How should we read Paul?

[redleghunter]

Matthew 10:5 "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into [any] city of the Samaritans enter ye not: 6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

About eight years after the gospel was preached to the Jews, it was preached to the Gentiles.

Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel: it is the power of God for salvation to every one who has faith, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

I replied to your claim Christ did not command the Gospel be preached to the Gentiles. I showed where that statement was incorrect.

 

[Righttruth]

Excellent expository.

No doubt Paul's letters are earlier compared to other letters and the gospel books. That makes us think that the latter writings were clarifying some of the claims Paul was spreading in the Gentile world. Ex: Paul's 'faith alone' was rebutted by James 'faith without works is dead'. The disputed concept 'Once saved is always saved' is not supported by Hebrews. Warning of claim of additional apostleship by Paul was disregarded by John in Revelation. No wonder Martin Luther wanted these books removed from the canon!

 

[royal priest]

Paul was not a witness in Jesus' earthly ministry. He never heard the elaboration of the parables by Jesus.

Correct. However, Paul had perhaps better opportunities and greater advantages than the other Apostles: Galatians 1:11-12; Galatians 1:17-18; 2 Corinthians 12:2-4

Therefore, all his epistles should be tested to determine whether they complement the preaching of Jesus or not.

Correct. The church has been doing this according to the noble Berean spirit for the past two millenia. Acts of the Apostles 17:10-12. The church has answered many a friend or foe on this very issue to see for ourselves whether these things were so.

Furthermore, any important theological concept cannot be based on Paul's epistles alone. Gospel is the filter one has to apply to his letters.

Not merely the Gospels (plural), but also the entire OT canon (since Paul quoted extensively from there), and the Epistles written by other Apostles, and compare Paul's own Epistles for consistency among themselves, too.
But, as I already mentioned, this has been going on for two millenia. You are not proposing anything new. Consequently, there are many helps available to aid you in this noble 'Berean' task.

 

[redleghunter]

No, noway he can join the crowd and hear Him as many did and followed. Even if he had heard from distance, he was never had the opportunity of listen to His elaborated teaching to His apostles, so missed out the sublime and profound teaching of Jesus.



Even now Tom, Dick and Harry claim to be apostles in tune with the self-claim of Paul! The first division in the Jerusalem church was started by Paul. No wonder all Pauline Christians are divided into thousands of denominations!

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

The Judaizers caused the conflict by stating one cannot be saved unless they were circumcised. So much for the ladies.

Is circumcision required for salvation?

 

[redleghunter]

Apostleship was granted by Jesus for 12 to judge 12 tribes. No more. Paul was wanting that status, without knowing the spiritual significance, badly since many were not listening to him, especially Jews. Consequently, he kept on harping on his self-claim of apostleship over and over again.

Where did Paul say that he did not want that title?

You reject the account of the Damascus road conversion?

 

[Righttruth]

I replied to your claim Christ did not command the Gospel be preached to the Gentiles. I showed where that statement was incorrect.

The Great Commission of Matthew's last verses also indicated that, after resurrection, it should be preached to all.

 

[Righttruth]

[/QUOTE]

The Judaizers caused the conflict by stating one cannot be saved unless they were circumcised. So much for the ladies.

Is circumcision required for salvation?[/QUOTE]

No. Physical evidence is nothing to do with spiritual requirements.

 

[Righttruth]

You reject the account of the Damascus road conversion?

The vision seen by Paul was recorded by Luke at two places in Acts. There is a contradiction between them. Please read carefully. Even after conversion, Paul claimed to be a Pharisee. How can it be?

 

[redleghunter]

No doubt Paul's letters are earlier compared to other letters and the gospel books. That makes us think that the latter writings were clarifying some of the claims Paul was spreading in the Gentile world. Ex: Paul's 'faith alone' was rebutted by James 'faith without works is dead'. The disputed concept 'Once saved is always saved' is not supported by Hebrews. Warning of claim of additional apostleship by Paul was disregarded by John in Revelation. No wonder Martin Luther wanted these books removed from the canon!

No I believe @rakovsky was making the point Paul was not in conflict with early church teachings and the Gospel message. Only that some interpret Scriptures incompletely and come to erroneous conclusions. I agree with him.

Back to your OP.

Do you see Paul as a false teacher who taught error leading souls away from the one true Gospel.

If so what do you see is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

[Righttruth]

No I believe @rakovsky was making the point Paul was not in conflict with early church teachings and the Gospel message. Only that some interpret Scriptures incompletely and come to erroneous conclusions. I agree with him.

Back to your OP.

Do you see Paul as a false teacher who taught error leading souls away from the one true Gospel.

If so what do you see is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Paul was crafty and scholar to manipulate to work out a solution in a church with his own suppositions. Therefore, we need to focus on Jesus instead of focusing on Paul which he advised! Consequently, Protestants have Paul before them and Catholics, Mary!

 

[St_Worm2]

No doubt Paul's letters are earlier compared to other letters and the gospel books. That makes us think that the latter writings were clarifying some of the claims Paul was spreading in the Gentile world. Ex: Paul's 'faith alone' was rebutted by James 'faith without works is dead'. The disputed concept 'Once saved is always saved' is not supported by Hebrews. Warning of claim of additional apostleship by Paul was disregarded by John in Revelation. No wonder Martin Luther wanted these books removed from the canon!

Hi Rt, if the later Epistles and Gospels "clarified" some of the claims St. Paul made in his Epistles, why were they not quoted, or St. Paul "singled out"? St. Peter called St. Paul, "our beloved brother", and his Epistles, "Scripture", but outside of that high praise for the man and for what he wrote/taught, I don't remember any big issues being raised among the other Apostles with him (or with what he wrote and taught). Do you (if so, please tell us where we can find it)

Also, please tell us where St. John "disregarded" St. Paul in Revelation.

As for a discussion of what St. Paul and St. James meant by "faith", and how what they meant differed, such a thing should be tabled for another thread (you are certainly welcome to start one if you'd like to ), or this thread's intended discussion would never recover

Finally, Martin Luther questioned a number of the books in the Canon, but the fact is, in the end, his Bible containes every book we have in our Bibles today, including the DC's (in his appendix).

Yours and His,
David

"He is able to save forever those who draw near to
God through Him, since He always lives
to make intercession for them"
Hebrews 7:25​

 

[Righttruth]

I think there are more than a few Christians that wonder at Paul being the foremost author of the NT.

As a pharisee he'd be well educated in the Hebrew scriptures. And since Jesus predates those in the spirit I think the way to ascertain if Saul was truly anointed by Christ to preach then we will know it by his writings at the Lord's behest.

If Saul in any way teaches contrary to Christ?

Test every spirit, remember.

How can a person who doesn't even qualify to be considered an apostle, claim such a status and write letters that form the appendices of the NT? Can a tail wag the dog?

 

[St_Worm2]

How can a person who doesn't even qualify to be considered an apostle....

What do you believe make up the qualifications "to be considered an apostle"? (or please point me to the post # if you mentioned this earlier in your thread)

Thanks!

--David

 

[nomadictheist]

The vision seen by Paul was recorded by Luke at two places in Acts. There is a contradiction between them. Please read carefully. Even after conversion, Paul claimed to be a Pharisee. How can it be?

If there is a contradiction between Acts 9 and Acts 22, point it out instead of just claiming it's there. Here, I'll even help you out:

Acts 9:
But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest 2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. 3 Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him. 4 And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” 5 And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. 6 But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.” 7 The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. 8 Saul rose from the ground, and although his eyes were opened, he saw nothing. So they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. 9 And for three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank.

Acts 22:
As I was on my way and drew near to Damascus, about noon a great light from heaven suddenly shone around me. 7 And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?’ 8 And I answered, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ And he said to me, ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting.’ 9 Now those who were with me saw the light but did not understand[c] the voice of the one who was speaking to me. 10 And I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ And the Lord said to me, ‘Rise, and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all that is appointed for you to do.’ 11 And since I could not see because of the brightness of that light, I was led by the hand by those who were with me, and came into Damascus.

Now where is the contradiction that you would like to point out?

 

[royal priest]

If there is a contradiction between Acts 9 and Acts 22, point it out instead of just claiming it's there. Here, I'll even help you out:

Acts 9:
But Saul, still breathing threats and murder against the disciples of the Lord, went to the high priest 2 and asked him for letters to the synagogues at Damascus, so that if he found any belonging to the Way, men or women, he might bring them bound to Jerusalem. 3 Now as he went on his way, he approached Damascus, and suddenly a light from heaven shone around him. 4 And falling to the ground he heard a voice saying to him, “Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” 5 And he said, “Who are you, Lord?” And he said, “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting. 6 But rise and enter the city, and you will be told what you are to do.” 7 The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. 8 Saul rose from the ground, and although his eyes were opened, he saw nothing. So they led him by the hand and brought him into Damascus. 9 And for three days he was without sight, and neither ate nor drank.

Acts 22:
As I was on my way and drew near to Damascus, about noon a great light from heaven suddenly shone around me. 7 And I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?’ 8 And I answered, ‘Who are you, Lord?’ And he said to me, ‘I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom you are persecuting.’ 9 Now those who were with me saw the light but did not understand[c] the voice of the one who was speaking to me. 10 And I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ And the Lord said to me, ‘Rise, and go into Damascus, and there you will be told all that is appointed for you to do.’ 11 And since I could not see because of the brightness of that light, I was led by the hand by those who were with me, and came into Damascus.

Now where is the contradiction that you would like to point out?

Muslims like to use this one by claiming a contradiction between the people attending Saul "hearing the voice" and "did not understand". The argument is that if they heard the voice how could they not understand it.

 

[redleghunter]

The Great Commission of Matthew's last verses also indicated that, after resurrection, it should be preached to all.

Yes I quoted Matthew 28.

 

[redleghunter]

The Judaizers caused the conflict by stating one cannot be saved unless they were circumcised. So much for the ladies.

Is circumcision required for salvation?[/QUOTE]

No. Physical evidence is nothing to do with spiritual requirements.[/QUOTE]

Glad we could clear that up.

So do you still see Paul as a false teacher?

 

[redleghunter]

The vision seen by Paul was recorded by Luke at two places in Acts. There is a contradiction between them. Please read carefully. Even after conversion, Paul claimed to be a Pharisee. How can it be?

Please post up the contradiction for all to examine.

Thank you.

 

[redleghunter]

Paul was crafty and scholar to manipulate to work out a solution in a church with his own suppositions. Therefore, we need to focus on Jesus instead of focusing on Paul which he advised! Consequently, Protestants have Paul before them and Catholics, Mary!

This is simply false. Paul's epistles are used a lot due to most of the NT are his writings.

You use 'crafty ' and 'manipulate ', does this mean you see Paul as a false teacher?

 

[redleghunter]

How can a person who doesn't even qualify to be considered an apostle, claim such a status and write letters that form the appendices of the NT? Can a tail wag the dog?

Because Jesus Christ commissioned Paul.