Paul an Apostle?

[R. Hartono]

On 12/28/2020 at 1:52 PM, 1to3 said:

Hi Starise;

I have not yet looked at your link but briefly, my opinion form having read the bible is that Paul is the 12 apostle replacing Judas Iscariot.

Even though after Christ Jesus resurrection the apostles thought to replace Judas by playing a chance divination stick game into choosing the next apostle (which I do not think God would approve of), I believe God chose spiritually Paul by Christ Jesus appearing to him, thus transforming Paul from being a persecutor of Christians to being one of the most faithful believers in Christ Jesus being who He said He was, without having met Christ while He was alive, but having met Him after His resurrection .Paul's conversion to believing Christ Jesus was who He said He was is the biggest testimonial to Jews that Christ Was who He said He was.

I remember years ago speaking with a Jewish woman about being a christian and she said to me: you know who is the most damaging character in your christian belief? it is Paul.

I believe she said this because , Paul was a very learned man and a strong Pharisees Jew before His conversion from persecutor of Christian to defenders of the Christians and Christ Jesus. That to Jew is hard to swallow.But also that can touch the heart of a Jew today into becoming a believer in Christ Jesus the One and only Messiah for both Jew and Gentile.

Best regards

In Christ Jesus Always

;1to3

The real fact behind those churches accusing Paul which i hv found is because Paul did not expect to rcv n use money from congregations as he was still working with Priscilla n Aquila n he even supported other christians from his job as tent maker, while most churches now are abusing the Tithe for their profit. Like the pirates who dig n rob the old grave of Torah (tithe) which God has torn the curtain at the Temple with all of its service.

[R. Hartono]

6 hours ago, JohnD said:

The argument for the difference in Paul and Jesus teachings

is an old one which tries to bring OT legalism into NT grace.

Money is their motive as they dig n rob the old grave of Torah (tithe) which has been buried by Jesus resurrection.

[Dennis1209]

22 hours ago, Sower said:

"I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth"

To be a lukewarm believer is to be as vomit.

I view Paul as on fire, originally just on the wrong road.
God knew a dedicated on fire soldier when He saw one, and set him on the right road.
No one can say he was lukewarm.
With all I/we need to learn to walk in Christ, I wonder the catalyst/origins to the doubts of Paul's credibility
as an inspired writer of the word. 

Luke and Mark were not apostles, yet wrote the gospels.

 

Many believe Mark wrote Peter's words?

[warrior12]

12 hours ago, kingdombrat said:

I believe OSAS, not the general understanding, but where some feel they basically have a {license to sin} is creating a Doctrine from Paul's words and placing those words higher than the Creators/Christ/the Messiah.

Paul' contribution to the bible has nothing to do with [ licence to sin ] as many interpret or misconstrue his teaching and writing.   It is all about context and one has read and understand what the whole bible narrative is .  Does Paul encourage anyone to sin, definitely no.   Those who don't read their bibles, but listen to others who may have degrees or higher education, then seem to lean on their interpretation and spread false narrative of Paul.

[R. Hartono]

43 minutes ago, warrior12 said:

Paul' contribution to the bible has nothing to do with [ licence to sin ] as many interpret or misconstrue his teaching and writing.   It is all about context and one has read and understand what the whole bible narrative is .  Does Paul encourage anyone to sin, definitely no.   Those who don't read their bibles, but listen to others who may have degrees or higher education, then seem to lean on their interpretation and spread false narrative of Paul.

As Paul said there will come fake teachers for itching ears.

[Willa]

On 12/27/2020 at 9:39 PM, Starise said:

I'm going to bring something up that never even entered my grey matter until a close friend I visited last night brought it up.

He has been reading literature online from people who are saying or who have said Paul really isn't a legit Biblical contributor.

He asked me what I thought about it. I simply stated that I would need to study it more to try and see what these teachers are saying and if I can make any sense of it.

A few key points to this view are as follows:

• The words of Jesus and Paul disagree in places
• Paul could have been a wise man but his writings didn't belong in scripture as inspired writings.
• Peter disagreed with Paul and much of what He said as did other theologians who believed the writings of Paul should be excluded from the canon of scripture.

Here's a link to one of the adherents to these ideas-https://jesuswordsonly.com/

Peter considered Paul's letters to be holy Scripture.

2Pe 3:15  And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him,

2Pe 3:16  as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.

 

 1Co 9:1

Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord?

 2Co 12:12

The signs of a true apostle were performed among you with utmost patience, with signs and wonders and mighty w

 Gal 1:1

Paul, an apostle—not from men nor through man, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father, who raised him from the dead—

On 12/28/2020 at 4:56 AM, Starise said:

Many thanks to all for your contributions here. 

I will further check out these references you gave Desopixi Seilynam and others.

I can see some of you have already turned these stones before. This is a relief to me and I'm thankful that Worthy is here with people who know about these things. I have read the Bible most of my life but sometimes one of these things comes out of left field and something just doesn't compute entirely. 

My take on this is Paul was the man God chose to go to the Gentiles or one of the key men in the early church. What I might have questioned the most is whether everything he said should be taken as seriously or is in the canon in the same way as the words of Jesus. Or can we rest assured the words Paul wrote can safely be added to what Jesus said or supersede it? I would say if there is ever any question about it Jesus wins every time. This also brings to bear the idea that some speakers how more weight in the Bible. Obviously what Jesus says had better line up with what anyone else says.

The fact that Paul was breaking down barriers and presenting a much less legalistic gospel would have made him very unpopular with many Jews. Remember though , he WAS one of those Jews.

Some of the accusations are as follows-

• Paul was self promoting and we only have the story of God blinding him as coming from Paul making the story suspect ( for some people).
• Some of what Paul said is different than what Jesus said.  I can't confirm this yet and I don't expect I will. He might have added to what Jesus said which is seen as shaky ground by some if Paul isn't considered to be a writer included in the canon.

My personal opinion on this thus far might not mean much because we want the facts not opinions. Still I find I can't avoid a few compelling things about the man Paul.

• Whatever Paul did, he did it with gusto. When he persecuted and murdered Christians he did it well and he thought he was doing the right thing. When God came to him later on after God changed him, Paul proceeded with the same gusto to promote the very thing he had fought against. This would severely hurt the pride of many men and would not be the sort of thing most people would be prone to do.
• Why would a man who committed himself to the destruction of Christianity make a 180 degree turn and take message that he believed was for his people ( the Jews) add to it the subsequent events of Jesus as gospel and then risk his life to promote it traveling all over the known world of the time as one of the first missionaries? To take such teachings and bend them, in the eyes of the legalistic Jews this amounted to treason. Things such as the eating of certain meats were now ok. To a Jew this might look like taking a major denomination today and chopping it all up. Would not sit well.
• Paul was a learned man. In todays terms he held a PhD when it came to the scriptures. One cannot argue that he was mentally challenged and believed everything that came down the pipes. He was a highly educated intelligent man saying these things.

That Paul might have expressed some of his opinions and they somehow made it into the canon as fact when they were not really laws to live by for all modern men might be up for grabs. Some of his comments concerning women and their place seem a bit archaic when you consider that Jesus had women who he respected and they might have been considered high ranking. I know people who see Paul as anti woman, or at least he thought less of them. This isn't MY opinion thus far. I am just relaying this as one concern my friend has. Should we regard many of the things Paul said as cultural customary saying for only that time?

To discredit Paul from a canon perspective really would change how one views the Bible. I think that's a given.

Further thoughts?

My friend who fell for that stuff is now a total unbeliever.  She says that she likes Peter, but doesn't say she believes him.  In fact, she even denies the portions of the Bible that Jesus spoke.  

Beware of the lies of satan!  The first thing He said in the Garden was "Hath God said?"  The first temptation was to get us to doubt God's word!

All Scripture is God breathed--inspired by the Holy Spirit.  This is even repeated in out Worthy statements of faith.   

Only in one place does Paul state that the words were from him and not from the Lord.

1Co 7:25  Now concerning the betrothed, I have no command from the Lord, but I give my judgment as one who by the Lord's mercy is trustworthy.

 

[Guest kingdombrat]

2 hours ago, warrior12 said:

Paul' contribution to the bible has nothing to do with [ licence to sin ] as many interpret or misconstrue his teaching and writing.   It is all about context and one has read and understand what the whole bible narrative is .  Does Paul encourage anyone to sin, definitely no.   Those who don't read their bibles, but listen to others who may have degrees or higher education, then seem to lean on their interpretation and spread false narrative of Paul.

Thank You!

 

I was not claiming that's the hidden meaning from Paul.

I am claiming someone is stretching the limits to make such a message.

And I absolutely agree with your post.

[Guest kingdombrat]

4 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

Many believe Mark wrote Peter's words?

Mark was considered by some a Disciple of Peter.   

According to some Church Fathers/Historians of that day, while Peter and Paul were creating Churches in Rome, Peter also {Spoke} the words in Hebrew/Aramaic while Mark applied the translation to Peter's words in Greek.

 

Of the 4 Gospels, Mark is direct and short to the point.   Very much how I envision a stubborn fisherman explaining the "Greatest Story Ever" to be. 

[Desopixi Seilynam]

On 12/28/2020 at 6:56 AM, Starise said:

Things such as the eating of certain meats were now ok. To a Jew this might look like taking a major denomination today and chopping it all up. Would not sit well.

Yes exactly, and such is the vein in which Paul is speaking about 'law'.
All the little things he used to have to worry about in regards to the Torah, he was now free from, all the ordinances, all he needed to be concerned with was sincerely loving and caring for his fellow man, which gets easier and easier by the miraculous power of God, for God is love, therefore miracles follow love, the fruit of the Spirit is, love...

In modern times men have twisted Paul's
message about 'law' to mean 'any rules at all'.

'There are no rules to follow' is not what Paul was saying,
Paul was speaking about the Torah and freedom from its vast ordinances and rituals.
 

Paul's therefore to grace is that we are to therefore live a certain way, because we have been saved by grace. We have been bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are Gods. 1 Corinthians 6:20 Those are Paul's therefore's.

But modern men take passages like Ephesians 2:8-9 and put their own 'therefore's onto it, such as therefore don't think you can try, or therefore sin does not matter.

But one willing to simply read on to Ephesians 2:10 through 4:1 and on will see that Paul's vein is that because God freely granted us the ability to do right, we are to sincerely do right.

"I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that you walk worthy of the vocation wherewith you are called, with all lowliness and meekness, with patience, forbearing one another in love" Ephesians 4:1

"This I say, therefore, and testify in the Lord,
that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk,
in the vanity of their mind...
That ye put off concerning the former conduct
the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts;
and be renewed in the spirit of your mind...
put away lying... let him that stole steal no more..." Ephesians 4:17-28
And the rest of Ephesians is ?! A list of rules to follow!

 

"The grace of God that brings salvation has appeared unto all mankind,
teaching us that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts,
we should live soberly righteously and godly in this present age." Titus 2:11-12

 

[Marilyn C]

On 12/28/2020 at 4:39 PM, Starise said:

I'm going to bring something up that never even entered my grey matter until a close friend I visited last night brought it up.

He has been reading literature online from people who are saying or who have said Paul really isn't a legit Biblical contributor.

He asked me what I thought about it. I simply stated that I would need to study it more to try and see what these teachers are saying and if I can make any sense of it.

A few key points to this view are as follows:

• The words of Jesus and Paul disagree in places
• Paul could have been a wise man but his writings didn't belong in scripture as inspired writings.
• Peter disagreed with Paul and much of what He said as did other theologians who believed the writings of Paul should be excluded from the canon of scripture.

Here's a link to one of the adherents to these ideas-https://jesuswordsonly.com/

Hi Starise,

Just some thoughts we might consider.

1. Did not Jesus as part of the Godhead `write`the Old Testament, and also the other scriptures, through those who walked with Him, & also through Paul by the Holy Spirit, as in all those cases.

2. The 12 disciples/Apostles were to teach what the Lord told them that He was Lord and Christ. (Acts 2: 36) They were those who walked with the Lord and thus were witnesses of Him. (Acts 1: 21 & 22)

Now the Lord anointed other Apostles when He ascended. (Eph. 4: 12 & 13) And these are to build up the Body of Christ. (Eph. 4: 13)

(1 Thess. 1: 1, 2: 6). tell us that `Paul, Silvanus and Timothy`are apostles, (to the Body of Christ.)

3. If Satan knew Of the Lord`s plans to form His Body of believers like Himself who would actually rule where he once did, then Satan would have never killed the Lord. (1 Cor. 2: 7 & 8) 

As the Lord tells us by His Holy Spirit through the Apostle Paul, that this revelation was not known in past age but was revealed to Paul & other Apostles & prophets, (after the Lord ascended). (Eph. 3: 1 - 7)

Much more but that is enough for now. Marilyn.