- May 19, 2018
- 11,783
- 12,499
- Country
- United Kingdom
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Single
St Paul then, unravels the Gospels, the teachings of Jesus In a way that we all can understand?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I do appreciate your post and found much to agree with in it.Paul is a teacher. Not just a disciple. Sometimes when I read the Bible, I find joy in reading Paul's letter than even Jesus' teaching. (Sincerely).
Let's be truthful here, the God inspired word of God needs people to pass it across and Paul was a valued asset.
But it never meant that no other person could do it so perfectly
That's silly. We make all kinds of important decisions based on evidence that isn't inerrant. People are used to evaluating less than perfect evidence. Inerrancy replaces the problem of deciding what we know about Jesus with the problem of proving inerrancy. There's a lot better evidence for Jesus than there is for inerrrancy.Then how can you trust the men who wrote the gospels that that was even what Jesus did? Your entire premise of follow Jesus falls flat if the words of scripture are not God inspired.
There are many people, who I disagree with, who will show you that Paul is not preaching OSAS.The error with your reasoning is that Jesus says that if you don't bear fruit you will be cut off the vine... So unless you believe that you can be saved without being attached to the vine, you should agree with what I'm saying.
If you are a disciple you are saved, if you aren't a disciple you aren't saved. It's pretty obvious.
Luke 13
6 And He began telling this parable: “A man had a fig tree which had been planted in his vineyard; and he came looking for fruit on it and did not find any. 7 And he said to the vineyard-keeper, ‘Behold, for three years I have come looking for fruit on this fig tree without finding any. Cut it down! Why does it even use up the ground?’ 8 And he answered and said to him, ‘Let it alone, sir, for this year too, until I dig around it and put in fertilizer; 9 and if it bears fruit next year, fine; but if not, cut it down.’”
Remember that most of Jesus' disciples WALKED AWAY/ left Him, and Jesus did not try to get them to come back.The error with your reasoning is that Jesus says that if you don't bear fruit you will be cut off the vine... So unless you believe that you can be saved without being attached to the vine, you should agree with what I'm saying.
If you are a disciple you are saved, if you aren't a disciple you aren't saved. It's pretty obvious.
Your not addressing the post I answered from another poster. Read it againThat's silly. We make all kinds of important decisions based on evidence that isn't inerrant. People are used to evaluating less than perfect evidence. Inerrancy replaces the problem of deciding what we know about Jesus with the problem of proving inerrancy. There's a lot better evidence for Jesus than there is for inerrrancy.
St Paul then, unravels the Gospels, the teachings of Jesus In a way that we all can understand?
That's silly. We make all kinds of important decisions based on evidence that isn't inerrant. People are used to evaluating less than perfect evidence. Inerrancy replaces the problem of deciding what we know about Jesus with the problem of proving inerrancy. There's a lot better evidence for Jesus than there is for inerrrancy.
OK, then I apologize. The response seemed to be sparked originally by this: https://www.christianforums.com/thr...-without-st-paul.8076293/page-5#post-73032246, which says every word was put into their minds by God.Hedrick, ToBeLoved didn't say anything about inerrancy.
There are many people, who I disagree with, who will show you that Paul is not preaching OSAS.
So the difference isn't between what Jesus and Paul say, but in our interpretations of what they say.
And in people's interpretations lies all kinds of contradictions. Don't put this on Paul, put it where it belongs, on man's interpretation.
You were saying in your post that we needed to interpret Paul's words in light of Christ's Words.I think I showed in my first post in this thread that I don't accuse Paul, but the reformers and those who use Paul's writings to misinterpret Jesus teachings.
"Every branch IN ME that does not bear fruit, He takes away"
But, many people interpret Jesus' words through what Paul said, and I asked for examples of this.
But I say Jesus and Paul were not at odds, Paul's words have the same weight as Jesus' words for Jesus' words were not His own, but those of the Father and Paul's words were inspired by the Holy Spirit.
More than that, Colter was declaring that claims of inspiration were being designed by God's ministers to oppress and control the flock.OK, then I apologize. The response seemed to be sparked originally by this: https://www.christianforums.com/thr...-without-st-paul.8076293/page-5#post-73032246, which says every word was put into their minds by God.
I do understand that Colter seemed to be denying inspiration at all.
You were saying in your post that we needed to interpret Paul's words in light of Christ's Words.
But, many people interpret Jesus' words through what Paul said, and I asked for examples of this.
But I say Jesus and Paul were not at odds, Paul's words have the same weight as Jesus' words for Jesus' words were not His own, but those of the Father and Paul's words were inspired by the Holy Spirit.
We shouldn't elevate Jesus' words over Paul's or Paul's words over Jesus. Neither spoke on there own.I fully agree! But it's easy to get the wrong understanding of Paul, starting with his writings instead of Jesus' teachings. Of course Jesus and Paul taught the same gospel. Luther and Calvin used Paul's letters to interpret Jesus' teachings, when it should be the other way around. If we understand Jesus, we can understand Paul.
I fully agree! But it's easy to get the wrong understanding of Paul, starting with his writings instead of Jesus' teachings. Of course Jesus and Paul taught the same gospel. Luther and Calvin used Paul's letters to interpret Jesus' teachings, when it should be the other way around. If we understand Jesus, we can understand Paul.
Since the Greek way of life and of thinking and of religion , ("Aristotle"?) , was wrong,At least in a way his audience at the time could understand.
I could understand Romans more easily after I'd read Aristotle--and that was simply a matter of better understanding the style of rhetoric.
This seems to confirm the definite, specific possibility at least, that some other way of understanding has wrongly affected understanding Jesus.That's kind of like saying a private soldier can take the Congress' document of declaration of war and then carry out combat all by himself without an intervening authority outlining his particular role in the fight.
In general, Jesus did not give specific instruction on how His Body should operate. He left that to His apostles and to following teachers and elders.
Although Jesus confirmed that His commandments were in accord with the "weightier" matters of scripture, Jesus rarely explained how. Paul did. Jesus certainly said to the sinner, "Your faith has saved you," that left the Jews scratching their heads about how that could be, Paul explained how.
Since the Greek way of life and of thinking and of religion , ("Aristotle"?) , was wrong,
and without any other details from you , it is entirely likely or possible that reading Aristotle , as you said, gave you a wrong understanding, not a good nor a correct understanding. "Selah" (dwell on this prayerfully, seeking Yahweh, over the next few months, as Yahweh permits.)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?