How should we read Paul?

[redleghunter]

Your comments evoke a fundamental attribute error.

Paul is also responsible in deviating from Jesus' preaching.

Paul craftily came up with suggestions to solve problems of the churches that don't support the way of Jesus!

Paul might have been more knowledgeable in the OT than the chosen apostles, but he missed out the sublime and profound teaching of Jesus while He was on earth. He took short cuts and deviated from the way in many a account.

Published book "Did Saint Paul Deviate From The Gospel" might help.

You mean Paul had his own abridged version of the Gospel without the preaching of Jesus!

John indirectly hinted at false apostles (other than the chosen 12) in Revelation

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!

Nothing prevented him to remain a 'chosen instrument' for the work of the Lord. He wanted that title badly because many were not prepared to accept him. Gentiles never knew the responsibility of an apostle apart being asked to preach the Gospel.

He had great zeal to add people to his flock no matter whether it is tune with the words of Jesus or not.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Still waiting for your reply to #453....

 

[expos4ever]

...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.

I lean the way you do on this, but it is a difficult position to manage and/or defend. Yes, I believe Paul wrote inspired scripture. But I also believe he wrote to particular people in a particular context - he was not really writing to us in the 21st century west. So, yes, I think we can legitimately "tune" some of Paul's teachings to the specifics of our time and culture - Paul's world was quite different from ours.

Perhaps some will counter that such an approach takes too many liberties - that we need to accept all of Paul's writing as timeless and applicable to all conceivable cultural contexts. I politely suggest that proponents of such a view need to at least ask themselves the following question: Is this strict literalist position really just a way for me to avoid the difficult task of understanding the differences between the 1st century world Paul was addressing and the world in which I live?

 

[jerry kelso]

He had great zeal to add people to his flock no matter whether it is tune with the words of Jesus or not.

righttruth,

1. Do you read your bible and do you know any scriptures to prove anything outside of anything you believe in?

2. Paul having a great zeal to add people to his flock had nothing to do with the actual context at all. That is just a general statement for all the apostles had a zeal to add to their flock for the gospel's sake.

3. 1 Timothy 2:15: Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. Giving an opinion is not rightly dividing the word of truth.

4. 2 Timothy 3:16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. If the old testament was the only scripture then Peter and John would have never written their books and they would have never been part of the canon. They have too much prophecy that is in accordance with the old testament and the covenants of Abraham and David for
5. Israel and their earthly calling and the church and their heavenly calling. There are also some things in their books that were not revealed or are contained in the old testament concerning the church and the details but this doesn't mean it is not scripture.

6. You have made an opinionated statement about 1 Corinthians 15:31. If you understand about debate and rebuttal you would start by telling what the context says and means. Even plain statement have contexts and plain statements can show the content and context of motive. Will you spin or give credible scriptural evidence to show you know about the scripture and its context. I'll be waiting. Jerry Kelso

 

[Righttruth]

Paul and all of the Apostles and disciples proclaimed Christ crucified, buried and Risen. What was Paul deceiving others on?

He never knew much of the important part of the Gospel, that is, words of Jesus.

 

[Righttruth]

Peter disagrees with you, as has been shown before. Thanks for your unsupported opinion though.

The support for Paul's apostleship has already been shown. Paul was

1. Called, chosen, and commissioned to preach the gospel by Jesus Himself (Acts 9)
2. Set apart by the Holy Spirit and sent to the gentiles by Jesus (Acts 13, Acts 22)
3. Persecuted and ultimately killed for his faith and devotion to Christ.

He has every mark of a true apostle, and there is nothing in scripture that speaks against his apostleship. If there were, you would have presented it by now.

I have already provided the proof from none other than the Lord Himself. Mark is different from actual when it comes to status and responsibility.

No I don't. If Paul said anything that disagreed with Jesus I would be the first to question it. Why do you limit the power of God by saying that He cannot reveal His Gospel to Paul?

I can't keep on posting excerpts from the published book where you find many examples.

The only one showing fanaticism here is you. You blindly accept the writings of a mechanical engineer over the writings of St. Paul the apostle, St. Peter the apostle, and the NT writers in general.

No, I am simply questioning the deviations of Paul.

Three possibilities come instantly to mind:
1. He heard the quote from another apostle
2. It was part of Jesus' revelation to him
3. He heard the quote from other disciples who listened to Jesus talk

He stayed with Peter for several days to get something about the ministry of Jesus. All the above three are possibilities, but insignificant considering the three and a half ministry of Jesus.

You need to demonstrate your ability to prove your account. I showed how the timeline matches up with the events documented in Acts. Your alternate timeline doesn't.

But that doesn't affect my point against Paul.

How many tribes are mentioned throughout the course of the Bible? Everyone knows Jacob had 12 sons, but that doesn't change the fact that there are 14 different tribes named among the "12 tribes" at various places in the Bible.

There may be hundred tribes. But doesn't change the important number 12.

Besides, doesn't matter if he replaced Judas. Judas was at one time an apostle. Then Matthias was chosen by men as an apostle. We also see in Galatians that James the brother of Jesus was an apostle. It is clear that Jesus did not limit the number of His apostles to 12, and neither should you.

James never claimed to be an apostle so also Jude. It is the Holy Spirit that chose Matthias. Nobody chose Paul as an apostle.

 

[expos4ever]

He never knew much of the important part of the Gospel, that is, words of Jesus.

I suspect this is a waste of time (per my earlier post) but I will venture to proceed.....

I really do not understand this. What is your specific objection? That Paul does not "quote" Jesus from the gospels, or otherwise re-articulate what Jesus taught?

Surely you must be capable of understanding that it may well have been God's purpose to give Paul a complementary role to that of Jesus. Let me ask you directly - do you deny this possibility and, if so, on what grounds exactly? I suggest that among other things, Paul's specific contribution is to explicitly argue that the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus constitutes the climax of the Abrahamic covenant. This is important for us to know precisely because it shows that the God of the Old Testament - who you presumably believe Jesus participates with as part of a Trinity - kept His promises.

You are in a difficult position, I suggest:

1. You cannot deny that Paul makes this very argument - it is really quite undeniable that he does;
2. You cannot deny that this is not important; to do that you would need to convince us that it does not materially help us to know that the God of the Old Testament has kept His promises! How can you possibly say this is not important? If you believe Jesus is "one" with the Father, you must surely understand that to know that the Father has kept His promises tells us that the Son, too, will keep his.

Now please address these issues substantively.

 

[Righttruth]

Your comments evoke a fundamental attribute error.

That is truth

 

[civilwarbuff]

James never claimed to be an apostle so also Jude. It is the Holy Spirit that chose Matthias. Nobody chose Paul as an apostle.

You realize Matthias was chosen before the Day of Pentecost?
And am still waiting on your responsed to #453.....

 

[nomadictheist]

I have already provided the proof from none other than the Lord Himself. Mark is different from actual when it comes to status and responsibility.



I can't keep on posting excerpts from the published book where you find many examples.



No, I am simply questioning the deviations of Paul.



He stayed with Peter for several days to get something about the ministry of Jesus. All the above three are possibilities, but insignificant considering the three and a half ministry of Jesus.



But that doesn't affect my point against Paul.



There may be hundred tribes. But doesn't change the important number 12.



James never claimed to be an apostle so also Jude. It is the Holy Spirit that chose Matthias. Nobody chose Paul as an apostle.

That doesn't change the fact that there are 14 that are, at different times, numbered among the 12. Stop evading and start quoting scripture. If Jesus' ministry is really the source of your disagreement with Paul you should have no problem doing this.

You keep saying "the deviations of Paul" but have yet to provide one actual deviation.

You keep claiming Paul was not called to be an apostle but have yet to provide one scripture that proves that.

You keep claiming that Paul was deceptive and a liar but have yet to provide one scripture that illustrates that.

Every time scripture is posted, you ignore it and go to your book that was written by a mechanical engineer who evidently believes himself wiser than St. Paul.

I rely on scripture for my truth. Other than you, nobody here has yet quoted a book about St. Paul. We have all quoted the Bible, and yet you continue to insist that it is we who do not rely on the Bible for our evidence, though you cannot find even one scripture to support your standpoint.

Your fanatical devotion to this book written by Devaprakash R. Shampur borders on occult. Shampur starts his book with the premise that Paul was a false apostle - already a poor approach and out of line with scripture - and goes on to use verses against false apostles to incriminate Paul, though none of them speak of Paul, and though Paul's writings are never found to be in contrast to the teachings of Jesus Christ. His entire approach to St. Paul is dependent on this notion that Paul - and Luke - as "rank outsiders" were unable to understand what it means to be an apostle. And he ignores the mountain of scriptural evidence that Paul is an apostle. He even falsely claims that Paul initiated the first division in the church - and even says the "Jerusalem church" - even though the events he describes took place in Antioch and were of a personal nature, not a doctrinal nature, and they occurred after Peter led the Jews into hypocrisy and created the first true division.

Yet you fanatically quote his book as though it were the Bible itself, and then claim that the New Testament Canon is not scripture. You are following a sect leader.

Jesus said "by their fruits you shall know them." Paul's fruits are plainly laid out in scripture. You have continually defamed and slandered him, but have yet to show even one valid proof of your claims. He is a wonderful example of one who lived out the instruction to live in such a way that even when people slander you and say all kinds of false things against you, their words will be proven false.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Every word true.....

 

[jerry kelso]

I have already provided the proof from none other than the Lord Himself. Mark is different from actual when it comes to status and responsibility.



I can't keep on posting excerpts from the published book where you find many examples.



No, I am simply questioning the deviations of Paul.



He stayed with Peter for several days to get something about the ministry of Jesus. All the above three are possibilities, but insignificant considering the three and a half ministry of Jesus.



But that doesn't affect my point against Paul.



There may be hundred tribes. But doesn't change the important number 12.



James never claimed to be an apostle so also Jude. It is the Holy Spirit that chose Matthias. Nobody chose Paul as an apostle.

wrongtruth,

1. Peter didn't even teach the same message Jesus did in his earthly ministry. The gospel is the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. He hardly said anything about his death and resurrection until the jews rejected him and the covenant of Abraham and David in the form of the KOH and the KOG which was only to the jews.

2. The disciples didn't even understand his death and resurrection in John 6 of eating his flesh and drinking his blood and many of his other disciples went back. He asked the disciples if they would go to and they said to whom shall we go for only thou has the words of eternal life.

3. In Matthew 16:22-23 Jesus told them he was fixing to be killed and rise again and Peter said I won"t let anyone kill you and he rebuked Peter, Saying; Get thee behind me Satan for you don't savor the things of God. This is a double reference because Satan was using Peter to thwart the redemptive plan of the cross of which Peter was ignorant of.

4. If Jesus would have taught his death, and resurrection to come to him and be saved it would have messed up the plan of God for he wouldn't have proclaimed the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand or else they would have had him killed so they could receive salvation in it's fullness because it could not be completed until Christ died. The prophecies showed that Israel would reject him and the church was predestinated before the world began or from the foundation of the world. This is why the church is to make Israel Jealous and why Israel has to be purged before they come back to God and enter their legal right to their earthly calling Isaiah 2:2-4; 9:6-7.

5. I am sorry but you don't have a clue about Jesus teachings and their purpose and why they were under the Mosaic law and not under new covenant teachings in his earthly ministry of the KOH and the KOG.
Hebrews 8:6-7 tells us that the new covenant replaced the old and that didn't happen until Calvary.
Hebrews 9:16-17: For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. Matthew 26:28 the blood of the Lord is the new testament.

6. Gradual revelation is the only way to understand how the redemptive plan of God unfolded through the ages and even in the beginning of the early church to the time that Peter got the vision of the clean and the unclean and learned that the gentiles were on the same level as the jews for in the body of Christ there is no jew, no gentile, no male, no female etc. This speaks spiritually on the same level. You don't have a clue and you need to recognize it and succumb to the truth of the word. Jerry kelso

 

[expos4ever]

Righttruth, please consider these words from Jesus in his interaction with Caiaphus:

But He kept silent and did not answer. Again the high priest was questioning Him, and saying to Him, "Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One? And Jesus said, "I am; and you shall see THE SON OF MAN SITTING AT THE RIGHT HAND OF POWER, and COMING WITH THE CLOUDS OF HEAVEN."

What is Jesus saying? Well, among other things, He quotes from Daniel 7, a text which speaks of a son of man character who arises and is given kingship over all the earth.

Now consider these words of Paul (Romans 15):

Again Isaiah says, "THERE SHALL COME THE ROOT OF JESSE, AND HE WHO ARISES TO RULE OVER THE GENTILES, IN HIM SHALL THE GENTILES HOPE."

I should need to say nothing more.

But, just to be sure you realize what is happening, I will: Paul is affirming the lordship of Jesus over the Gentiles, something Jesus claims to Caiaphus' face.

Paul and Jesus are on exactly the same page about this.

What say ye?

 

[Strong in Him]

Looks like I am the only one here who is not falling to his trap of trick.

Claiming to be the only one who is correct and sees/knows the truth is guaranteed to set alarm bells off.

 

[redleghunter]

He never knew much of the important part of the Gospel, that is, words of Jesus.

Now you are going to tell us of course what Paul missed in preaching the full Gospel.

 

[redleghunter]

That is truth

Which means you are in danger of bearing false witness against Paul.

Falsely attributing him characteristics, actions and thoughts (mind reading), is false attribution error.

Which means you are misleading people on this thread.

 

[Strong in Him]

Paul was also troubled by a messenger of Satan. I read all but accept that are complementary to the words of Jesus.

"Troubled by a messenger from Satan" is a reference to an illness, or other persistent problem that Paul had.
Pau; was chosen by Jesus, lived for Jesus, preached Jesus and died for him - of course his teachings are going to agree with what Jesus taught.

Yes, inspired by the Holy Spirit.

The Bible was inspired by the Holy Spirit - good.

Next question; would the Spirit of truth who leads us into all truth, inspire men to write books/letters that weren't true and inspire others to include them in Scripture? Basically, is the Bible a clear, truthful revelation of God FROM God - the God who is truth and cannot lie - or a bunch of random writings and we have to decide which are true and which aren't?

Hearing is more spiritual than recording. Words have been translated, modified, deleted, added by men with their biased minds.

Not at all. Hearing is subjective - even a crowd of people at a lecture may hear the same words differently.
If you say you have heard the Lord speaking to you, we can't contradict that you heard something because we weren't with you and didn't hear what you did. We can, and should, try to discern if it was from the Lord, which we do by measuring against the things taught and revealed in Scripture; including the writings of Paul because orthodox churches and theologians accept that his words were from God. If what you say God told you contradicts what has been written down in Scripture - eg if you were to say God told you that Peter was the Messiah - then we would reject your testimony. We couldn't deny that you had HEARD something, but could say with certainty that what you heard was not from God.

If you doubt the Spirit's ability to guide men as they wrote down his revelations, then you are saying that you don't really trust Scripture at all. The Gospels have been written down - how do we know that the words of Jesus - which you say are the only thing you trust - were actually written correctly?

Peter never called Paul an apostle

Why did he need to?

nor did he say he was inspired by the Holy Spirit.

He didn't say that he wasn't. Actually he said that ignorant men distort his writings, as they do the other Scriptures, 2 Peter 3:16, and that people do this to their own destruction.

John says that additional apostles are liars (Revelation 2:2)

No he doesn't.
Jesus commended those in Ephesus because they had tested people who claimed to be apostles, but weren't, and found that they were indeed false. Paul's name is not mentioned and this doesn't apply to him - except in your view. And your view, as far as I can see, is based entirely on the fact that there isn't a verse where Jesus said, "I am making you an apostle."

I'm still waiting for an answer to the question; if Jesus and the 12 accepted Paul, because they did not correct or rebuke him, why do you feel that you cannot? If Paul gave himself a title that God never intended, then that would be between him and God and he could be in a lot of trouble. That should not negate Paul's teachings and revelations about God.

 

[expos4ever]

Righttruth: Another comparison for you to consider.

Jesus said: "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."

Paul wrote: that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;

Again, Paul precisely echoes this most foundational of Jesus' statements regarding salvation.

Now, prithee, where do you say that Paul and Jesus part company? Please give chapter and verse.

 

[Righttruth]

Do you believe for a verse to be true it must be repeated over and over?

Jesus said repeatedly said truly, truly:

John 3
3 Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."

5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

11 Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony.

John 5
19 Therefore Jesus answered and was saying to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, unless it is something He sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, these things the Son also does in like manner.

24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

25 Truly, truly, I say to you, an hour is coming and now is, when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.

John 6
26 Jesus answered them and said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled.

32 Jesus then said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven.

47 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life.

53 So Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in yourselves.

John 8
34 Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, everyone who commits sin is the slave of sin.

51 Truly, truly, I say to you, if anyone keeps My word he will never see death."

58 Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am."

John 10
1 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter by the door into the fold of the sheep, but climbs up some other way, he is a thief and a robber.

7 So Jesus said to them again, "Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep.

John 12
24 Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.

John 13
16 Truly, truly, I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor is one who is sent greater than the one who sent him.

20 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who receives whomever I send receives Me; and he who receives Me receives Him who sent Me."

21 When Jesus had said this, He became troubled in spirit, and testified and said, "Truly, truly, I say to you, that one of you will betray Me."

38 Jesus *answered, "Will you lay down your life for Me? Truly, truly, I say to you, a rooster will not crow until you deny Me three times.

John 14
12 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in Me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these he will do; because I go to the Father.

John 16
20 Truly, truly, I say to you, that you will weep and lament, but the world will rejoice; you will grieve, but your grief will be turned into joy.

23 In that day you will not question Me about anything. Truly, truly, I say to you, if you ask the Father for anything in My name, He will give it to you.

John 21
18 Truly, truly, I say to you, when you were younger, you used to gird yourself and walk wherever you wished; but when you grow old, you will stretch out your hands and someone else will gird you, and bring you where you do not wish to go."

 

[Righttruth]

So you deny the Gospels as well?

No. I read all writings. The Holy Spirit convicts me of the preaching of Jesus and related complementary writings. Extraneous, extrapolated and extras I reject.