Paul (Saul) of Tarsus, a Masonic Infiltrator of Christianity?

[soaren]

Another provocative topic, and I couldn't help myself with this one either... I am on the fence with this one.

All I'm going to contribute is this: Paul basically made the argument for "salvation by grace". Yet Jesus himself said on the Mount that you must follow the commandments to enter heaven...

Yes, of course I believe in Jesus, but I take his opinion much higher than Pauls... I have actually come to think that "salvation by grace" is just another one of Catholicisms failures... Like abstaining from marriage by "priests", explained to be a heresy per the Book of Timothy... Also, they changed Sabbath...

Just look up "Jesus is savior catholic heresies" and you'll get the picture.

What do you guys think on Paul and his contradictions with Jesus' teachings?

Thanks for keeping it Civil - God Bless,

Soaren

 

[St_Worm2]

Another provocative topic, and I couldn't help myself with this one either... I am on the fence with this one.

All I'm going to contribute is this: Paul basically made the argument for "salvation by grace". Yet Jesus himself said on the Mount that you must follow the commandments to enter heaven...

Yes, of course I believe in Jesus, but I take his opinion much higher than Pauls... I have actually come to think that "salvation by grace" is just another one of Catholicisms failures... Like abstaining from marriage by "priests", explained to be a heresy per the Book of Timothy... Also, they changed Sabbath...

Just look up "Jesus is savior catholic heresies" and you'll get the picture.

What do you guys think on Paul and his contradictions with Jesus' teachings?

Thanks for keeping it Civil - God Bless,

Soaren

Hi Soaren, you are right, your topic is "provocative", but I'm afraid I don't understand the connection between the Masons (who formed as a group during the Middle Ages) and St. Paul. So (if you would be so kind), please explain what you mean when you say that Paul could be a "Masonic Infiltrator of Christianity".

Also, where in the "Sermon on the Mount" did Jesus say that we "must follow the commandments to enter Heaven"?


You also say that you take Jesus' opinion over that of Paul's. Does that mean that you believe that only the words in "red" in the NT are the actual words of God? Where does that leave the rest of the NT and, for that matter, the OT? Is the rest of the Bible (save perhaps the 10 Commandments) simply men's thoughts and feelings (or perhaps their best guesses) about God?

You then continue with a statement about Roman Catholics and their beliefs. Speaking as a Calvinist, I think you'll find that we Protestants are even greater defenders of the doctrine of "salvation by grace" than Roman Catholics are. We even go so far as to add the word "alone" to the end of the phrase "salvation by grace" to give greater clarity to what we believe it means.

Finally, you mention Paul's "contradictions" with Jesus' teachings. My final question is, what contradictions? Chapters and verses, please!

Thanks!

Yours and His,
David
p.s. - BTW, I see that you are kinda new here so, WELCOME TO CF .. And finally, according to Jesus' words below, by what means do we obtain eternal life? (See John 3:16 as well)

"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me,
has eternal life, and does not come into judgment,
but has passed out of death into life"
John 5:24​

 

[soaren]

(All KJV) Matthew 5;6;7 Prove my point.

Also there is the matter of

Matthew 19:16-19

16 And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
19 Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

I am saying I take Jesus' work over Paul's because it appears Paul is sometimes in contradiction with Jesus. The Pauline Epistles say "Salvation by Grace Alone" when referring to the religion of a Man himself that said "Salvation by Keeping the Commandments". So who do I believe?

Yes... There is the matter of John 3:16, but are you implying by that I can indulge in every vice in the world, yet still make it to heaven simply because I believe in Jesus? There have sadly been people in this world who have thought that.

I think the issue here is that IF YOU REALLY believe in Jesus, and are not someone of a deceitful tongue, then you would Obey the Commandments.

 

[Radagast]

Paul a Mason? That's just ...

 

[St_Worm2]

OK, let's try this again. First, for some reason you chose not to answer the question about the Masons and St. Paul (which appears to be the main topic of this thread). Please tell us how a group, which didn't exist for more than 1000 years after Paul died, could have influenced his thinking and thereby, Christianity? You continue:

(All KJV) Matthew 5;6;7 Prove my point.

Matthew 5-7 is where you find the Sermon on the Mount. I already knew that, but thanks for reminding me. My question was (and still is), where in the "Sermon on the Mount" (IOW, which specific verses from Matthew 5-7) state that we "must follow the commandments to enter Heaven"? Where did Jesus say that? (or even insinuate it?).

That's enough for now. I'll address the rest of your last post after you've had a chance to answer these questions.

--David
p.s. - here's a hint for you concerning the Sermon on the Mount. Try Matthew 7:21. But make sure that you read it by itself (IOW, out of context) or it may not say what you're hoping it will.

--David

 

[Trogool]

Another provocative topic, and I couldn't help myself with this one either... I am on the fence with this one.

All I'm going to contribute is this: Paul basically made the argument for "salvation by grace". Yet Jesus himself said on the Mount that you must follow the commandments to enter heaven...

Yes, of course I believe in Jesus, but I take his opinion much higher than Pauls... I have actually come to think that "salvation by grace" is just another one of Catholicisms failures... Like abstaining from marriage by "priests", explained to be a heresy per the Book of Timothy... Also, they changed Sabbath...

Just look up "Jesus is savior catholic heresies" and you'll get the picture.

What do you guys think on Paul and his contradictions with Jesus' teachings?

Thanks for keeping it Civil - God Bless,

Soaren

Jesus is savior is also an incredibly virulent hate site. I don't think we are even allowed to post links to it on this forum. That place is toxic, seriously, I wouldn't believe anything you read there.

 

[IisJustMe]

Another provocative topic, and I couldn't help myself with this one either... I am on the fence with this one.

All I'm going to contribute is this: Paul basically made the argument for "salvation by grace". Yet Jesus himself said on the Mount that you must follow the commandments to enter heaven...

Not so fast, cowpoke. He also said:

John 3 NASB
16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."
​

Not "believes and ... " anything. Just believes. That's all. And He said:

John 6
47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life."
​

Jesus makes it clear salvaton is by faith alone, through the Father's grace. And get this? Paul actually said it that way! Amazing!

[/sarcasm]

 

[Albion]

Jesus is savior is also an incredibly virulent hate site. I don't think we are even allowed to post links to it on this forum. That place is toxic, seriously, I wouldn't believe anything you read there.

I took a look and have to agree with Radagast.

 

[rivertree]

Radagast your comment, "Paul a Mason? That's just ..."

Well, it was funny. And I needed something funny.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Another provocative topic, and I couldn't help myself with this one either... I am on the fence with this one.

All I'm going to contribute is this: Paul basically made the argument for "salvation by grace". Yet Jesus himself said on the Mount that you must follow the commandments to enter heaven...

Yes, of course I believe in Jesus, but I take his opinion much higher than Pauls... I have actually come to think that "salvation by grace" is just another one of Catholicisms failures... Like abstaining from marriage by "priests", explained to be a heresy per the Book of Timothy... Also, they changed Sabbath...

Just look up "Jesus is savior catholic heresies" and you'll get the picture.

What do you guys think on Paul and his contradictions with Jesus' teachings?

Thanks for keeping it Civil - God Bless,

Soaren

How is Salvation by Grace 'one of Catholicism's failures'? Everything we have is by grace, why not salvation. All we have to do is recognize that God is God. Even that comes from grace.

What "book of Timothy" shows that priestly celibacy is a heresy? Of course, it would have to be a doctrine or dogma before you could claim it a heresy.

When did the Catholic Church "change the Sabbath"? We did no such thing. The Sabbath is the 7th day on which God rested. We celebrate the eigth day, on which Jesus rose from the dead.

By the way, the site you mention filters for "racism and hate".

 

[rivertree]

"How is Salvation by Grace 'one of Catholicism's failures'?" I was wondering that myself, and I'm not a Catholic. Seems to me the Catholic church (and all of us) have learned about salvation by grace through God's word, and though many tears and sorrows.

 

[ThatWhichIsnt]

I heard Jesus was part of the Illuminati, too.

 

[Albion]

I heard Jesus was part of the Illuminati, too.

Even the nutjobs don't claim that the Illuminati were formed until the 18th century, so....?

It has been speculated--by Masons and anti-Masons alike--that Masonry goes back to ancient times, but not the Illuminati.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

<snip>
All I'm going to contribute is this: Paul basically made the argument for "salvation by grace". Yet Jesus himself said on the Mount that you must follow the commandments to enter heaven...
<snip>

Thanks for keeping it Civil - God Bless,

Soaren

In my opinion, based on what a number of Masons (I know a lot of them) have told me, is at odds with the statement that has been provided as proof regarding St. Paul.

While the Lodge is not "Christian" in and of itself, there are many proclaiming Christians who are members. The Lodge is Gnostic in nature in that it claims "secrets" of enlightenment. Part of the journey of the members through the various degrees are various "moral" principles which must be practised; these include the 10 commandments and charitable works. All of these principals are diametrically opposed to the teachings of Paul in that the Lodge is "works based".

Such are the reasons why the Catholic Church, Confessional Lutheran Synods, and various other Christian Churches and Denominations prohibit membership in the Masonic Lodge and other "Secret Societies".

BTW, it seems to me that the "legalism" of many reformed protestant denominations would be more in line with Masonic teaching and practice than they are with the teachings of Paul.

 

[Albion]

In my opinion, based on what a number of Masons (I know a lot of them) have told me, is at odds with the statement that has been provided as proof regarding St. Paul.

While the Lodge is not "Christian" in and of itself, there are many proclaiming Christians who are members. The Lodge is Gnostic in nature in that it claims "secrets" of enlightenment. Part of the journey of the members through the various degrees are various "moral" principles which must be practised; these include the 10 commandments and charitable works. All of these principals are diametrically opposed to the teachings of Paul in that the Lodge is "works based".

Such are the reasons why the Catholic Church, Confessional Lutheran Synods, and various other Christian Churches and Denominations prohibit membership in the Masonic Lodge and other "Secret Societies".

BTW, it seems to me that the "legalism" of many reformed protestant denominations would be more in line with Masonic teaching and practice than they are with the teachings of Paul.

1. The actual reason for the Catholic Church's opposition is that Freemasonry stood for national independence, free elections, and religious liberty. The Vatican had long considered its authority to be above all rulers and so was able, in many cases, to pass on the validity of the rulers of nations. Social movements in the 18th and 19th centuries were beginning to undercut that role, and Masonry was normally on the side of national liberation. The Church's nominal reason for opposing Masonry was that it supposedly was indifferent to true religion (by which was meant that men of different denominations could join).

2. Masonry has no required religious tenets other than life after death and monotheism. Most members, both Protestant and Catholic, are active Christian churchgoers. Masonry itself does not require a belief in works righteousness and does not talk or behave as though that is inherently a part of the Masonic standards or its charitable endeavors. In all aspects of Masonry, it is emphasized that nothing therein is to be considered by the member to supercede his own religious convictions.

The declarations against Masonry that have been made by a number of Protestant churches over the years have, in many cases, been based on little more than hearsay or an interpretation of one or two ambiguous lines taken from the thousands of pages of Masonic rituals. I've studied this and found only the most superficial examination made of Masonry by some church committee, none of whose members had ever been a Mason, before the national convention of that church dutifully voted to condemn Masonry as a false religion. Many charges were, in fact, demonstrably false.

Ironically, many Protestant churches condemn Masonry for allegedly holding essentially Catholic doctrines, while the Catholic church condemns Masonry as a de-facto Protestant religion. It has even been charged by a well-known American minister that because Masonry believes in the brotherhood of man, it therefore is a religion, even though it has no religious creed, no clergy, no sacraments, and no worship services.


.

 

[OneWordVa]

I think Paul was doing the will of God...Yea we have to keep the commandments but we will never live up to keeping them all even if we were the best Christian ever and thats where grace comes in...Yea ur goal is to be like Christ and follow his ways but theres also grace set to help get u to salvation because we live in a fallen world where sin exist...

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

1. The actual reason for the Catholic Church's opposition is that Freemasonry stood for national independence, free elections, and religious liberty. The Vatican had long considered its authority to be above all rulers and so was able, in many cases, to pass on the validity of the rulers of nations. Social movements in the 18th and 19th centuries were beginning to undercut that role, and Masonry was normally on the side of national liberation. The Church's nominal reason for opposing Masonry was that it supposedly was indifferent to true religion (by which was meant that men of different denominations could join).

2. Masonry has no required religious tenets other than life after death and monotheism. Most members, both Protestant and Catholic, are active Christian churchgoers. Masonry itself does not require a belief in works righteousness and does not talk or behave as though that is inherently a part of the Masonic standards or its charitable endeavors. In all aspects of Masonry, it is emphasized that nothing therein is to be considered by the member to supercede his own religious convictions.

The declarations against Masonry that have been made by a number of Protestant churches over the years have, in many cases, been based on little more than hearsay or an interpretation of one or two ambiguous lines taken from the thousands of pages of Masonic rituals. I've studied this and found only the most superficial examination made of Masonry by some church committee, none of whose members had ever been a Mason, before the national convention of that church dutifully voted to condemn Masonry as a false religion. Many charges were, in fact, demonstrably false.

Ironically, many Protestant churches condemn Masonry for allegedly holding essentially Catholic doctrines, while the Catholic church condemns Masonry as a de-facto Protestant religion. It has even been charged by a well-known American minister that because Masonry believes in the brotherhood of man, it therefore is a religion, even though it has no religious creed, no clergy, no sacraments, and no worship services.


.

Hi Albion

While, as you stated there were political issues at play as well; but the truth remains; the Masonic Lodge is accepting of Christians both trinitarian and not; it is accepting of other faiths as well; and it teaches Gnosticism. The universality of the Lodge; and it's Gnostic teachings are not compatible with Confessional Christianity; certainly not Confessional Lutheranism.

Respectfully,

Mark

 

[Albion]

Hi Albion

Hi, Mark!

While, as you stated there were political issues at play as well; but the truth remains; the Masonic Lodge is accepting of Christians both trinitarian and not; it is accepting of other faiths as well

Yep, just like the Boy Scouts. And, you know, there are Lutherans who forbid membership in the Boy Scouts on the same basis! Personally, I've considered it but can't be persuaded by that argument. Many organizations we belong to, from college fraternities to the Rotary, are multi-denominational and even have members who are not religious at all--which makes their membership more diverse than the Masons are.

and it teaches Gnosticism.

If you've been taught Gnosticism by the Masons, I'll defer to you. From all that I know, however, this is a supposition that's been made and then repeated in books and online but isn't true. How, by the way, does one "teach Gnosticism?"

are not compatible with Confessional Christianity; certainly not Confessional Lutheranism.

Then I'd recommend all Confessional Lutherans to follow their own churches' views on this matter, but that still doesn't make the allegations correct. My church BTW does not have a policy against Masonic membership, and even many of the clergy are Masons, as was a recent Archbishop of Canterbury and members of the Royal family.

 

[Harry3142]

Soaren-

Matthew 19:16-19 is only part of a passage that actually doesn't end until Matthew 19:26. And that verse states:

Jesus looked at them and said, "With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible."

Don't come onto a website such as this, quote certain verses, and expect us to simply take your word for it without our verifying what you say by reading the entire passage that you took the verses from.

I've seen attacks on St. Paul on this and other websites. And in each and every case, they were instigated by those whose sects demanded absolute obedience to their heirarchy as a prerequisite for obtaining the righteousness necessary for salvation. It's not a tactic used by those who wish to enlighten others as to the message of Jesus Christ. Instead, it's a tactic used by those whose sole desire is to gain absolute power over others. In other words, it's a power grab that is using the cross of Christ as a smokescreen in order to give it a legitimacy it does not deserve, nor should it ever attain.

 

[ptomwebster]

Another provocative topic, and I couldn't help myself with this one either... I am on the fence with this one.

All I'm going to contribute is this: Paul basically made the argument for "salvation by grace". Yet Jesus himself said on the Mount that you must follow the commandments to enter heaven...

...

Soaren

Learn how to "rightly divide!"