle of Jews! Where do you see the head of the church preventing his preaching? Verse please.



This came up after Paul had already decided to shun Jews and go to Gentiles on his own.



In fact Paul misguided Jews who had gathered in large number by saying that he is a Pharisee even after conversion!

You keep saying this. I will post again what Paul said about this:

1 Corinthians 9:


19 For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a servant to all, that I might win the more; 20 and to the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to thosewho are under the law, as under the law, that I might win those who are under the law; 21 to those who are without law, as without law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ, that I might win those who are without law; 22 to the weak I became as weak , that I might win the weak. I have become all things to all men,that I might by all means save some. 23 Now this I do for the gospel’s sake, that I may be partaker of it with you.


I have answered the OP topic. The above tells us how to read Paul.

 

[civilwarbuff]

i thought that wathever JC says is right. so for example, the letter to corinthians when he talks about marriage or wearing a hat to cover women head out of respect for ministry, in orther words discipleship are not what Jesus talked about. so yes i believe that the whole book is God, but paul was a human, and you know the telephone game......

You are not saying Jesus Christ (JC) wrote Corinthians are you?....cuz that sure is what it reads like...

 

[civilwarbuff]

so please, for a new beleiver, what are we to think of all the rules and regulations given by paul.

What rules and regulations? Please give scripture.

 

[redleghunter]

i am a new beleiver and this question is a question i struggle with. i too before becoming a beleiver was wanting to read only the gospels. i thought that wathever JC says is right. so for example, the letter to corinthians when he talks about marriage or wearing a hat to cover women head out of respect for ministry, in orther words discipleship are not what Jesus talked about. so yes i believe that the whole book is God, but paul was a human, and you know the telephone game......

so please, for a new beleiver, what are we to think of all the rules and regulations given by paul. I knoow a bit of the context, there was difficulty with women in the ministry.... also the way jewish traditions where, women did not have their place in gods worship. so i do beleive that it was in answer to the problems that women were causing by actually taking to much room in the ministry. and since i beleive that the Bible is divinely inspired, the solutions found were too... but that means that those rules are for that ppl in that time period. lets say where i live its not a problem to have women ministry.... then no need to cover her head. soory if im not going deep enough. im very very new. and in no way mean to teach anyone, i am just putting my thoughts out.

Welcome to CF Nikki. Controversial theology may not be the best place for edification of a new Christian. Posing your questions in the New Christian thread might be a better place:

http://www.christianforums.com/forums/for-new-christians.43/

Loads of loving hands there.

God Bless.

 

[Grateful-Nikki]

You are not saying Jesus Christ (JC) wrote Corinthians are you?....cuz that sure is what it reads like...

lol no!!!! haha!!

Welcome to CF Nikki. Controversial theology may not be the best place for edification of a new Christian. Posing your questions in the New Christian thread might be a better place:

http://www.christianforums.com/forums/for-new-christians.43/

Loads of loving hands there.

God Bless.

ok THANK you, still trying to get the hang of this forum. its hard, so clicking on new posts is not the best option. grrrrrr this is hard, i dont even understand what apologetics means or edification. ok dictionary come here old friend from school.

 

[St_Worm2]

Hi Nikki, I'd like to say WELCOME TO CF as well .. If you need any help figuring this place out, don't hesitate to ask us, or the Mods, of course

Yours and His,
David