How should we read Paul?

[Extraneous]

@Righttruth

Please, dont judge Paul to quickly, keep your mind open. Many people misunderstand him at first, just as Peter also said. I struggled with many of his writings but in the end i saw the wisdom in his words, and how they do not contradict Christ at all, but actually preach Christ.

 

[Righttruth]

I don't follow your reasoning. I suggest that Paul's writing adds an important theological dimension to the material in the gospels. To be more specific: Paul argues, convincingly in my view, that Jesus' life, death, and resurrection constitute an entirely appropriate, if surprising, climax to the covenant story of God and Israel. I suggest this important truth is not really presented in the gospels.

So why can Paul not be seen as independently contributing "theological concepts" to the Christian worldview?

Without knowing the way, the life and truth as preached by Jesus, theological concepts are only good for arm-chair complacent Christians to munch about fruitlessly.

 

[Righttruth]

@Righttruth

Please, dont judge Paul to quickly, keep your mind open. Many people misunderstand him at first, just as Peter also said. I struggled with many of his writings but in the end i saw the wisdom in his words, and how they do not contradict Christ at all, but actually preach Christ.

Perhaps, published book, "Did Saint Paul Deviate From The Gospel?" may be helpful for consideration.

 

[Extraneous]

Perhaps, published book, "Did Saint Paul Deviate From The Gospel?" may be helpful for consideration.

Why would i need that book, which is not scripture, when i have Paul's words which are scripture? Peter himself said that Paul's words were scripture. I also have peters words, and those of James, John and Jude. I don't see any conflict between them at all.

 

[expos4ever]

Without knowing the way, the life and truth as preached by Jesus, theological concepts are only good for arm-chair complacent Christians to munch about fruitlessly.

Why do you say this? I never denied the importance of knowing what Jesus taught. I said what I said: Paul added an important theological dimension to what is presented in the gospels, namely that Jesus constitutes the fulfillment of the covenant God made with Israel. Do you deny this? I suggest the evidence is against you if you do. Perhaps you accept this but think it is not relevant to actual Christian practice. Is that what you are saying?

 

[expos4ever]

Without knowing the way, the life and truth as preached by Jesus, theological concepts are only good for arm-chair complacent Christians to munch about fruitlessly.

Here is at least one "practical" reason it is important to understand that Jesus is the climax of the covenant story as Paul teaches: it demonstrates that God indeed keeps His promises. Many evangelicals think the story of Israel and the covenant is irrelevant background material. It is not - understanding that Jesus comprises the fulfillment of the covenant has all sorts of practical implications for us. And it is Paul alone who gives us the argument about Jesus as the fulfillment of the covenant.

 

[nomadictheist]

So Paul had no opportunity to know the revealed truth!

Logical fallacy. Jesus was not and is not the only way that God reveals truth.

“But now I go away to Him who sent Me, and none of you asks Me, ‘Where are You going?’ 6 But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your heart. 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. 8 And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: 9 of sin, because they do not believe in Me; 10 of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more; 11 of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.

12 “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. 15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you."

Paul didn't need to directly hear Jesus' words to His first apostles. He had the Spirit of Truth to guide him.

Even direct communication would not have helped the people who had become blind and deaf for spiritual truths.

Are you arguing with Jesus? It was He who said that He spoke in parables in order that the people would not understand.

It is against the approach Jesus told to correct a person who has gone astray.

That's an outright lie. Hear the words of Jesus:
Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’17 And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.

Undoubtedly, he was not hesitant to tell white lies to push his agenda!

Could you point to these "white lies?"

Peter was speaking of Scripture of the OT and also the writings of Paul. It not correct to equate the two.

Peter equated the two. He said "as they do the other scriptures..." Tell me, what does "other" mean to you?

Who picked up the books? Where was the need for Jesus to send the Holy Spirit if He could employ Paul to speak on His behalf?

This is yet another non sequitur. It doesn't follow that because God sent the Holy Spirit, He did not also call men to preach the gospel and instruct the believers.

 

[redleghunter]

Which canon you are referring to? Catholic, Protestant, Oriental, etc.?

All Christians have the 27 NT books. Luther did not 'toss them out."

 

[redleghunter]

Acts 1:21 "Therefore it is necessary that of the men who have accompanied us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us--
22 beginning with the baptism of John until the day that He was taken up from us--one of these must become a witness with us of His resurrection."
23 So they put forward two men, Joseph called Barsabbas (who was also called Justus), and Matthias.
24 And they prayed and said, "You, Lord, who know the hearts of all men, show which one of these two You have chosen
25 to occupy this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place."
26 And they drew lots for them, and the lot fell to Matthias; and he was added to the eleven apostles.

Yes makes perfect sense when you take in the complete picture of the NT. Matthias rounded out the 12 apostles for the 12 Tribes of Israel. Paul was commissioned directly by Christ to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles (nations) makes sense.

 

[redleghunter]

In his enthusiasm to gather more flock, he came up with all pleasing concepts with immature believers which cannot be accepted now in general as of relevance.

That is the definition of false prophet. What does your canon contain if the teachings of Paul, in your opinion, are false?

 

[St_Worm2]

Of course, in learning Paul had advantage. It was easy to convince Gentiles, who had no knowledge of one true God, with his compromise formulas.

Hi Rt, would you mind giving us a couple of examples of what you mean by St. Paul's "compromise formulas" and where they can be found in the Bible?

Thanks!

--David

 

[St_Worm2]

Not as an apostle. The Great Commission included baptism. He stopped doing that on his own!

Hi Rt, I have a question about this as well. Are you saying that St. Paul decided to stop baptizing new believers? If so, where does he say that?

Thanks!

--David

 

[Righttruth]

Why would i need that book, which is not scripture, when i have Paul's words which are scripture? Peter himself said that Paul's words were scripture. I also have peters words, and those of James, John and Jude. I don't see any conflict between them at all.

Who decided scripture? Certainly not Jesus! If so, there was no need for Him to send the Holy Spirit! Peter never called Paul's letters as scripture; that is your biased logic! Canon is man made! It is different for different groups! I will not be surprised if you deny the dispute and division in the Jerusalem church due to Paul!

 

[Righttruth]

Why do you say this? I never denied the importance of knowing what Jesus taught. I said what I said: Paul added an important theological dimension to what is presented in the gospels, namely that Jesus constitutes the fulfillment of the covenant God made with Israel. Do you deny this? I suggest the evidence is against you if you do. Perhaps you accept this but think it is not relevant to actual Christian practice. Is that what you are saying?

The dimension that Paul added was against the preaching of Jesus in many cases! Of course, Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law in letters. Paul established a religion with his pharisaic background which is superfluous for a believer in Jesus.

 

[Righttruth]

Here is at least one "practical" reason it is important to understand that Jesus is the climax of the covenant story as Paul teaches: it demonstrates that God indeed keeps His promises. Many evangelicals think the story of Israel and the covenant is irrelevant background material. It is not - understanding that Jesus comprises the fulfillment of the covenant has all sorts of practical implications for us. And it is Paul alone who gives us the argument about Jesus as the fulfillment of the covenant.

It is not the story that is important, rather it is life!

 

[civilwarbuff]

The dimension that Paul added was against the preaching of Jesus in many cases!

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

Paul established a religion with his pharisaic background which is superfluous for a believer in Jesus.

Again, where is your evidence?

 

[Extraneous]

Who decided scripture? Certainly not Jesus! If so, there was no need for Him to send the Holy Spirit! Peter never called Paul's letters as scripture; that is your biased logic! Canon is man made! It is different for different groups! I will not be surprised if you deny the dispute and division in the Jerusalem church due to Paul!

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

 

[Righttruth]

Logical fallacy. Jesus was not and is not the only way that God reveals truth.

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!

“But now I go away to Him who sent Me, and none of you asks Me, ‘Where are You going?’ 6 But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your heart. 7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. 8 And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: 9 of sin, because they do not believe in Me; 10 of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more; 11 of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.

12 “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.13 However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. 14 He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. 15 All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you."

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

Paul didn't need to directly hear Jesus' words to His first apostles. He had the Spirit of Truth to guide him.

That is what all claim to push their propaganda!

Are you arguing with Jesus? It was He who said that He spoke in parables in order that the people would not understand.

No, I am arguing with Paul.

That's an outright lie. Hear the words of Jesus:
Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’17 And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.

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!

Could you point to these "white lies?"

One ex: Gift of interpretation!

Peter equated the two. He said "as they do the other scriptures..." Tell me, what does "other" mean to you?

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!

This is yet another non sequitur. It doesn't follow that because God sent the Holy Spirit, He did not also call men to preach the gospel and instruct the believers.

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

 

[Righttruth]

All Christians have the 27 NT books. Luther did not 'toss them out."

He would have, if he had the final authority!

 

[Righttruth]

Yes makes perfect sense when you take in the complete picture of the NT. Matthias rounded out the 12 apostles for the 12 Tribes of Israel. Paul was commissioned directly by Christ to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles (nations) makes sense.

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.