Was Paul inspired by God?

[nephilimiyr]

What do you all say? Was the apostle Paul inspired by God or did he just write what he felt? Did he just write the epistles because he thought time was running short for the age and needed to tell people whatever they wanted to hear just so that they would confess Jesus as Lord?

 

[Slave2SinNoMore]

What do you all say? Was the apostle Paul inspired by God or did he just write what he felt? Did he just write the epistles because he thought time was running short for the age and needed to tell people whatever they wanted to hear just so that they would confess Jesus as Lord?

Paul Rocks!!

The scripture he wrote, as well as all the Bible, is God-breathed.

 

[nephilimiyr]

Paul Rocks!!

The scripture he wrote, as well as all the Bible, is God-breathed.

Thank you Slave, you don't know how much your post means to me right now but it means alot! I was really haveing doubts, not about what Paul wrote but about some of the people here posting in the christian only forums. Let me just say my heart aches...

 

[backley]

Thank you Slave, you don't know how much your post means to me right now but it means alot! I was really haveing doubts, not about what Paul wrote but about some of the people here posting in the christian only forums. Let me just say my heart aches...

I would also add that others who mentioned Paul would agree with his apostleship, such as Luke writing about Paul in Acts and Peter saying Pauls writings are scripture.

Brian

 

[Starcrystal]

Pauls writings were inspired by God, however, there are a couple areas where he writes opinion, but he makes it clear its his own opinion. 1 Corinthians 7 and 11 are two areas. He writes about marraige and about hair lengths. 7:12, "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord...." Also where he says he suffers not a woman to teach: this was his own personal thing. It wasn't meant to be enforced on the whole church.
Its mainly a matter of interpretation, and reading ALL scripture in context. Peter makes reference to the difficulties in some of pauls letters, but he also relates them to scripture, meaning they are inspired. (2 Peter 3:15 - 16)

 

[nephilimiyr]

Pauls writings were inspired by God, however, there are a couple areas where he writes opinion, but he makes it clear its his own opinion. 1 Corinthians 7 and 11 are two areas. He writes about marraige and about hair lengths. 7:12, "But to the rest speak I, not the Lord...." Also where he says he suffers not a woman to teach: this was his own personal thing. It wasn't meant to be enforced on the whole church.
Its mainly a matter of interpretation, and reading ALL scripture in context. Peter makes reference to the difficulties in some of pauls letters, but he also relates them to scripture, meaning they are inspired. (2 Peter 3:15 - 16)

Ok, I can agree with that. But if in general someone claimed that Paul wrote anything to to get people to come to jesus would you agree with that? Would you agree with that person if perhaps they said Paul was only telling people what they wanted to hear to get them to accept jesus?

 

[Warrior Poet]

neph I share the same sentiment about the confusion of Paul's writings. I do have my take on it. In Galations Paul lays out the path he took to get to where he was at and uses great detail. This is what I gather from this.
Paul was a spiritual powerhouse and obviously a clever thinker. But I think Paul can be summed up in one verse he wrote.

Gal 5:6

For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

The bold is mine.

Paul expressed himself through love, tough love if there is such a thing. But he was letting his faith guide the way. Or following his heart. I agree at the time his word were right on the money, and I don't doubt that he communed with God in prayer as we all do. What my beef is who made Paul the law and rule maker? I hate to go to this topic but take homosexuality, Paul was the one that set the "guideline" for it. Not Jesus. I understand the arguments of it all the abomination, or unnatural regardless he set forth a "law" that christians take so dreadfully serious it jeopardizes what Paul was about "faith expressing itself through love". Paul let his faith guide him this pitted him against people of the "same" faith that were lead more by law then their faith. He even cover legalism and taking it to far. This is where my delima starts. Paul set forth a set of "ground rules" , or laws, that are adhered to today. Like the submitting of husbands and wives, headship, sexuality, church corruption, he was being led by his faith and trying to express it through love. This letter were targeted at those who should know better, but Paul holds them accountable, almost bordering condemnation, something he was admittly against.
I guess basically what I am getting it is that I see Paul as a man of God no doubt I do not place him somewhere above me or any other true man of God. His faith led him to conclusions that fell in line with the teachings of Christ, and were yet still very different from the majority's frame of mind.
Almost like he was telling the ONLY thing that matters is faith expressing itself through love, let your faith guide you and walk the walk of love for all, but if your faith guides you to show compassion to those Paul spoke against we are now watering down the Bible.

I don't think he said what he did for the sake to save people, he did it to rid ignorance so it could not be an excuse. He was set that the old "law" was a human way to salvation that no laws appointed to us by man where a way to salvation, My question then is following Pauls "guide" to the "T" the only way to be a good christian and get saved????By his own words IMO the answer is no. I mean he was a man who set many "laws" christians adhere to today when their faith maybe leading them in a different direction. There is always the extreme I understand this, but is saying something like "I have no desire to be "head" of the house" a violation of Gods will for a person, isn't Gods will for all of us different. What about granting EVERYONE equal rights, a "law of the land" which we are suppose to uphold. If i say i don't agree with something personally but wont protest it because I see them as my brothers and sister able to make their own choice, and be judging for those choice, make me go against Gods word and against Jesus??? Or is my faith being expressed through love??

I know where I stand.

Christianity is a religion, not a lifestyle, FAITH is the lifestyle. Let it lead let it express love.

Warrior Poet

 

[G4m]

What do you all say? Was the apostle Paul inspired by God or did he just write what he felt? Did he just write the epistles because he thought time was running short for the age and needed to tell people whatever they wanted to hear just so that they would confess Jesus as Lord?

Few points:

2 Peter 3
15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

1 Corinthians 9
22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.
Romans 15
20 Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation:

Philippians 1
14 And many of the brethren in the Lord, waxing confident by my bonds, are much more bold to speak the word without fear.
15 Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and some also of good will:
16 The one preach Christ of contention, not sincerely, supposing to add affliction to my bonds:
17 But the other of love, knowing that I am set for the defence of the gospel.
18 What then? notwithstanding, every way, whether in pretence, or in truth, Christ is preached; and I therein do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice.

 

[Tangnefedd]

I think Paul thought he was, but I doubt it! He was a man of his time and wrote narrowly from his own experience of life, and his prejudices. Having read what he wrote I don't think I would have got on with him very well!

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Paul had a deeper and more personal revelation of Jesus than did any of the apostles that actually walked with Him... with the exception of maybe John.
We tend to think that because the other apostles actually walked with Jesus that they knew more. Actually I believe that because Paul received what he did by revelation, his knowledge was in fact deeper and more profound.

 

[Starcrystal]

Nephilimiyr,
Ok, I can agree with that. But if in general someone claimed that Paul wrote anything to to get people to come to jesus would you agree with that? Would you agree with that person if perhaps they said Paul was only telling people what they wanted to hear to get them to accept jesus?

I don't think he was telling them what they wanted to hear. In fact he warned against people who preached like that (2 Timothy 4:3)
Some people DIDN't want to hear what he had to write. Even today, as we see from some posts on this thread, people don't want to hear what Paul says. I think he preached a very hard gospel, even harder than Jesus. Maybe he did so from some of his prior experience as a Pharisee, but he preached the way of salvation nonetheless.... so long as we don't make legalistic doctrines out of the 3 or so "opinion" passages he wrote....

 

[Slave2SinNoMore]

I don't think he was telling them what they wanted to hear. In fact he warned against people who preached like that (2 Timothy 4:3)
Some people DIDN't want to hear what he had to write. Even today, as we see from some posts on this thread, people don't want to hear what Paul says. I think he preached a very hard gospel, even harder than Jesus. Maybe he did so from some of his prior experience as a Pharisee, but he preached the way of salvation nonetheless.... so long as we don't make legalistic doctrines out of the 3 or so "opinion" passages he wrote....

That would be a shame if people turned Paul's writings into a basis for legalism. Paul would definitely not have wanted that. He hated legalism with a passion, and in fact had conflict with the Jerusalem church who seemed to be caving in a little to the Judaizers. I think Paul is the least leglistic writer of any book of the Bible.

 

[Svt4Him]

Paul's writtings are great. And when Paul wrote 'his opinion' an understanding of what that means is that he was teaching a new thing, not expounding on a teaching of Jesus, but it carries just as much weight.

That said, there are some things I don't understand. Honestly though, I think some things I'll have to put on the shelf until I have a fuller understanding.

 

[Momzilla]

Paul's writings can sometimes be very difficult to understand, much less accept. He has some hard teachings. There is a tendency among many modern-minded Christians to simply toss Paul's writings out for this reason, but I think that tendency should be resisted. Even a cursors reading of Acts makes clear that Paul was chosen by God for ministry, and the church fathers who selected the canon of the Bible under the guidance of the Holy Spirit included certain of Paul's letters.

I think we owe it to ourselves, to God, and to St. Paul himself to treat his writings as inspired scripture, as difficult as this is to do. As a woman, I was enormously comforted when my (female) pastor said, "I struggled with Paul for a long time. But now, we're friends."

 

[JMRE5150]

I think Paul thought he was, but I doubt it! He was a man of his time and wrote narrowly from his own experience of life, and his prejudices. Having read what he wrote I don't think I would have got on with him very well!

Just curious Tangnefedd...are you saying you don't believe Paul was inspired by God at all? If so, are you aware that 2/3rds of the new testament was written by Paul? Also, if you answer yes to the first 2 questions, are we to assume you don't believe that 2/3rds of the new testament is not God inspired?

Or do I simply misunderstand your response?


Robb

 

[Bulldog]

It never ceases to amaze me how many Christians do not believe the inspiration of Paul just because his teachings disagree with their own opinion.

 

[nephilimiyr]

It never ceases to amaze me how many Christians do not believe the inspiration of Paul just because his teachings disagree with their own opinion.

These are exactly my thoughts as well! I didn't realize just how many christians felt this way untill recently on this forum. I always took it for granted that all christians took everything in the canonized Bible as an inspired work. I mean isn't that the main hurdle the book has to cross in order to become canonized? I knew there are christians that don't take everything literal but have always believed they believe the non-literal work is still inspired just the same.

 

[jgarden]

Paul is unchallenged as Christianity's greatest missionary, theologian and writer. His ministry "bore fruit" despite the efforts of the Judaizers and the Jerusalem Church. It is doubtful that there would have been a Christian Church as we know it, without Paul. Based on his letters, Paul has had more influence on Christian thought than any other writer.

Paul was the only real advocate for the Gentiles immediately after the Resurrection. He was the only leader who didn't require the circumcision of Gentiles to become a Christian. Although Peter became the first pope, the Catholic Church would not have existed without Paul. Paul was not without his idiosyncrasies, including his views on marriage and the role of women in the Church.

 

[jgarden]

 

[Philip]

despite the efforts of the Judaizers and the Jerusalem Church

Huh? The Council of Jerusalem agreed with St Paul against the Judaizers.

Paul was the only real advocate for the Gentiles immediately after the Resurrection.

Um, immediately after the Resurrection, Paul was Saul. He was killing Christians.

He was the only leader who didn't require the circumcision of Gentiles to become a Christian.

Um, the Council of Jerusalem agreed with Paul in not requiring circumcision.