Is belief that a god exists a choice?

[Dave Ellis]

Ok. Just for future reference when you use this line of argument, Peter acknowledged that Paul's writings were to be taken as truth according to God's word. Where does this leave the premise that Paul's writings were either fictional, or insane ?

Peter was wrong?

I mean seriously, just because Peter bought into the idea that Paul was seeing visions doesn't mean those visions were actually coming from a god (if indeed Paul was actually having visions at all).

How could Peter verify the visions were genuinely divinely inspired? I don't know how that would be possible.

 

[WoundedDeep]

Well, perhaps he was a madman.

Mental illness is a fairly common thing even in this day and age, much less the first century where it would have gone completely untreated.

The idea that someone had a screw loose upstairs is far more plausible than the idea that the all powerful creator of the universe is actually talking to that person.

That goes for any self proclaimed "prophet" in the modern world, and it goes for Paul as well.

And you believe Christians are not told to discern true from false prophets? Paul, as much as any Christian, know that by the fruits of the prophets you will know them to be from or against God. Discernment was so important to Christians the apostles wrote warnings after warnings against false teachers and prophets. Paul, by his fruits observed by those who listened to his preaching, was shown to be a true apostle of Jesus Christ.

 

[WoundedDeep]

What sort of personal gain does any cult leader get when he starts up a new religion? It could be any number of reasons.

For example, his actions of writing various letters to upstart churches in the area claiming to receive revelations might wind up making him a key figure in a new religion.

Perhaps even one that would see him remembered beyond 2,000 years after his own death. Of course, we're just speaking hypothetically here.

Power over some followers is usually enough for any potential cult leader to start a cult. In some cases they could be made famous, in same cases it could reap financial rewards.

I can't speak for what Paul's motivations might have been, if indeed they were based on fraud at all. However you're ignoring that there's any number of reasons why someone would want to start up a cult on fraudulent grounds.

Paul was constantly in the danger of being killed, persecuted, starving, put in prison etc. In fact, he wrote of all the difficulties he faced (at one point, he was desperate of life) in trying to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. People were constantly trying to discredit him (just like what you are doing now), and if not for the powers of God wrought in him, no one would even come close to believing in his preaching. So what did he gain? He was a tent maker, earning his own living while facing persecution for his faith and preaching.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

And you believe Christians are not told to discern true from false prophets? Paul, as much as any Christian, know that by the fruits of the prophets you will know them to be from or against God. Discernment was so important to Christians the apostles wrote warnings after warnings against false teachers and prophets. Paul, by his fruits observed by those who listened to his preaching, was shown to be a true apostle of Jesus Christ.

Isn't that exactly what a false prophet would want you to think?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Paul was constantly in the danger of being killed, persecuted, starving, put in prison etc. In fact, he wrote of all the difficulties he faced (at one point, he was desperate of life) in trying to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. People were constantly trying to discredit him (just like what you are doing now), and if not for the powers of God wrought in him, no one would even come close to believing in his preaching. So what did he gain? He was a tent maker, earning his own living while facing persecution for his faith and preaching.

Not saying this to be offensive but, what do cult leaders have to gain from leading cults?

 

[WoundedDeep]

Not saying this to be offensive but, what do cult leaders have to gain from leading cults?

Fame and wealth. Paul had none of the two.

 

[WoundedDeep]

Isn't that exactly what a false prophet would want you to think?

No, that is what Jesus Christ taught. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Preposterous and ludicrous accusations against Paul. There are many people even in Paul's times trying to discredit Paul, if Paul was suffering from mental illness, people would have seen this easily and his ministry would have failed. Yet, many early Christians know him to be a holy and reasonable man, not devoid of sense or reason.

You just contradicted your own argument... You said people would have seen through him easily, and also said there were many people in his own time trying to discredit him.

Any run of the mill whackjob cult leader can usually drum up a small following of people if they work at it. Why would Paul be any different? You just said there were a lot of people opposed to him (apart from his small band of followers), that sounds exactly like any formative religious group/sect/cult that I've ever heard of.

Don't even try to compare yourself with him. He was a man of faith and believed in everything he was taught of God.

If that's his defining attribute, I wouldn't want to compare myself to him. I have too much self respect.

To be a man of faith, and knowingly pronounce a curse which he believed will happen, means that he is confident of his preaching. If he have even suspected that he might have been deluded, he would not have wrote such a curse so adamantly, but would rather be on knees seeking God to make sure he was not deluded. Even if he was not fully confident that he was preaching the truth, he will not have written such a curse. That is the reasonable acts of a man with faith.

Sure, it also doesn't mean that he isn't completely wrong. Even if he really believed those things with full confidence, that does not lend any credibility to the idea that he is actually right about what he says.

He had full confidence in what he said, and knowing the faithfulness of God and Jesus Christ, he knows that delusion could not happen to him if he was miraculously chosen by God to be an apostle to the Gentiles. He knows that before his conversion he was wholly opposed to the Christian faith, and therefore his conversion was an act wrought by God Himself. This is experiential faith, and the things that happened to him since his conversion convinced him that his conversion is true.

You, therefore, are foolish in trying to assert that he may have been deluded since his personal experiences speak to the contrary. And he being truly fervent for God, knows the faithfulness of God in keeping his preaching intact. That again, is reasonable for a man of faith.

Confidence does not equal evidence. If the mental illness idea is correct, he very well might have experienced all the visions he claimed, he might have just been dead wrong about the idea that they came from god instead of his own brain.

Just because he claims unwavering confidence means absolutely nothing, curse or no curse. He still has just as much of a chance of being unequivocally wrong.

 

[agua]

Peter was wrong?

I mean seriously, just because Peter bought into the idea that Paul was seeing visions doesn't mean those visions were actually coming from a god (if indeed Paul was actually having visions at all).

How could Peter verify the visions were genuinely divinely inspired? I don't know how that would be possible.

Ok now your premise assumes Peter has incorrectly supported Paul's message without verification. Peter's complete writings are in agreement with Paul's, and in Galatians we see Paul rebuking Peter for improper conduct in one area. ( this shows Peter will have reason to be scrupulous with Paul's writing imo) We also know that Peter relates his own vision ( the transfiguration ), and the eye witness account of the resurrected Chist. Peter had episodes of dealing with false prophets and even people who made false claims of spiritual awareness.

Will you still attempt to defend this premise ?

 

[WoundedDeep]

You just contradicted your own argument... You said people would have seen through him easily, and also said there were many people in his own time trying to discredit him.

Any run of the mill whackjob cult leader can usually drum up a small following of people if they work at it. Why would Paul be any different? You just said there were a lot of people opposed to him (apart from his small band of followers), that sounds exactly like any formative religious group/sect/cult that I've ever heard of.

I was talking specifically about mental illness. If a man is mentally ill to the point of being schizophrenic, people will be able to tell. Paul had people practically following him on his preaching journey, would they not have seen if he was mentally sound or not? Your alluding to him being mentally ill is ludicrous because no one, not even those eager to discredit him, ever tried to use "mental illness" as evidence against him.

Are you serious? Those who opposed Paul wanted to kill him, but Paul never responded in kind. What looks more like a cult to you? People who encourage murder and constantly attempt to kill others who disagree with their teachings (that's what Paul's opposers did)? Or people like Paul who preached in peace and helped the poor and needy?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Fame and wealth. Paul had none of the two.

Not necessarily. I don't think all cult leaders have fame and wealth.

No, that is what Jesus Christ taught. A good tree cannot bear bad fruit.

How do you know Paul was a good tree?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I was talking specifically about mental illness. If a man is mentally ill to the point of being schizophrenic, people will be able to tell.

On what do you base this? Stereotypes of schizophrenia? People with mental illness are often very good at concealing their condition.

 

[agua]

I'm don't think it's a good to ad hominem attack Paul to discredit his writings. I'll let admins decide before continuing.

 

[TheImmortalJellyfish]

Peter was wrong?

I mean seriously, just because Peter bought into the idea that Paul was seeing visions doesn't mean those visions were actually coming from a god (if indeed Paul was actually having visions at all).

How could Peter verify the visions were genuinely divinely inspired? I don't know how that would be possible.

Much of what Paul said was incorporating creeds from the earliest Christian church, going way back to the dawn of the Church Age after the Resurrection. (The NT is not in chronological order; the gospels were written after almost all of Paul's letters). These were creeds, confessions of faith, hymns, etc. Passages such as Philippians 2:6-11 which says "Jesus is in very nature God.
We also have 1 Corinthians 15, where Paul uses technical language to indicate he was passing along this oral tradition in relatively fixed form:

"For what I received, I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he as raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter, and then to the Twelve. After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. And last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared to me also."

If the Crucifixion was as early as A.D. 30, Paul's conversion to Christianity would've been about 32. Rushed right along to Damascus where he meets a Christian named Ananias and some disciples, his first meeting with the apostles in Jerusalem would've been around 35, and at some point around there, Paul was given this creed which had already been formulated and was being used in the early church.

 

[WoundedDeep]

If that's his defining attribute, I wouldn't want to compare myself to him. I have too much self respect.

No, you have unbelief and arrogance, both are signs of enmity towards God and are far from self respect. Those who wilfully choose not to believe in God (no matter what evidence is presented) really hate their own souls since they reject the very source of life.

Sure, it also doesn't mean that he isn't completely wrong. Even if he really believed those things with full confidence, that does not lend any credibility to the idea that he is actually right about what he says.

If you failed to realise, early apostles like Paul had God's power working through them to validate their preaching. Such as deliverance from demonic possession and healing. But even those miracles were not the only evidence of the truthfulness of preaching, but how he lived his life in faith.

Confidence does not equal evidence. If the mental illness idea is correct, he very well might have experienced all the visions he claimed, he might have just been dead wrong about the idea that they came from god instead of his own brain.

Mental illness was not even used by Paul's direct opponents to discredit him. What then makes your case here correct?

Just because he claims unwavering confidence means absolutely nothing, curse or no curse. He still has just as much of a chance of being unequivocally wrong.

Statements of denial. You have no concrete evidence to discredit Paul, so your statements mean absolutely nothing either, no matter how many times they are repeated.

 

[WoundedDeep]

Not necessarily. I don't think all cult leaders have fame and wealth.

How do you know Paul was a good tree?

But fame and wealth are what cult leaders desire, those are the primary motivations of cult leaders. Paul never had any desire for those things to begin with. In fact, he said if he was still a men pleaser, he should not be an apostle of Jesus Christ.

Those who were with Paul, his immediate disciples and those who saw him in person, all attest to his upright living.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

But fame and wealth are what cult leaders desire, those are the primary motivations of cult leaders.

On what do you base this? I don't think desire for fame and wealth is universal to all cult leaders. Some (?most) are probably narcissists who derive satisfaction from being the centre of other people's attention and being able to exercise authority over them. That's perhaps why cult leaders are often the founders of new religious groups.

Those who were with Paul, his immediate disciples and those who saw him in person, all attest to his upright living.

Again, not meaning to offend here, but this is exactly what members of a cult would say about their leader.

 

[Dave Ellis]

If you really did believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, and if it said that you would be cursed if you spoke anything untrue about it, you wouldn't speak anything untrue about it, would you? Unless you wanted to be willfully disobedient, I suppose...but then wouldn't the subsequent curse upon you be a testimony to the veracity of what you said?

"God's favorite color is purple. He told me. He also said that if I lie about anything He says, he'll strike me dead!"

*lightning bolt strikes man dead*

Logical conclusion: two truths are revealed:
1. God's favorite color is not purple (or God never said anything about colors at all)
2, God will strike dead anyone who tells lies about Him

SO, basically, Paul would've wanted to be cursed, according to you.

Well, again there's two possible explanations I put forward:

1) Possible mental illness: In this case he would have genuinely believed he was speaking the truth and was at no risk of a curse.

2) Willful fraud: In this particular case, various religious leaders have a long history of committing fraudulent acts in the face of self proclaimed curses or other punishments laid out in the holy book they are preaching. For example:

Jeremiah 14:14-16 Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart. Therefore thus saith the LORD concerning the prophets that prophesy in my name, and I sent them not, yet they say, Sword and famine shall not be in this land; By sword and famine shall those prophets be consumed. And the people to whom they prophesy shall be cast out in the streets of Jerusalem because of the famine and the sword; and they shall have none to bury them, them, their wives, nor their sons, nor their daughters: for I will pour their wickedness upon them.

Or for New Testament:

2 Peter 2:1 - But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them--bringing swift destruction on themselves.

So according to the bible, any false prophet is cursed.


So, how do you explain Oral Roberts, who famously claimed that god told him he needed to raise 8 million dollars or he would be "called home". Or Benny Hinn, or Peter Popoff, or Jim Bakker, or Ted Haggard, or any other well known evangelists who have a history of telling us what god says, then wind up being completely wrong while being exposed as dishonest crooks in the process. They knew what they were saying was bogus, and they didn't care. They must have also known god supposedly would have been unhappy with them, and they still didn't care. Moral of the story is, some people who hold positions of power will exploit that power for their own good.

As the famous quote goes:

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.”

- Seneca (Roman Philosopher and Statesman)

 

[Dave Ellis]

Paul was constantly in the danger of being killed, persecuted, starving, put in prison etc. In fact, he wrote of all the difficulties he faced (at one point, he was desperate of life) in trying to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. People were constantly trying to discredit him (just like what you are doing now), and if not for the powers of God wrought in him, no one would even come close to believing in his preaching. So what did he gain? He was a tent maker, earning his own living while facing persecution for his faith and preaching.

What you just wrote also perfectly describes Joseph Smith.

Do you believe him too now?

 

[WoundedDeep]

On what do you base this? I don't think desire for fame and wealth is universal to all cult leaders. Some (?most) are probably narcissists who derive satisfaction from being the centre of other people's attention and being able to exercise authority over them. That's perhaps why cult leaders are often the founders of new religious groups.

Desire to be the centre of people's attention is desire for fame (which also includes being power-hungry). Paul was definitely NOT such a man.

Again, not meaning to offend here, but this is exactly what members of a cult would say about their leader.

And if it was untrue, their cult will soon fail.