How should we read Paul?

[Righttruth]

Paul is not an outsider, and apparently you do need Paul, because your accusation against him proves that you dont understand Christs words as well as you may think.

I will believe in Jesus directly, not through Paul.

 

[Righttruth]

I said anyone who would blind themselves with worldliness cannot see well enough to help others take the speck from their eye. Its only by forsaking our earthly lives of patriotism, politics and wealth, that we can be healed of our blindness. Going to bible school doesn't open our eyes, only following Christ does that.

How many pastors claim that? Instead they claim to know more about Paul.

 

[Righttruth]

Which words of Jesus? You already threw out the Gospel of Luke and Acts.

It's quite simple. Just list the books of the NT you have infallibly declared the words of Jesus.

I don't thrown out any book at all. I ignore any portion of the content that contradicts the preaching of Jesus. I rely on the four books of the Gospel to understand the life and preaching of Jesus which is the truth.

 

[redleghunter]

I don't thrown out any book at all. I ignore any portion of the content that contradicts the preaching of Jesus. I rely on the four books of the Gospel to understand the life and preaching of Jesus which is the truth.

What contradictions?

 

[Strong in Him]

This kind of argument and guesses don't help in discussing his self-claims.

You said that there was no way that Paul heard the words of Jesus. I asked you how you know that; you clearly don't.
If it could be proved that Paul was around when Jesus was teaching and heard his words, that would demolish at least part of your argument. Maybe that's why you don't want to consider the possibility.

 

[Commander Xenophon]

Yeah, that is believing the self-proclamations.

My goodness, this is what happens with Paul mania! We are expected to be witnesses to Jesus, not vice versa. This is pure blasphemy of subordinating Jesus to Paul. God forbid such thoughts! I wonder whether I should continue to discuss with you since you are in a spiritual abyss! Goodbye!

We do not subordinate Jesus to St. Paul, any more than we subordinate him to St. Peter or St. John or St. Jude or St. James.

The complete lack of contrast between the Four Evangelists, St. Paul and the other Apostles, especially St. John and St. Peter, really stresses this point. One perceives there was only slight tension between St. Paul and St. James, which St. Peter resolved; later St. Peter accepted correction from St. Paul. The result of all lf this was the Apostles all clrrected themselves and got the Christian faith rolling.

 

[Strong in Him]

Nobody endorsed the apostleship of Paul except his Gentile friend Luke. Compilation is not an endorsement of self-claims of Paul.

If they didn't endorse Paul Then why didn't they oppose, contradict him and expose his as being false? Why did they accept him, Acts of the Apostles 9:27-30; why did they listen to him, Acts of the Apostles 15:12; why did they send him out, with Barnabas and others, to the churches with a letter of greeting and instruction, Acts of the Apostles 15:22, 30-35? Why did Peter call him a dear brother and urge people to read his writings?
That Paul's letters were included in the NT IS an endorsement of them; they could have left them out. If Paul had been a false teacher, then when he died they could have destroyed all his letters and sent people to all the churches to "un teach" what he had taught. The fact that none one did so shows that they didn't have a problem with it.

Unless, for some reason, you are trying to say that Paul was wrong, the early church were wrong to have tolerated him, the Holy Spirit made a mistake in including his writings in the NT, all the compilers of the Bible were wrong, the church, which is useless anyway, has been wrong to accept and read Paul - and that you, and the person who wrote this book are the only two people who can see the truth about Paul.

 

[Strong in Him]

A Church should be led by saints and disciples who have given up all for the sake of the Gospel, not by salaried people for enlarging their families and comforts and who get trained in 'knowledge factories' with no sign of sacrifice. Now almost all churches have become social clubs.

Firstly, that's a generalisation and also a judgement. Have you visited ALL churches throughout the world? If not, how do you know that MOST have become social clubs?
Secondly, THE church is all believers. We meet in local fellowships, and those fellowships aren't perfect because we're not perfect. That doesn't mean that Jesus founded the church, is head of it and it is the church which is the bride of Christ.

Yes, He told to His chosen apostles who had given up all for the sake of the kingdom of God. How many are teaching that way the words of Jesus? People are comfortably spreading self-claims of Paul and using some of his cozy verses or part of a verse because that is their livelihood.

All churches teach the words of Jesus and the Gospel.
I doubt there is any church that would teach that Paul was a false apostle and we don't need to read his words.

Edited: because I think I may have got too personal.

 

[Strong in Him]

You don't need an outsider to understand Christ.

So you don't believe that Jesus chose Paul; that he was chosen by the Son of God?

 

[Truthfrees]

MOD HAT ON

Please discuss the topic and not each other.

If your post is missing it's for this reason.

MOD HAT OFF

 

[St_Worm2]

A Church should be led by saints and disciples who have given up all for the sake of the Gospel, not by salaried people for enlarging their families and comforts and who get trained in 'knowledge factories' with no sign of sacrifice. Now almost all churches have become social clubs.

"Preach, saying, the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out demons. Freely you received, freely give. Do not acquire gold, or silver, or copper for your money belts, or a bag for your journey, or even two coats, or sandals, or a staff; for the worker is worthy of his support." Matthew 10:8-10

"The Lord directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel." 1 Corinthians 9:14

"The Scripture says, YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING*, and The laborer is worthy of his wages**.” 1 Timothy 5:18 (Deuteronomy 25:4*/Luke 10:7**)​

enlarging their families

You believe that pastors, as a group, should disobey the first commandment God gave us as a people? Please show us where the Bible tells us that.

"God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth" Genesis 1:28​

knowledge factories

So the three years the Lord spent teaching the Apostles was a waste of time in your eyes It's also interesting that you recently took the opposite stance concerning these, "knowledge factories", when it suited your purposes to do so, claiming that the one valid credential your book's author had for writing the book he did was the fact the he was a seminary student.

almost all churches have become social clubs

Your evidence for this is .................................

People are comfortably spreading self-claims of Paul and using some of his cozy verses or part of a verse because that is their livelihood.

If this is what most are doing as teachers in our churches today, then you should have no problem providing us with a boatload of evidence showing that these claims of yours are true. So please, provide away!

Yours and His,
David

 

[Strong in Him]

MOD HAT ON

Please discuss the topic and not each other.

If your post is missing it's for this reason.

MOD HAT OFF

Sorry. I wanted to know why the OP refers to Paul as an outsider when he previously said he was chosen by Jesus. Maybe I worded it wrongly.

 

[St_Worm2]

Sorry. I wanted to know why the OP refers to Paul as an outsider when he previously said he was chosen by Jesus. Maybe I worded it wrongly.

Hi SiH, one of the ways the book (that Righttruth has recommended throughout this thread) refers to St. Paul in it's earliest pages is as a, "rank outsider". Rt has often used the exact same phrase to describe St. Paul in this thread.

 

[Strong in Him]

Hi SiH, one of the ways the book (that Righttruth has recommended throughout this thread) refers to St. Paul in it's earliest pages is as a, "rank outsider". Rt has often used the exact same phrase to describe St. Paul in this thread.

I see - thanks.

 

[Righttruth]

What contradictions?

I have indicated in the excerpts in reply nos. 680, 726 & 741

 

[Righttruth]

You said that there was no way that Paul heard the words of Jesus. I asked you how you know that; you clearly don't.
If it could be proved that Paul was around when Jesus was teaching and heard his words, that would demolish at least part of your argument. Maybe that's why you don't want to consider the possibility.

All those folks who heard him marveled at His teachings. I don't think Paul was prepared to identify with such groups. Whether he had heard it or not, let us not side track the issue of his speculations.

 

[Righttruth]

We do not subordinate Jesus to St. Paul, any more than we subordinate him to St. Peter or St. John or St. Jude or St. James.

The complete lack of contrast between the Four Evangelists, St. Paul and the other Apostles, especially St. John and St. Peter, really stresses this point. One perceives there was only slight tension between St. Paul and St. James, which St. Peter resolved; later St. Peter accepted correction from St. Paul. The result of all lf this was the Apostles all clrrected themselves and got the Christian faith rolling.

That is fine, but St. Paul was not an apostle.

 

[Righttruth]

If they didn't endorse Paul Then why didn't they oppose, contradict him and expose his as being false? Why did they accept him, Acts of the Apostles 9:27-30; why did they listen to him, Acts of the Apostles 15:12; why did they send him out, with Barnabas and others, to the churches with a letter of greeting and instruction, Acts of the Apostles 15:22, 30-35? Why did Peter call him a dear brother and urge people to read his writings?

John finally exposed the extra assumption of people who claimed themselves as apostles, including the claim of Paul.

That Paul's letters were included in the NT IS an endorsement of them; they could have left them out. If Paul had been a false teacher, then when he died they could have destroyed all his letters and sent people to all the churches to "un teach" what he had taught. The fact that none one did so shows that they didn't have a problem with it.

The chosen apostles were humble and semi-literate and did not have the arrogant attitude and persecuting trait of Paul to do that. It was not that simple in those days to follow what was happening elsewhere. NT was not the work of the chosen apostles. It was evolved later.

Unless, for some reason, you are trying to say that Paul was wrong, the early church were wrong to have tolerated him, the Holy Spirit made a mistake in including his writings in the NT, all the compilers of the Bible were wrong, the church, which is useless anyway, has been wrong to accept and read Paul - and that you, and the person who wrote this book are the only two people who can see the truth about Paul.

If you saw the early church history, we see people opposing Paul. And it started with Mark in the very first journey. Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to remind of His teachings, not to interpret writings of outsiders with their personal visions that oppose the preaching of Jesus. Why did John point out the problems of the seven churches? They were baptizing for the dead which Paul endorsed. Do you think every thing was rosy and in all the churches? Don't expect Satan to remain a spectator with all the things happening in all kinds of churches with their in fighting and blind enforcement. People have been burnt on stakes. Paul was troubled by Satan.

 

[Righttruth]

Firstly, that's a generalisation and also a judgement. Have you visited ALL churches throughout the world? If not, how do you know that MOST have become social clubs?
Secondly, THE church is all believers. We meet in local fellowships, and those fellowships aren't perfect because we're not perfect. That doesn't mean that Jesus founded the church, is head of it and it is the church which is the bride of Christ.

Do you check all pieces of meat to find out whether everything is cooked alright? Jesus established the Church with Peter leading it, who had given up all to follow the Master. The Jerusalem Church was led by chosen apostles who also had given up all for the sake of the kingdom of God. Any church anywhere in the world led by a family man with encumbrances and interests can only lead a social club for worldly betterment.

All churches teach the words of Jesus and the Gospel.

How many churches teach the Sermon on the Mount and practice it?

I doubt there is any church that would teach that Paul was a false apostle and we don't need to read his words.
Edited: because I think I may have got too personal.

They won't because it will be detrimental to their business.

 

[Righttruth]

So you don't believe that Jesus chose Paul; that he was chosen by the Son of God?

Yes, he chose him as an instrument not as an apostle since He had already recognized the twelve for His ministry to begin with.