How should we read Paul?

[Extraneous]

Right.



No way it comes to the call of Jesus. This is where Paul teaches organized collection of funds with rosy words. Therefore, Protestantism built a structure with a business zeal that is difficult to dismantle with all worldly expectations that go with that.

No, paul doesn't even command it, he just teaches about the churches helping each other in times of need. Dont blame paul for how Churches act today, because they misapply all scripture to justify their doctrine. Prosperity preachers for example, they use more words from Christ and The OT to teach their sowing of "financial seeds", that they do pauls words. Paul teaches that we should be content with food and clothing, and that he himself learned to be content whether full or hungry.

Paul is not talking about living off of others here, but is referring to sitting at the masters table and receiving heavenly things as apposed to earthly carnal things. Paul didn't love money and didn't want it either, because he learned that Christ was much better, paul fed off the Word, not the money of others. As david said, "Your words are worth more than money" This is what Paul teaches that prosperity preachers ignore:


1 Corinthians 9:8 Do I say these things as a mere man? Or does not the law say the same also?9 For it is written in the law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.” Is it oxen God is concerned about? 10 Or does He say it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that he who plows should plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope. 11 If we have sown spiritual things for you, is it a great thing if we reap your material things? 12 If others are partakers of this right over you, are we not even more?

Nevertheless we have not used this right, but endure all things lest we hinder the gospel of Christ. 13 Do you not know that those who minister the holy things eat of the things of the temple, and those who serve at the altar partake of the offerings of the altar? 14 Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel.

Psalm 119:Their heart is as fat as grease,
But I delight in Your law.
71 It is good for me that I have been afflicted,
That I may learn Your statutes.
72 The law of Your mouth is better to me
Than thousands of coins of gold and silver.

 

[Extraneous]

You don't see Jesus and the truth when you allow Paul to eclipse Him.

I see Paul pointing to Christ, in all things. The only reason Paul says to follow him instead of other men, is because Paul is wanting them to follow Christ instead of false teachers. Paul leads us to Christ in all things.

 

[nomadictheist]

You appear to wait for His return to go after His body and blood again after what happened with crucifixion. If you really cared for Jesus' words you won't observe that as Paul recommended.

Matthew 26: 29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom.

Jesus does not tell His disciples never to observe the eucharist here. He's telling them that He's about to be betrayed, arrested, and killed.

Sin is found everywhere. It is doesn't mean you should invent strategies for tackling that by hook or by crook methods.

When Jesus specifically called Paul a chosen vessel after selecting twelve, Paul had no business to assume status that was meant for others.

Once again, calling the instructions of St. Paul "hook or crook methods" does not make them so. Please cite your real biblical evidence that what St. Paul was telling the Corinthian church was wrong. And while you're trying to find something that says that (other than your book), also find any place in the Bible where Jesus uses the word "apostle" to specifically designate any of the 12. Because, as has been said before, an "apostolos" is a messenger commissioned and sent by Jesus Himself. It has already been shown that this is what Paul was. Additionally, we have shown that Paul's testimony comes from (1) Jesus Christ, (2) the other apostles, including Peter, who called him a "beloved brother" and spoke of the wisdom "God had given him (Paul)," and (3) the Holy Spirit. Please produce better witnesses against Paul, if you can.

Jerusalem Church and churches established by chosen apostles had both communal meal and communion. Paul asked the Corinthian congregation to have food in their homes and come for observance of communion nominally with sample materials. That is nominal ritual of Paul glorifying death.

Evidence. Show me where Paul instructs them to change the customs. He tells them to eat at home if they are hungry - that is, if they are so hungry that they cannot restrain themselves from leaving nothing for their brethren. You have yet to show how this is in any way wrong.

I don't shun myself reading any book. All be subjected to scrutiny by the words of Jesus and that of the chosen apostles and people who were witness to His ministry.

You'd probably be surprised at books I've read. They include, but aren't limited to: Most of the Apocrypha, large portions of the Book of Mormon, large portions of the Quran in English, the complete works of Josephus, and many others like it. It wasn't hard to tell by looking at the first few pages of the book you're quoting that it wasn't worth my time to read. It didn't have any scholarly value. The author started the book with the premise that Paul was a false apostle without offering any evidence, and his misquotes of Paul were easily exposed.

Then you should accept Catholic beliefs and traditions. After all, Protestantism is of recent origin comparatively.

Don't tell me what I should expect. I've studied how Catholic beliefs and traditions came about. The modern Catholic traditions that I (and most non-Catholic denominations) disagree with came about much later in the history of the church than the Canon of scripture, and are based mainly on text from apocryphal books. Apocryphal books may be good for scholarly study of what was written, but they can never be used to prove the Canon of Scripture wrong or build doctrines that disagree with scripture (like what you're trying to do with Paul).

 

[nomadictheist]

No one called Paul another apostle. That is bending backwards to accommodate Paul's spurious claim.

As has already been demonstrated from scripture, Paul is attested to by (1) Jesus Christ, (2) the Holy Spirit, and (3) the apostles and church leaders of His day, including a specific commendation by the apostle Peter. By calling him a false prophet, you defame every witness who commends him as well.

 

[Righttruth]

How does your church resolve issues today? What transcendent standard do you use to test truth claims? I gather it can't be the Bible as you have tossed out over 70% of the NT.

Church is not reliable source anymore. I am only trying to filter out all writings.

Are you again accusing Paul of being a false teacher?

Paul cannot claim to be a teacher because there is only one Teacher, that is, Jesus Christ.

 

[Righttruth]

Jesus does not tell His disciples never to observe the eucharist here. He's telling them that He's about to be betrayed, arrested, and killed.

If you claimed that Matthew 26:29 is about betrayal, arrest and killing, I think I am wasting my time to make you see reason!

Once again, calling the instructions of St. Paul "hook or crook methods" does not make them so. Please cite your real biblical evidence that what St. Paul was telling the Corinthian church was wrong. And while you're trying to find something that says that (other than your book), also find any place in the Bible where Jesus uses the word "apostle" to specifically designate any of the 12. Because, as has been said before, an "apostolos" is a messenger commissioned and sent by Jesus Himself. It has already been shown that this is what Paul was. Additionally, we have shown that Paul's testimony comes from (1) Jesus Christ, (2) the other apostles, including Peter, who called him a "beloved brother" and spoke of the wisdom "God had given him (Paul)," and (3) the Holy Spirit. Please produce better witnesses against Paul, if you can.

What better witness than the words of Jesus and that of Peter. Still you want to believe the self-witnessing of Paul.

Evidence. Show me where Paul instructs them to change the customs. He tells them to eat at home if they are hungry - that is, if they are so hungry that they cannot restrain themselves from leaving nothing for their brethren. You have yet to show how this is in any way wrong.

In Jerusalem Church they were staying and sharing together. There was no question of eating at home.

You'd probably be surprised at books I've read. They include, but aren't limited to: Most of the Apocrypha, large portions of the Book of Mormon, large portions of the Quran in English, the complete works of Josephus, and many others like it. It wasn't hard to tell by looking at the first few pages of the book you're quoting that it wasn't worth my time to read. It didn't have any scholarly value. The author started the book with the premise that Paul was a false apostle without offering any evidence, and his misquotes of Paul were easily exposed.

You might have read all that with a presumption that all the self-claims of Paul are genuine. That is biased reading. I have read Paul without bias trying to find out how far he reflected on Jesus. Not much, one can see.

Don't tell me what I should expect. I've studied how Catholic beliefs and traditions came about. The modern Catholic traditions that I (and most non-Catholic denominations) disagree with came about much later in the history of the church than the Canon of scripture, and are based mainly on text from apocryphal books. Apocryphal books may be good for scholarly study of what was written, but they can never be used to prove the Canon of Scripture wrong or build doctrines that disagree with scripture (like what you're trying to do with Paul).

Canon is man-made.

 

[Righttruth]

As has already been demonstrated from scripture, Paul is attested to by (1) Jesus Christ, (2) the Holy Spirit, and (3) the apostles and church leaders of His day, including a specific commendation by the apostle Peter. By calling him a false prophet, you defame every witness who commends him as well.

You have demonstrated nothing with regard to the self-claim of Paul. Definitely he is an assumed apostle. What else you can expect from people who put on airs to gather attention?

 

[nomadictheist]

You have demonstrated nothing with regard to the self-claim of Paul. Definitely he is an assumed apostle. What else you can expect from people who put on airs to gather attention?

As has already been demonstrated from scripture, Paul is attested to by (1) Jesus Christ, (2) the Holy Spirit, and (3) the apostles and church leaders of His day, including a specific commendation by the apostle Peter. By calling him a false prophet, you defame every witness who commends him as well.

 

[nomadictheist]

If you claimed that Matthew 26:29 is about betrayal, arrest and killing, I think I am wasting my time to make you see reason!

If you think that Jesus saying that He will not eat the bread or drink the cup with His disciples again till they do so in the Father's kingdom is somehow an instruction for them to never do it with each other, and you call that reason, I don't really want your "reason." It might be contagious.

What better witness than the words of Jesus and that of Peter. Still you want to believe the self-witnessing of Paul.

What witness from Jesus and Peter? Both spoke well of Paul.

In Jerusalem Church they were staying and sharing together. There was no question of eating at home.

Evidence please.

You might have read all that with a presumption that all the self-claims of Paul are genuine. That is biased reading. I have read Paul without bias trying to find out how far he reflected on Jesus. Not much, one can see.

Jesus, the apostles, and the early church disagree with you. What you mean is that you have read Paul with bias and tried to twist his words as others have before you.

Canon is man-made.

And that is why you can't be convinced of anything, because you refuse to accept God's part in the canon of scripture.

 

[Righttruth]

No, paul doesn't even command it, he just teaches about the churches helping each other in times of need. Dont blame paul for how Churches act today, because they misapply all scripture to justify their doctrine. Prosperity preachers for example, they use more words from Christ and The OT to teach their sowing of "financial seeds", that they do pauls words. Paul teaches that we should be content with food and clothing, and that he himself learned to be content whether full or hungry.

I don't think prosperity teachers can find anything from Jesus that supports them. It is their misunderstood interpretation from John's letter and many other OT writings.

1 Corinthians 9:8 Do I say these things as a mere man? Or does not the law say the same also?9 For it is written in the law of Moses, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain.” Is it oxen God is concerned about? 10 Or does He say it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written, that he who plows should plow in hope, and he who threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope. 11 If we have sown spiritual things for you, is it a great thing if we reap your material things? 12 If others are partakers of this right over you, are we not even more?

Nevertheless we have not used this right, but endure all things lest we hinder the gospel of Christ. 13 Do you not know that those who minister the holy things eat of the things of the temple, and those who serve at the altar partake of the offerings of the altar? 14 Even so the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should live from the gospel.

This is greatest oasis for Protestant pastors and workers to work for a salary. The business starts with this basis. This no way reflects the ministry of Jesus.

 

[Extraneous]

I don't think prosperity teachers can find anything from Jesus that supports them. It is their misunderstood interpretation from John's letter and many other OT writings.



This is greatest oasis for Protestant pastors and workers to work for a salary. The business starts with this basis. This no way reflects the ministry of Jesus.

You see what you see, the Protestant Church's see what they see, the Catholics see what they see, and i see what i see. Paul teaches me to be content with simple things, and Jesus teaches me the same. To each there own.

 

[Righttruth]

If you think that Jesus saying that He will not eat the bread or drink the cup with His disciples again till they do so in the Father's kingdom is somehow an instruction for them to never do it with each other, and you call that reason, I don't really want your "reason." It might be contagious.

Yeah, I know because you want the word of Paul 'remembrance' to be interpolated for the ritual unsupported by Jesus' words.

What witness from Jesus and Peter? Both spoke well of Paul.

That did not grant him apostleship.

Evidence please.

Acts 2: 44 And all those who had believed were together and had all things in common;
45 and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need.
46 Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart,

Jesus, the apostles, and the early church disagree with you. What you mean is that you have read Paul with bias and tried to twist his words as others have before you.

Don't bring Jesus and chosen apostles to support the spurious claims of Paul.

And that is why you can't be convinced of anything, because you refuse to accept God's part in the canon of scripture.

You simply underestimate the power of Satan in manipulating the written manuscripts and he did not even spare Paul.

 

[Righttruth]

You see what you see, the Protestant Church's see what they see, the Catholics see what they see, and i see what i see. Paul teaches me to be content with simple things, and Jesus teaches me the same. To each there own.

Truth cannot be relative. Knowing Jesus through His words is realizing truth. No one should come in between Jesus and us.

 

[Extraneous]

Truth cannot be relative. Knowing Jesus through His words is realizing truth. No one should come in between Jesus and us.

Paul doesn't come between me and the Lord. He hasnt lead me away from anything the Lord has said. Paul actually lead me away from people who deny the words of Christ

 

[nomadictheist]

Yeah, I know because you want the word of Paul 'remembrance' to be interpolated for the ritual unsupported by Jesus' words.

No, because it's terrible exegesis.

That did not grant him apostleship.

As his accuser, you are the one that needs to show evidence. Jesus, the apostles, and the early church are all good witnesses for Paul. Who are your witnesses against him?

Acts 2: 44 And all those who had believed were together and had all things in common;
45 and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need.
46 Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart,

Yeah. I figured you would go there. The problem is that you fail to realize that they are breaking bread "from house to house" (meaning they still owned houses), and that there are examples of believers who owned houses and properties in Jerusalem and other areas where the Jerusalem church was clearly involved later:
For example:

Simon the Tanner, whose house Simon Peter was staying in when he received the vision of the "unclean food" and was summoned to the house of Cornelius.

Priscilla and Aquila's house.

The house of Mary, the mother of Mark, where many believers gathered to pray when Peter was imprisoned.

And more.

So again, please show any evidence that Paul's command for people to not eat all the food so that some had none and for those who were eating all the food to eat at their own house if they were hungry is wrong.

Don't bring Jesus and chosen apostles to support the spurious claims of Paul.



You simply underestimate the power of Satan in manipulating the written manuscripts and he did not even spare Paul.

I don't believe Satan has more power than God, or than His only begotten Son, or than the Holy Spirit. Satan tried to get all kinds of writings into the canon. The gnostic gospels, for example. And most of the apocrypha was rejected because of its disharmony with the canon. But God made sure that His written word survived, and Satan's insidious texts were not a part of it.

But I do certainly believe Satan has the power to convince false truth seekers that one of Jesus' apostles to the world was a false prophet.

 

[redleghunter]

Church is not reliable source anymore. I am only trying to filter out all writings.



Paul cannot claim to be a teacher because there is only one Teacher, that is, Jesus Christ.

So you are your own source to test truth claims. YOU transcend all others?

What is your transcendent standard for 'filtering' out the Scriptures?

Jesus appointed apostles, approved ones to preach and teach the Gospel and He told them to go out and teach and convert many many more.

Please reveal your canon.

 

[Strong in Him]

How do you test such claims? Words of Jesus is the answer.

The Bible - all of it.
If it wasn't for the Bible, we wouldn't know about Jesus; the OT prophesied his coming, the Gospels describe his ministry and record his words, and the epistles explain how to apply his words and our faith, and how the Christian faith grew and spread. The Bible is either inspired or it isn't; either from God or just like any other book. If it's not inspired, then how do you explain the OT prophecies which point to Jesus and which were fulfilled in, and by, him? If it's not inspired and something written only by men, then how can we even trust the Gospels, which contain the words of Jesus? But if those things are true, then it must all be true. Otherwise we have to pick and choose the passages we accept, and different people may believe, and accept, different things. If we doubt the Bible, then we have no holy book. If we doubt the Bible then, when we talk to non Christians about our faith, all we will be able to say is "well the Holy Bible contains some words from a false prophet; you'll have to read it and make up your own mind what is true." A non Christian would have no chance of doing this without the Holy Spirit.

If you searched the Bible, you see the word 'hearing or heard' more than reading.

Maybe I would; so?

If you read assuming that it is inspired by the Holy Spirit and without error, it is a bias reading.

Trusting in the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of truth, is bias?

You know many versions have words of Jesus in red. I like that because anything deviating from that is dangerous. Paul did the deviation on many accounts churning out convenient concepts to ignorant Gentiles. We also like his compromises because we were all Gentiles or Pagans before!

You say that Paul was called and chosen by Jesus, the Son of God, yet you claim that he compromised and was allowed to do so without being corrected by the One who chose him?

The excerpts I have quoted from the book make clear on the compromise arguments of Paul.

I haven't read this book and have no intention of doing so.
Since you are making the claims, I would rather you explained, in your own words, with evidence, of how Paul compromised.

 

[Strong in Him]

Who heard the words of Jesus? Paul, no way!

As I've asked you before; how do you know? How do you know that Paul wasn't one of the Pharisees who Jesus criticised? How will you prove that Paul never heard Jesus' words or didn't have them reported to him?
He didn't record the fact, but that didn't mean it didn't happen.

 

[Strong in Him]

According to Bible, any claim should be attested by at least two witnesses. Paul's claims should be endorsed by at least two other sources.

They were endorsed by the 12, and later also by all those who agreed his letters should form part of the NT. I make that more than 2.

 

[Strong in Him]

Church is not reliable source anymore.

The church is all believers. The church is the bride of Christ. The church was identified by Jesus as being an authoritative body - for example when he said, "if you have a dispute with someone, try to sort it out but if not, take it to the church."
Jesus founded, and said he was building, his church. If you are dismissing, or have lost confidence in it, then you are doubting the One who set it up and whose idea it was.

Paul cannot claim to be a teacher because there is only one Teacher, that is, Jesus Christ.

Nonsense. Jesus told his disciples to also make disciples and teach them everything he had taught them, Matthew 28:19. Teaching is a gift of the Holy Spirit. many are teachers; we're not born knowing everything - or even anything; we have to be taught. The person who wrote the book you keep quoting from wrote it to teach people.