Those who denounce Paul

[Hentenza]

You said that the statement that Paul was a Pharisee (and had never renounced that) was refuted long ago.

Paul said in 1 Cor. 9:

19 For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under [h]the Law, as under [i]the Law though not being myself under [j]the Law, so that I might win those who are under [k]the Law; 21 to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. 23 I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.


Paul became all to all to win souls for Christ. Paul is a Pharisee for the sake of the gospel.



Saul was a Pharisee. Paul was a Christian.

If so, please post the proof of that refutation here so that people don't have to go back looking for what is claimed to be a fact and not an opinion.

I don't mind repeating at times but, and I really don't want this to sound rude, if you get to a thread late it is your responsibility to read back.

 

[Standing Up]

You said that the statement that Paul was a Pharisee (and had never renounced that) was refuted long ago.

If so, please post the proof of that refutation here so that people don't have to go back looking for what is claimed to be a fact and not an opinion.

After that trial in chapter 23, he goes to Caesarea. See chapter 26.

Which knew me from the beginning, if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee.
And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers:

He lived as a Pharisee, and now as a believer in the promise from God. He wasn't under trial as a Pharisee. As Hentenza said, as Saul versus as Paul.

What's the promise?

" they [gentiles and Jews] may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me [Christ]." 26:18

Paul is not telling us anything that had not already been promised. The just shall live by faith. Like Abraham. Like Habbakuk. Like David. Like Paul. Like Peter. Like you and I.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Oh my! The Lord bore witness to paul's grace preaching!

Unless Luke fibbed?

Acts 14:3 So they remained for a long time, speaking boldly for the Lord, who bore witness to the word of his grace, granting signs and wonders to be done by their hands.

Gotta love the "Word"

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary
JESUS AND PAUL VS THE OC JUDEAN RULERS

Acts 13:46
Being bold yet Paul and Barnabas said "to ye it was necessary first to be spoken the Word of GOD.
Since ye are thrusting away it and not worthy judging yeselves of the age-abiding life, behold! we are turning into the Nations/Gentiles".

Reve 19:11
And I saw the heaven open up and behold! a white horse and the One sitting on him *called faithful*
and true
and in righteousness He is judging and is battling.
12 The yet eyes of Him a flame of fire and upon the head of Him, many diadems,
having a name having been written which no-one has seen except He.
13 And having been about-cast/clothed a cloak, having been dipped to blood
and hath been called the name of Him, the Word of GOD.

.
.

 

[sonny1293]

Let me add the following,

Let’s begin with this! 1 Cor.1:1, “Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God (the Father.)”

Acts 9:15, Jesus said to Ananias, “Go your way: for he (Paul) is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel.”

Paul writes, Rom.15:8, “Now I (Paul) say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision (to the Jews) for the truth of God (the Father,) to confirm the promises made unto the (O.T. Jewish) fathers (Abraham, David etc.)”

Gal.2:9, “And when James, Cephas (Peter) and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me (Paul,) they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands (they shook hands) of fellowship; that we (Paul and Barnabas) should go unto the heathen (Gentiles) and they unto the circumcision (Jews.)”

Paul’s gospel was that of faith, and not works.

Rom.4:5, “But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him (Jesus,) that justifieth the ungodly, his faith (those who believe) is counted for righteousness.”

When we speak of works, we mean those who depend, both in the past and present on being saved by their own works and not by the grace of God alone.

Rom.5:1, “Therefore being justified (declare to be just) by faith, we have peace with God (the Father) through our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Rom.6:14, “For sin shall not have dominion over you: for you are not under the law, but under grace.”

Phil LaSpino

amen

 

[BlunderAngel]

you said this though, clearly an insult to his integrity.Unless Luke wanted to be out of a job he'd not speak ill of his boss.

It's a statement of fact in a employee/subordinate, boss/superior relationship.
The only two people who referred to Paul as an apostle in the new testament are Paul and Luke. Paul repeatedly pronounced himself an apostle. While he was dismissed by all of Asia when he was found wanting of that status there.

Paul said in 1 Cor. 9:

19 For though I am free from all men, I have made myself a slave to all, so that I may win more. 20 To the Jews I became as a Jew, so that I might win Jews; to those who are under [h]the Law, as under [i]the Law though not being myself under [j]the Law, so that I might win those who are under [k]the Law; 21 to those who are without law, as without law, though not being without the law of God but under the law of Christ, so that I might win those who are without law. 22 To the weak I became weak, that I might win the weak; I have become all things to all men, so that I may by all means save some. 23 I do all things for the sake of the gospel, so that I may become a fellow partaker of it.

Paul became all to all to win souls for Christ. Paul is a Pharisee for the sake of the gospel.

He did all things for the sake of spreading his doctrine that he expected to cause people to believe in him.1 Corinthians 4:16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.

Including lie.
[FONT=&quot]Romans 3:7 "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?"[/FONT]

2 Corinthians 12:15-16 And I will very gladly spend and be spent for you; though the more abundantly I love you, the less I be loved. 16 But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.


As admitted here:

[FONT=&quot]1 Corinthians 9:19-23 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]"I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, that I might gain them that are without law. ... I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. And this I do for the gospel's sake"[/FONT]

2 Corinthians 11:1-9Paul and the False Apostles

Saul was a Pharisee. Paul was a Christian.

Saul was a Pharisee and a Jew, Paul was the Latin namesake inherited from his father because he was also a Roman citizen.

I don't mind repeating at times but, and I really don't want this to sound rude, if you get to a thread late it is your responsibility to read back.

I don't wish this to sound rude either however, if you make a proclamation such as Paul's being a Pharisee has been refuted, it is incumbent on you to show proof to support that proclamation.
Saying that Saul's being a Pharisee has been refuted and then telling people if they want proof of that go look for it, isn't how a discussion regarding claims and counter claims, is carried out.

 

[Messy]

[/I][/INDENT]The "law of liberty" is liberty from sin, not liberty from doing what's right. YHWH, right before He gave the 10 commandments, stated that He brought the Israelites out of the "house of bondage" (Ex 20:2) ... only to bring them under bondage again? No, He brought them out of bondage to sin (forced to sin in Egypt) to the liberty of doing what's right.

Yes and to the liberty of being able to do what's right. That's exactly what Paul preached.

 

[Frogster]

It's a statement of fact in a employee/subordinate, boss/superior relationship.
The only two people who referred to Paul as an apostle in the new testament are Paul and Luke. Paul repeatedly pronounced himself an apostle. While he was dismissed by all of Asia when he was found wanting of that status there.

He did all things for the sake of spreading his doctrine that he expected to cause people to believe in him.1 Corinthians 4:16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.

Including lie.
[FONT=&quot]Romans 3:7 "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?"[/FONT]

2 Corinthians 12:15-16 And I will very gladly spend and be spent for you; though the more abundantly I love you, the less I be loved. 16 But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.


As admitted here:

[FONT=&quot]1 Corinthians 9:19-23 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]"I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, that I might gain them that are without law. ... I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. And this I do for the gospel's sake"[/FONT]

2 Corinthians 11:1-9Paul and the False Apostles






Saul was a Pharisee and a Jew, Paul was the Latin namesake inherited from his father because he was also a Roman citizen.


I don't wish this to sound rude either however, if you make a proclamation such as Paul's being a Pharisee has been refuted, it is incumbent on you to show proof to support that proclamation.
Saying that Saul's being a Pharisee has been refuted and then telling people if they want proof of that go look for it, isn't how a discussion regarding claims and counter claims, is carried out.

not only did you not prove you discredited Luke without proof...

but lol! Rom 3:7 was not paul calling himself a liar, it was what his condmened apponents were saying! He was quoting their mentallity there... read it...

 

[BlunderAngel]

not only did you not prove you discredited Luke without proof..

The scriptures prove Luke was not an apostle of Christ's 12 but was a physician and scribe/secretary of Paul.

but lol! Rom 3:7 was not paul calling himself a liar, it was what his condmened apponents were saying! He was quoting their mentallity there... read it...[/quote]
I did. There are numerous scriptures where Paul brags of lying and using guile to bring his letters and teachings to the populace.

 

[Frogster]

It's a statement of fact in a employee/subordinate, boss/superior relationship.
The only two people who referred to Paul as an apostle in the new testament are Paul and Luke. Paul repeatedly pronounced himself an apostle.




While he was dismissed by all of Asia when he was found wanting of that status there.

He did all things for the sake of spreading his doctrine that he expected to cause people to believe in him.1 Corinthians 4:16 Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me.

Including lie.
[FONT=&quot]Romans 3:7 "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?"[/FONT]

2 Corinthians 12:15-16 And I will very gladly spend and be spent for you; though the more abundantly I love you, the less I be loved. 16 But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.


As admitted here:

[FONT=&quot]1 Corinthians 9:19-23 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]"I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; To them that are without law, as without law, that I might gain them that are without law. ... I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. And this I do for the gospel's sake"[/FONT]

2 Corinthians 11:1-9Paul and the False Apostles






Saul was a Pharisee and a Jew, Paul was the Latin namesake inherited from his father because he was also a Roman citizen.


I don't wish this to sound rude either however, if you make a proclamation such as Paul's being a Pharisee has been refuted, it is incumbent on you to show proof to support that proclamation.
Saying that Saul's being a Pharisee has been refuted and then telling people if they want proof of that go look for it, isn't how a discussion regarding claims and counter claims, is carried out.

hmmmmm...red above...peter anounced he was an apostle too....


1 Simeon[a] Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

How on earth could a Pharisee say what Paul said? I thought Pharisees were only hating Jesus, they didn't accept Him, they were keeping the law, making people keep the law and making their own laws, they were greedy.

Paul worked himself and he preached grace and Jesus.

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary
JESUS AND PAUL VS THE PHARISESS

Matthew 23:15 Woe to ye Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!
that ye are going about the sea and the dry/xhran <3584> to make one proselyte and whenever he may be becoming, ye are making him a son of geennhV twofold-more of yeselves

Acts 13:43 Of being loosed yet of the synagogue, many of the Judeans and the being reverent proselytes follow Paul and Barnabus,
whoany speaking to them, persuaded them to be remaining to the Grace of GOD.



.

 

[Frogster]

but you insulted Luke, and you were wrong in your rom 3:7 usage....fact!

 

[BlunderAngel]

hmmmmm...red above...peter anounced he was an apostle too....


1 Simeon[a] Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:

Well yes, Peter would have every right to because he walked with Jesus and his feet were washed by Jesus. Matthew 10:2-4/John 13:1-17.

The only one that pronounced Paul an apostle was Paul. And his employee on but 2 occasions. No apostle of the living Jesus called him apostle.

And if Paul was not considered to lie in his teachings why would he say he is not lying about his apostleship?

1 Timothy 2:7 (ERV)


7 And I was chosen as an apostle to tell people that message. (I am telling the truth. I am not lying.) I was chosen to teach those who are not Jews to believe and understand the truth.

 

[ananda]

Maybe this one:
James 2:8
If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself,” you do well; 9 but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors.

James is stating that we do well if fulfill the royal law - "loving your neighbor as yourself". James is not stating that "loving your neighbor ..." fulfills the Law.

 

[ananda]

No and it certainly wouldn't be yours.

Then what would you answer be, for those people? "What canon/Bible is the right one to buy?"

 

[ananda]

Been refuted already.

Nope it hasn't.

 

[ananda]

Then why are you teaching as the Pharisees did?

The Pharisees taught anti-Law. I do no such thing.

 

[ananda]

Jesus gave us two commandments. He did not give the Christian ANY laws.

Been refuted already.

 

[ananda]

Netzarim is pushing his own traditions just as the pharisees were.

No, I'm not pushing tradition. I'm preaching adherence to YHWH's Law in determining canon. Instead, Hentenza is pushing his own tradition just as the pharisees were.

 

[ananda]

Good point.

Besides, all Paul was trying to do was to split the council over the resurrection issue, which he did. It'd be like someone today who was raised RC and left, but was now on trial and there being RC and EO in the crowd, who says I believe in the primacy of Peter. The crowd starts arguing amongst itself and RC says let him go.

Why did he try to split the council? Was "the resurrection issue" the reason he was arrested in the first place?

 

[Frogster]

Well yes, Peter would have every right to because he walked with Jesus and his feet were washed by Jesus. Matthew 10:2-4/John 13:1-17.

The only one that pronounced Paul an apostle was Paul. And his employee on but 2 occasions. No apostle of the living Jesus called him apostle.

And if Paul was not considered to lie in his teachings why would he say he is not lying about his apostleship?

1 Timothy 2:7 (ERV)


7 And I was chosen as an apostle to tell people that message. (I am telling the truth. I am not lying.) I was chosen to teach those who are not Jews to believe and understand the truth.

this is a weak rebuttal.

Peter still called himself an apostle, why?

The jerusalem council recognized paul big time.

Gee, what do you prove, other than paul's enemies called him a liar, they called Jesus names too, no?


wrong again, the church called Paul an apostle.


2 If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you, for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.


you should. realize because of Paul's powerful anointing, the devil attacked him all the time, so charges from liars, or false apostles are not example you should use.


did you see how you were wrong om Rom 3:7 yet?