Who Anointed Paul???

Much of what we discuss on SI has to do with Grace and Works...How much grace, how much works, and what are they to flow from.

Jesus anointed the 11 Apostles by breathing on them.

Saul claimed to be anointed by Jesus, on the Damascus Road, or in his healing from the blindness that appearance caused.

Was that Paul's anointing?

Paul preached a message that not even the 11 Apostles truly understood. Grace through Faith in Jesus Christ. It is the heart of Christianity.

Yet Paul made a lot of rules for Gentiles to live by. Was that his job? In converting the Gentiles, was he to also tell them how to live?

Or merely to give them Jesus' message on grace?

Did Paul overstep his bounds? For there are conflicts in what Paul said that conflict with what the other Apostles said, and even what Jesus said.

[color=0000FF]2 Peter 3: 11. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
12. Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
13. Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
14. Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; [b]even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16. As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; [u]in which are some things hard to be understood,[/u] which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.[/b]
17. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.[/color]

And can an Apostle be humanly wrong, and still have a true message?

For those that love Paul and his message, please note that this is a question on doctrine, not an attack on Paul's message of Grace through Faith.

Blessings,

Forrest

Did Paul overstep his bounds? For there are conflicts in what Paul said that conflict with what the other Apostles said, and even what Jesus said.

I believe that Paul's doctrine and teaching in every single epistle he wrote was 100% inspired by the Holy Ghost. Every word is perfect, purified 7 times by the Holy Spirit, every thought true - the true and perfect and sovereign will of God for our instruction in 2008, and I give the exact same non-negotiable credence to all of Paul's words as I do the recorded words of Christ in Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Of course, I don't worship Paul...but I do consider his words, doctrine, theology, moral standards and judgments all to be perfect, and I read them as though it were God Himself personally speaking them to my spirit.

I dare ask...don't you? :-o

PaulWest wrote:

I believe that Paul's doctrine and teaching in every single epistle he wrote was 100% inspired by the Holy Ghost...Of course, I don't worship Paul...but I do consider his words, doctrine, theology, moral standards and judgments all to be perfect, and I read them as though it were God Himself personally speaking them to my spirit.

I dare ask...don't you? :-o

Brother,

You've obviously never been to my website, or you would know straight off that I believe the Bible is [b]inherently[/b] true...not [b]inerrently[/b] true.

Being inspired by God is much different than being the literal WORD of GOD, and hence, worthy of Worship. The Bible is not the WORD...it is not Jesus, who is the WORD.

I worship Jesus, not the Bible, BUT I do believe that God wanted what's in our Bible to be there, because I believe that God is in control of everything.

I simply want to discuss why God would have Paul contradict some things that Jesus said...is it merely contextual?

Is it appropriate for a man of God to 'be all things to all people'? That sounds like manpleasing, but it could be read differently.

Many things that the Catholic Church latched on to have to do with Paul.

His Hierarchy of Bishops and Elders; His unfortunate words against a women speaking in Church, when it was actually a Synagogue,(and Synagogues are very noisy places.)even though many women have spoken for God in the past. Still, Paul's words have been used against women for centuries...heavens, how many women have been killed for disagreeing with a man, much less a priest?

I obey all these rules...by staying out of any churches.

I probably would not stay away from Churches if I were not disabled, but I would be hard put to find a church that is not already contaminated by the false doctrines out there, and there are many of those.

I do not even in my website teach with authority...nor do I know who visits it, or whether they are male or female, since I don't ask for money, and hence can't know who comes there.

If I went to a church, and wanted to speak against some of the lamentable preaching out there, I would wear a head covering, because it would show that I meant business, and was taking the Lord for my covering, as I do in the rest of my life. And I would probably be evicted, or even arrested, for simply interrupting the service, and not just because I am a woman, but because our churches do not allow discussion, as synagogues, and the Temple did, and house churches now do.

But many people question not the message of Paul, but his frequently odd behavior.

WE are told to say yes or no, and let our word be yes for yes, and no for no, but Paul teaches men to lie if it is expedient 'for the faith', and the Catholic Church has been riding on that one a long time. They lie a lot. I believe it was Augustin who taught them to, but it could have come straight from Paul.

But if Paul lied about anything, then is his message suspect...or is Paul merely a man, being honest about how he works? And since he admits he lies, it is a problem.

[color=993300]"For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?" (ROM 3:7)[/color]

And please be aware that I am a Grace through Faith person, and read Paul frequently.

Let this not be personal, but a true discussion of points that bother many people about Paul. And they do bother people...enough to lead them away from Christianity, or to doubt God's message.

And I am asking because I am asked these questions, and I'd like to have some really good answers...if there are any!

Blessings,

Forrest

Did Paul overstep his bounds? For there are conflicts in what Paul said that conflict with what the other Apostles said, and even what Jesus said.

For those that love Paul and his message, please note that this is a question on doctrine, not an attack on Paul's message of Grace through Faith.

HI Rev,

Before we respond to the questions as you have framed them, I'm wondering if we shouldn't first address the the frame you are using. You have presented us with a perplexity. You say you are not disputing Paul's message of grace through faith, but yet you accept there is contrariety in his message as an apostle, even saying he has contradicted Jesus' teachings occasionally, (if only for sake of context.) You also feel that the message of grace though faith seems to be unique to Paul and not even understood by the other apostles. If his testimony seems contrary on even the smallest points, as well as unique and without collaboration, then it follows that this Gospel of grace could very well be a proprietary invention.

How do you get pass this?

MC

Quote:

"""But if Paul lied about anything, then is his message suspect...or is Paul merely a man, being honest about how he works? And since he admits he lies, it is a problem"""

Are you saying that this is an admission of lying?

"""For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?" (ROM 3:7)""

We must by no means understand these words as spoken by the apostle himself in his own name, as if he had told lies for the upholding of the truth; and that the truth of God had abounded even more to the glory of God through his lies; but he speaks in the person of a profane objector. Not in that he Paul is that objector, by he Paul being a liar about the truth of God. This truth given Him directly by the Son of God, Jesus Himself. Thus some man (as if the aposthe Paul had said) may possibly plead for his sin: "The truth of God hath gained by my lie, the faithfulness of God is made more manifest by the unfaithfulness of men; therefore, why should I be judged and condemned as a sinner, when the glory of God will shine more bright upon the occasion of my sin? Answer; Paul is not a liar, but God will judge the sin of lying, if a man lie then he becomes the judged, because of the sin of lying, not more to the glory of God.

Paul is not admitting to any lie.

If Paul contradicted Jesus, show me. Jesus was preaching the Law to the Jew and the kingdom to Israel. Paul is preaching Grace by Faith of Jesus Christ because the Cross destroys the Law of death and sin, and gives life to Grace and truth.

Where did Paul lie? Where did Paul contradict Jesus?

We should no less thank God for Paul than we would thank God for Mary. They both brought Christ to the World and the Believer. All the Glory is to God for both.

In Christ: Phillip

Hi everyone,

The Apostle Paul was sent by the Lord Jesus in Acts chapter 9. His testimony was not only his own, but he was also [b]sent to[/b] from the Lord Jesus by a disciple named Ananias, whom the Lord spoke to in a vision. See Acts chapter 9 verse 1-16.

"But the Lord said unto him,

[b][color=660000]Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will show him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake. [/color][/b]"

- Acts chapter 9 verses 15-16(KJV)

Chris

Brothers,

Thank you for your answers.

I'll look up my referants, and get back to you.

Thank you for your patience. I'll need a day or so to reply.

Blessings,

Forrest

You've obviously never been to my website, or you would know straight off that I believe the Bible in inherently true...not inerrently true.

Hi, Forrest. I didn't know this was your standpoint on the Word of God. I guess I should have asked.

Paul

(edit) I edited some content that was not beneficial to you or others. I think most here understand the real danger in rejecting scripture inerrancy.

Rev,

I think you might have caused people to misunderstand what you are trying to say.

In your second post on this subject you said
'And I am asking because I am asked these questions...'

Had you said that in the beginning, then maybe it would not sound like you are attacking the Bible, which is what it does sound like.

Never forget that the fall of man was promted by a question, 'Has God said?', it was downhill all the way after that.

If peoples questions cause us to question God and doubt His word, our faith might get a blow it probably will never recover from.

That's it.

God bless.

Not long after I gave my life to Jesus Christ, I began to get Pearl-Harboured by questions, doubts, philosophies, conjecturings all pertaining to Holy Scripture. The ancient "question of death" began to creep insidiously into my mind and heart: "Hath God said?"

This dark, creeping spider would torment me. It would confuse me, weaken me, cast me into a kind of mental havoc where all things were game and worthy of consideration. Most lethal of all, however, was that it opened the door of "self" to analyze, speculate, deliberate and disect God's Word. If there was a doubtful or spurious link anywhere in God's golden chain, I feared it would snap when pulled taunt, and I found I couldn't go on serving Him knowing there was a weak link somewhere in His Word. It frightened me to think for myself and dig deep and explore - afraid I just might discover where that weak link was and snap it. How then could I preach from a broken chain with a clear conscience?

Finally, I threw in the towel and humbled myself; I layed my biases, my intellect, my issues and baggage at the cross and bowed the knee to the inerrant Word of God by faith. I became a fool and committed suicide intellectually so that I might have peace spiritually. And the truth is when you die to your human cleverness and critical convictions and just surrender all to the inerrancy of the Holy Bible to accept and obey without question or complaint, God rewards your soul with peace, wisdom and confidence. Never again will the fatal question, the creeping, loathsome spider of "Hath God said?" spin a web in your mind and devour your peace and joy in Christ.

Brethren, this is something I have learnt. Surrender all; believe, trust and obey the whole Word and you will live life to its fullest.

Brother Paul

Billy Graham came to a turning point in his
ministry when he realized that while he may
not understand some of the difficult truths
and wisdom of God's word; he agreed it was
still God's Word and God's truth and so he
decided not to question it any more!!

Hi Paul,

I became a fool and committed suicide intellectually so that I might have peace spiritually.

I would like to look at your testimony a little closer here.

I am reminded of Francis Shaeffer's advice to the new believer that modern man must bow in three ways to the Lord.

First he must bow morally.

Second he must bow intellectually.

Third he must bow metaphysically.

I feel the reason he phrased it this way is to help a man admit the futility of depending on his own perceptions to know God. Man the viewer is fallen, and the world he views is fallen...thus while man is still made in the image of God, the fall has corrupted his will and impaired the intellect. So when man can't find truth it is not because it is missing, but because he can't recognize it in his unrighteousness heart.

We know this from For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

So we cannot trust our intellects, even if our minds are curious, energetic, and strong...because the heart has sway over our thoughts . Our experiences even with spiritual reality, even with the holy Spirit, are equally tainted, in that instead of being illumined by our contact with spiritual things, we pervert our contact with spiritual things, adulterating them into natural and ignorant things. This is our tendency, even if we loathe ourselves for it.

And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

Finally Christians should not assume that becoming born agaiin instantly glorifies the flesh and renews the mind to such a state where we see and know perfectly. For the purpose of knowing God, even Christians must concede that their perceptions remain tainted by their past experiences, and remain affected by the fall. For this purpose we are given the scriptures to provide a source of understandable truth outside of the flaws of our own morals, intellects, and spiritual experiences. For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. This scripture implies that man is ever susceptible to moral, intellectual, and metaphysical corruption, but that it is the word of God assumes ruler-ship over these inner parts...and not only shows us our real selves, but also corrects and helps us.

So my long winded point is this brother Paul. You did not really commit intellectual suicide when you traded your thoughts for God's word. On the contrary, you moved from the unsustainable fallacy of authenticating truth through your own rational philosophy. (Objecting philosophers and scientists among us may recall the conclusion of David Hume: "Reason is, and ought only to be, the slave of the passions, and can never pretend to any other office than to serve and obey them." )

So Paul, once we admit the corruptibility of homo perceptus we realize that intellectual suicide is not committed when we agree with God's Word, but when we ignore or argue with it.

As a footnote, there are some who should be careful how much distance they insist exists between the word and the Word. If we say we prefer a metaphysical experience with Christ over his written word, we might be closing the very spiritual doors that the bible was meant to open. We know that reading the scriptures is unlike reading any other book ever written. The Spirit of God is there with us, and if we close our bibles in hopes of receiving something more mystically or emotionally, we are in fact closing ourselves off to the Spirit, rather then opening ourselves up to him.

Blessings,

MC

So Paul, once we admit the corruptibility of homo perceptus we realize that intellectual suicide is not committed when we agree with God's Word, but when we ignore or argue with it.

Succinctly put. Yes, I could have expressed it differently. The suicide that occured was more of a willful subdual of homo perceptus to the Lordship of Christ. This may go off on a slight tanget here, but I also believe that the subduing of the intellect to Christ's Lordship always leads to the all-encompassing revelation of Scripture inerrancy and absolutism.

Brother Paul

Paul,

My semantical concern was not for your sake, but for 'the record.'
Actually the 'violence' of your determination to submit your inner man to the Lord was convicting and challenging to me. These discussions have been showing me how lax I've become. May your tribe increase!

MC

Hey, brother, Lord willing my wife will allow me to go to the yet-in-the-womb Revival Conference 2008. I'm not too particular about where it will be - just as long as there's a good coffee shop nearby.

Would love to sit and drink a few cups with you. And talk.

God bless you,

Brother Paul

I became a fool and committed suicide intellectually so that I might have peace spiritually.

Loved this line and the reading between of it ...

"Lean not to your own understanding"

This seems to be a continuance of an older argument that comes down to authority and a certain dislike of it than one of supposed contradiction. I definitely feel the indignation start to rise up when the idea that Paul is somehow ... "[i]other than[/i]" the rest of the apostles or is in contradistinction or that he presents a 'take or leave or it' mentality that allows him to be challenged and by that I mean into disregard, as that often seems to be the idea of some. Take what I like, disregard the rest.

His unfortunate words against a women speaking in Church, when it was actually a Synagogue,(and Synagogues are very noisy places.)even though many women have spoken for God in the past. Still, Paul's words have been used against women for centuries...heavens, how many women have been killed for disagreeing with a man, much less a priest?

I obey all these rules...by staying out of any churches.

I probably would not stay away from Churches if I were not disabled, but I would be hard put to find a church that is not already contaminated by the false doctrines out there, and there are many of those.

Is this like the defiant child after being told to sit down utters to himself "[i]But I'm standing up on the inside![/i]" ?

If I went to a church, and wanted to speak against some of the lamentable preaching out there, I would wear a head covering, because it would show that I meant business, and was taking the Lord for my covering, as I do in the rest of my life. And I would probably be evicted, or even arrested, for simply interrupting the service, and not just because I am a woman, but because our churches do not allow discussion, as synagogues, and the Temple did, and house churches now do.

Or might you do none of the above and recognize something back of and underneath it all.

But many people question not the message of Paul, but his frequently odd behavior.

It is only odd if you deem it so and because it seems to disagree with the way you think things ought to be done. In essence you are setting up Paul as a straw man to try and knock him back down again, this is fallacious reasoning and suspect.

""For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?" (ROM 3:7)"

Come now, surely you do not supposed to extract this from the intention do you? How much of doing just this fit's your own accusations here, snatch a scripture and make an argument, rather an accusation;

And since he admits he lies, it is a problem.

[b]through my lie to his glory:[/b] nothing is more opposite to truth than a lie; a lie of itself can never be of any advantage to truth, or to the God of truth; nothing is more contrary to the nature of God, and more abominable to him; a lie is of the devil, and punishable with eternal death; wherefore it may seem strange, that the truth of God should abound through it to his glory: now let it be observed, that the apostle is not speaking of himself, nor of his lie of unbelief, in his state of unregeneracy; but in the person of a sinful man, "for every man is a liar", Rom_3:4, as he says, "I speak as a man", Rom_3:5; representing a wicked man, who from what was before said, might collect this as the sense of it, that the truth of God is illustrated by the lies of men: and so much may be owned as the apostle's sense, that the truth of God is commended, illustrated, and made to abound, when it is asserted, that he is true and faithful, and every man is a liar, fallacious, and deceitful; "let God be true, and every man a liar", Rom_3:4, moreover, the truth of God may be allowed to abound through the lies of men, in a comparative sense, the one being set against the other; and so as contraries do, illustrate each other: this may be assented to, as that sometimes a lie has been overruled by God, for the accomplishing of his purposes and promises, in which his truth and faithfulness have been displayed, as in the cases of Jacob and the Egyptian midwives; but then this does not arise from its nature and tendency, but from the overruling wisdom and providence of God, and therefore not to be excused hereby from sin; and consequently the inference from it is not just, that therefore "no man can, or ought to be, judged as a sinner"; since his sin turns to such account, as to make for the glory of God, which is intimated in the question:

John Gill

Read, [i]colloquialism[/i] ...

Let this not be personal, but a true discussion of points that bother many people about Paul. And they do bother people...enough to lead them away from Christianity, or to doubt God's message.

And I am asking because I am asked these questions, and I'd like to have some really good answers...if there are any!

Glad that it is not personal and neither is mine. But is it not also true that you yourself are very bothered by these things, more so than the charge you are leveling that Paul would actually ... "[i]enough to lead them away from Christianity, or to doubt God's message.[/i]" That is patently absurd! Are we not again in the business of 'fixing the message' to assuage the hearers? Even the scripture you quoted and underlined;

15. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; [b]even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16. As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; [u]in which are some things hard to be understood[/u], which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.[/b]

How remarkable that this proves the very point against your reasoning here.

For those that love Paul and his message, please note that this is a question on doctrine, not an attack on Paul's message of Grace through Faith.

And by that you are making a distinction that Paul has a [i]different[/i] message than the rest. It's a straw man and doesn't exist except in wresting the scriptures.

Quote:

"""--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

For those that love Paul and his message, please note that this is a question on doctrine, not an attack on Paul's message of Grace through Faith.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------"""

"And by that you are making a distinction that Paul has a different message than the rest. It's a straw man and doesn't exist except in wresting the scriptures."

The ironic thing here is that Paul's gospel is completely different than anything ever revealed before to man.

This is just the beginning of what Paul wants to convey of what Jesus Christ revealed to Him and only him Personally.

Colossians 1:12-15 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of every creature:

For it is Christ in Paul, the reason for his very existence, and Paul always in all his epistles preaches this In Christ position of the believer and even much more "hard to understand", "Christ in you the hope of Glory".

Colossians 1:16-24 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things he might have the preeminence. For it pleased the Father that in him should all fulness dwell; And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight: If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister; Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:

To finish the revealing of this mystery to Paul which is to fulfill the the Word and will of God in Christ Jesus, Paul states it plainly and securely, without variation or changing of mind or spirit. "To know Him", above all that Paul is or ever was, this is Pauls overwhelming and never changing want for himself and all the saints that are in Christ Jesus, which is His Body the Church, Christ living in each one and the Holy Spirit by the Prayer of Jesus Christ now in the believer also from the Father, to reveal this mystery, again, "Christ in you the hope of glory".

Colossians 1:25-29 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus: Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily.

"Things hard to understand", absolutely, and only can be revealed by the Holy Spirit as Christ gives Him utterance.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

Teaching in the spirit:

John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:

Not of the Holy Spirit Himself, but of Christ, taught by the Parakleet.

John 16:13-15 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you. All things that the Father hath are mine: therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

No wonder so many don't have ears to hear and eyes to see. This is a mind blowing concept, another person being born in the believer, that is Christ in you the hope of glory, "things hard to understand", how can this be? But without this Spirit of Christ and the water of life being in the believer, "we are none of His".
Ask and you will receive. When you ask for the bread of life, He won't give you a stone.

Rom 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

In Christ, Christ in us, a newly born creature of God: Phillip

Colossians 1:25-29 Whereof I (Paul) am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me (Paul) for you, to fulfil the Word of God; Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints: To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory: Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus: Whereunto I also labour, striving according to his working, which worketh in me mightily. "by My Gospel"

Rom 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to ((my gospel.))

Rom 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to (((my gospel,))) and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

2Ti 2:8 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to ((((my gospel:))))

((if this offends, better speak to God.))

IN CHRIST: I wish and pray these two words would explode of the page in into our hearts with all the power of God that created all that there is or ever will be. Resurrection Power.

Phillip

I hope no one takes the words of Paul and treats them like the Ten Commandments that we wake each morning and "try" to live the words of Paul. God Forbid.

Well, I for one, take the words of Paul very seriously, and treat them as though it were God speaking directly to my Spirit, because I believe such is the intent of the Holy Ghost. I think we ought to live the words of Paul indeed - because Paul exhorts us to imitate him as he, in turn, imitates Christ.

I think his writings are meant to be a [i]help[/i] for the Christian as they journey on life's way. There are many examples given on how to deal with certain situations. Some things are spoken in mysteries and some are spiritual.

I think Paul is giving us more than mere helpful suggestions in his inspired epistles - I believe he gives us the standard as he received directly from God. The danger we get into now is when we begin to rationalize, and hypothesize that this was all good for Paul - for Paul's day and culture - but today we see things a little differently. This is how we get into the dilemma the author of this thread is in.

The Christian doesn't awaken each morning to "try" (as you wrote) to live the words of Paul, but we should certainly aspire to imitate him, as we are provoked and empowered by God. Paul inspires me on so many different fronts. He is truly my greatest hero and object of emultation in the Bible after Jesus Christ.

Awake each morning and go forth with the Christ that is now your life and walking on this earth in you as Him. It is me in Christ awaking each morning and going forth as "The hope of Glory", that is "Christ in you".

Without Paul's epistles which God gave Him through Jesus Christ for us, to fulfill His Word, we would still be hidden from the mystery now revealed to Paul, that mystery now in us; Jesus Christ

A son of God: Phillip

Dr. Wiersbe said that the Holy Ghost doesn't work in a vacuum. He needs substance, information, a seed from which He can work and effectuate. The writings of Paul inspired by the Holy Spirit are some of the approved material used to fill this vacuum. We ingest what Paul wrote, the Word of God, and what began with Spirit builds up our spirits and fruit comes forth. All of the words Paul wrote by God are profitable meat, food for the spirit, living and true and double-edged. The pen was Paul's but the Words are Gods, and Paul himself is God's pen, and Paul is in God.

Paul is indispensible, true from God, and because his doctrine came by revelation from God and God used it to fill two-thirds of the NT, I deem his doctine infallible, non-negotiable, and the utmost and exclusive standard for all Christians.

Any takers? :-)

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"""I hope no one takes the words of Paul and treats them like the Ten Commandments that we wake each morning and "try" to live the words of Paul. God Forbid."""

Pauls word are much more than the ten commandments. They are eternal life and even more than that, we have become son's of God by the Christ that is in us.

I don't worship Paul, I worship God and Christ Jesus by the Holy Spirit resurrection power given us by the Father, for giving these words to Paul for us to fulfill His Word.

What a Glory!!! Oh that we could see all that God has given us in Christ Jesus.

Eph 3:20 Now unto Him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us,

"above all that we ask or think", WOW!!!!

Ephesians 3:17-19 That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love, May be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height; And to know the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge, that ye might be filled with all the fulness of God.

Do we really hear with the ears and see with the eyes that the Christ in us has brought to us by Birth from the Father, "Fulness of God".

1 Peter 1:21-23 Who by Him do believe in God, that raised Him up from the dead, and gave Him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God. Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. Who's faith and hope are we in? Who is the Word?

"Word of God"

John 1:1-4 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men.

In Christ: Phillip

Paul is indispensible, true from God, and because his doctrine came by revelation from God and God used it to fill two-thirds of the NT, I deem his doctine infallible, non-negotiable, and the utmost and exclusive standard for all Christians.

Indeed!

I didn't intend to be too disparaging earlier but there is some past precedence in this regard. We have also seen in the past here a few that would pit Paul ... alone ... against everyone else or at least attempt to oddly discredit that which doesn't fit whatever fancy ... Redundant.

It seems just as odd to isolate Paul by making mention of him in this way, even if it is too seemingly be coming to his defense, he needs no defending! This is a seamless garment no matter if it be John, Peter, Paul, Matthew ...

he needs no defending! This is a seamless garment no matter if it be John, Peter, Paul, Matthew ...

Amen! The reason I am lavishing on the praise here for Paul, is not so much to isolate but to [i]validate.[/i] Paul, I realise, needs no more defense than the Bible itself. Though I would relish to validate also in my own feeble words Peter and James, Luke and John - had they been under similiar attack and speculation too. Not long ago my wife and I watched a religious documentary hosted by Dateline NBC or ABC or whatever (they're all the same!) concerning the Apostle Paul. Basically, all the show intended to do was show Paul as a bigot, a sexist, someone who completely butchered the teachings of Jesus Christ and tainted them by injecting his own personal convictions on homosexuality, women's rights, drinking, fornication - in short, all the stuff Jesus apparently had no qualms with. It is because of Paul - the documentary concluded - that fundamental Christianity is the self-righteous beast that it is today.

To verify this, they interveiwed several prominent men and women of the cloth who were all too quick to confirm this liberal concept. Note, these same clergymen and clergywomen also denied scripture inerrancy in the course of their interviews, showing these two trains of thought - i.e. Paul's corruption and the possible errancy of scripture - are intrinsically linked.

Brother Paul

"Who anointed Paul???"

Acts 9:15-16 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he (Paul) is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.

Paul is called chosen because Christ had selected him, as he did his other apostles, for their service.

Acts 13:2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.

Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,

1 Corinthians 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

Galatians 1:15-16 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

Ephesians 3:7-8 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

crsschk, are you saying that Pauls Gospel is the same as the old testament gospel? If so, why was it necessary for Jesus Christ to set him apart and teach Paul this particular Gospel of Grace through Faith being born again of Incorruptable Seed of God of the Father? If Paul had this Gospel from the old testament why did Jesus Christ have to reveal it to Paul?

Paul's gospel is completely different from the Gospel of Moses and even The Gospel of Jesus Christ offered to the House of Israel, who were His own and they received Him not. Paul went to them first and they would not hear or see, then he was sent to the Gentile who would hear.

Acts 28:23-29 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening. And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not. And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers, Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive: For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it. And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.

That is why God gave Paul permission to call the revelation given to him as "My Gospel".

Rom 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

Rom 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

2Ti 2:8 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:

Jesus was the seed of David by Mary, but He was raised according to Paul's Gospel, Not anyone else until it was given to Paul and he revealed it to the world.

That we might separate the old from the new, praise God.

Old things have passed away and behold all things have become new.

Separating the Soul from the spirit of Satan, and given a new Spirit of Christ in you. The Holy Spirit now in us not just with us. This is completely different from the old testament.

This will probably cause a great gulf and explosion in the body, but I don't see anyone born again in the old testament. I don't see Christ in anyone "the hope of Glory". I see Paul fighting his whole ministry given him by Jesus Christ to present this Gospel and reveal The new way of salvation. Christ in you the Hope of Glory.

Hbr 4:12 For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Hebrews 4:5-13 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his. Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief. For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.

Did they have His rest? Do we have His rest?

2 Timothy 2:8-26 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel: Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, even unto bonds; but the word of God is not bound. Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him: If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us: If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself. Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work. Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

Sorry but I had to ask.

In Christ: Phillip

Compton wrote:

Did Paul overstep his bounds? For there are conflicts in what Paul said that conflict with what the other Apostles said, and even what Jesus said.

For those that love Paul and his message, please note that this is a question on doctrine, not an attack on Paul's message of Grace through Faith.

HI Rev,

Before we respond to the questions as you have framed them, I'm wondering if we shouldn't first address the the frame you are using. You have presented us with a perplexity. You say you are not disputing Paul's message of grace through faith, but yet you accept there is contrariety in his message as an apostle, even saying he has contradicted Jesus' teachings occasionally, (if only for sake of context.) You also feel that the message of grace though faith seems to be unique to Paul and not even understood by the other apostles. If his testimony seems contrary on even the smallest points, as well as unique and without collaboration, then it follows that this Gospel of grace could very well be a proprietary invention.

How do you get past this?

MC

MC,

Some people have suggested to me that, to the extent that Paul takes it in parts of his dissertations, that Grace and only Grace, is sufficient to please Jesus.

But Paul himself was perfectly aware that we must willingly bend ourselves to submit to Jesus, in Love, and obey in Love.

The Grace is sufficient to save us, else Christ is vain, and Calvary is a mockery.

But I do know that the Holy Spirit is continuously teaching us to obey as well, not to get saved, but to grow, and become like Jesus.

Standing still in Jesus is impossible, but too many take Grace to an extreme that I am sure Paul neither meant, nor encouraged, from my readings of his epistles.

And Paul is quite open about being a very faulty man, with a major pride problem. Having the same pride problem, and a huge thorn in my side to go with it, and understanding the very cosmopolitan Paul a little too well for my comfort, compared to the more earthy, and simplistic Apostles, like Peter and John, James and Matthew, who knew the Law of their fathers, and what Jesus taught them from an experiential point of view more than from an theoretical point of view, I can see how the Grace message resonates in our culture.

But let us not forget that Jesus is a Jew, and so were all the Apostles, and I for one do not want to dispense with what God gave to Moses, for Jesus fulfilled it.

And in our love for Jesus, we must look past the doctrinal dissertations back to what Jesus taught. And as our Paschal Lamb, He most certainly knew what Grace He was buying for us with His love. He asks us to love Him, and show it by obedience.

And as your question shows, for many, could they set the books of Paul aside for a time, and read only Jesus's first followers? Does every doctrinal question have to be asked and answered in Paul? Or will you not seek Grace elsewhere in the Old and New Testaments...and dispel the impression there is that without Paul, there is no Grace.

Blessings,

Forrest

crsschk wrote:
"Lean not to your own understanding"

This seems to be a continuance of an older argument that comes down to authority and a certain dislike of it than one of supposed contradiction. I definitely feel the indignation start to rise up when the idea that Paul is somehow ... "[i]other than[/i]" the rest of the apostles or is in contradistinction or that he presents a 'take or leave or it' mentality that allows him to be challenged and by that I mean into disregard, as that often seems to be the idea of some. Take what I like, disregard the rest.

[color=993300]No. The contradictions between Paul's message to a gentile church, and the other Apostles is always answered by quotes from Paul or Luke.

These are real questions that are being asked me, and yes, perhaps it is an issue to them, of authority...I haven't asked.[/color]

His unfortunate words against a women speaking in Church, when it was actually a Synagogue,(and Synagogues are very noisy places.)even though many women have spoken for God in the past. Still, Paul's words have been used against women for centuries...heavens, how many women have been killed for disagreeing with a man, much less a priest?

I obey all these rules...by staying out of any churches.

I probably would not stay away from Churches if I were not disabled, but I would be hard put to find a church that is not already contaminated by the false doctrines out there, and there are many of those.

Is this like the defiant child after being told to sit down utters to himself "[i]But I'm standing up on the inside![/i]" ?

[color=993300]Good question.

Since they are not my questions, but questions put to me, and to this august body, through me, because I would love to have the quotes to come back at these answers that are not from Paul, or Luke, Luke being suspect to some by virtue of his long friendship with Paul.

But oddly, everyone seeks to avoid the essential question in their outrage over 'an attack on Paul', when Paul is open to attack through what he said, as are the other Apostles, as well as you, me, and everyone who presumes to put Jesus' thoughts into descriptive passages.[/color]

If I went to a church, and wanted to speak against some of the lamentable preaching out there, I would wear a head covering, because it would show that I meant business, and was taking the Lord for my covering, as I do in the rest of my life. And I would probably be evicted, or even arrested, for simply interrupting the service, and not just because I am a woman, but because our churches do not allow discussion, as synagogues, and the Temple did, and house churches now do.

Or might you do none of the above and recognize something back of and underneath it all.

[color=993300]If God is in back of our lamentable churches, I am not going to say so. I rather think the enemy is, and most certainly underneath them!

But because of the conventions demanded by men, and not by God, I would comply, in order to get a hearing.[/color]

But many people question not the message of Paul, but his frequently odd behavior.

It is only odd if you deem it so and because it seems to disagree with the way you think things ought to be done. In essence you are setting up Paul as a straw man to try and knock him back down again, this is fallacious reasoning and suspect.

[color=993300]Since these are real questions from real people, and I am not able to answer them to my hearts content, this is not in any way a straw man.

I rarely put up a thread, much less ask what I know will be seen as offensive questions as 'straw men', merely to be knocked down by those more knowlegable than I, if that is what a 'straw man' means.

I am asking these questions not to be shouted down for asking them, nor to prove my scholarship, but to get the questions an acceptable answer.

And since Paul is being questioned, inerrancy, or even the real belief in Paul's teachings won't do. So Gill's answer to my question won't do either.

If I cannot answer these questions, except with a quote from Paul, I deem it a reasonable question, and so should all of us.[/color]

""For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?" (ROM 3:7)"

Come now, surely you do not supposed to extract this from the intention do you? How much of doing just this fit's your own accusations here, snatch a scripture and make an argument, rather an accusation;

And since he admits he lies, it is a problem.

Let this not be personal, but a true discussion of points that bother many people about Paul. And they do bother people...enough to lead them away from Christianity, or to doubt God's message.

And I am asking because I am asked these questions, and I'd like to have some really good answers...if there are any!

Glad that it is not personal and neither is mine. But is it not also true that you yourself are very bothered by these things, more so than the charge you are leveling that Paul would actually ... "[i]enough to lead them away from Christianity, or to doubt God's message.[/i]" That is patently absurd! Are we not again in the business of 'fixing the message' to assuage the hearers? Even the scripture you quoted and underlined;

15. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; [b]even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16. As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; [u]in which are some things hard to be understood[/u], which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.[/b]

How remarkable that this proves the very point against your reasoning here.

For those that love Paul and his message, please note that this is a question on doctrine, not an attack on Paul's message of Grace through Faith.

And by that you are making a distinction that Paul has a [i]different[/i] message than the rest. It's a straw man and doesn't exist except in wresting the scriptures.

[color=993300]The questions have been put forth to me, and I must answer them.

If I cannot get help from my brethern and sistern because they are too offended in me, then where am I to go?

These remarks to me or my attitude or behavior are illustrative of my very real life, and reactions, and are not recomendations or permissions given. It is how I live, in the way I must live.

But I would rather be answered, as I asked these questions, in all seriousness, and not from Paul.

Every answer I have is from Paul. If I get no others, I will have to toss Paul out, and I love the man and his works too much to want to do that.

But I do not have to agree with the societal constraints placed on the pagan society of the 1st Century by Paul. My altars are not set up to worship my god or goddess with sex, and I am too well broken, by Jesus, to worship money or power.

I need to agree with what Jesus taught, in Paul, and elsewhere. I don't mind in the least going by the Noahide Laws, plus modern convention for women old enough to be your mother or grandmother, and Jesus' love and mercy. Oddly, He does not demand near as much of me as you might do, being God, and knowing my heart.

Like all of the Christians out there that truly love Him, I am trying to learn to submit to Him, but I won't take your word for what I am to do if you cannot answer me outside of Paul. Because if Jesus and the other apostles didn't cover it, I am going to have to admit that Paul was in error.

And I have a lot more questions when the ones I first posed are answered, if anyone is willing to seriously answer them, and not make this a personal discussion.

The questions are seriously put forward.

Blessings,

Forrest[/color]

Hi Rev,

Or will you not seek Grace elsewhere in the Old and New Testaments...and dispel the impression there is that without Paul, there is no Grace.

The impression seemed to be yours. Remember it was you who said the other apostles didn't even grasp Pauls' Gospel of faith. You suggested there was uniqueness in Paul and disharmony from other scriptures, not I. As far as I was concerned, the Old Testament was written to be read with the anticipation of Christ.

You have no way of knowing any of those things you attributed to me. Please be at ease regarding any impressions you think I have, for they are only assumptions on your part.

In any case, I'm not worth debating this with. I'm hardly going to give you something you haven't already heard. Besides, I am pooped, and have no stamina to do any of this anymore.

Blessings sister. I mean it. And I hope you find the answers your looking for.

MC

Compton wrote:
Hi Rev,

Or will you not seek Grace elsewhere in the Old and New Testaments...and dispel the impression there is that without Paul, there is no Grace.

The impression seemed to be yours. Remember it was you who said the other apostles didn't even grasp Pauls' Gospel of faith. You suggested there was uniqueness in Paul and disharmony from other scriptures, not I. As far as I was concerned, the Old Testament was written to be read with the anticipation of Christ.

[color=993300]Whoa! I didn't say that the other Apostles didn't grasp Paul's gospel of faith...because it is Jesus' gospel of faith, and they were well versed in that gospel. But the original 11 Apostles did not write about Jesus, or His gospel in the way that Paul did, nor do they seem to wish to dispute him from what survives of their written works.

I wasn't at the canonizing of the scriptures party...and as far as I can tell, no Jews were. There was too much emnity at the time between the groups. There were, however, Orthodox Christians there that no longer followed the law at all.

Unfortunately, we do not know from anyone as yet what those Apostles did say, because no one seems to be looking at what they said, and what they say Jesus said.[/color]

You have no way of knowing any of those things you attributed to me. Please be at ease regarding any impressions you think I have, for they are only assumptions on your part.

[color=993300]Actually, MC, they weren't even assumptions about you at all...in fact, they were logical deductions, as I could best string them together, about the common belief in the current Christian churches, which you are following, and I am too, to the best of my abilty.[/color]

The questions remain about Paul, and 'his' gospel...your words, not mine.

In any case, I'm not worth debating this with. I'm hardly going to give you something you haven't already heard.

[color=993300]You are the only one that can judge that...from what I have been reading, you are no mean expositor of the Word yourself.[/color]

Besides, I am pooped, and have no stamina to do any of this anymore.

[color=993300]I can understand that thoroughly...I'm only operating on one cylinder myself![/color]

Blessings sister. I mean it. And I hope you find the answers your looking for.

MC

[color=993300]MC, I hope someone CAN and WILL answer them, for it is not in my ability to do so...I am so well taught in Paul I cannot come up with the answers myself.

Indeed, to do so, I am making a copy of the KJV, and eliminating Paul's epistles, just so I can do the searches I need to do, without Paul muddying the waters with his brilliance, education, and experience.

As for his anointing, I have no doubt that God wanted Paul to explain a lot of things...but I rather doubt that we are to take Jesus' message from Paul alone, and the Christian Church has a nasty habit of doing just that.

Hopefully some of the brethern and sistern who are better versed than both of us will take on these very real questions.

Blessings,

Forrest[/color]

I am making a copy of the KJV, and eliminating Paul's epistles, just so I can do the searches I need to do, without Paul muddying the waters with his brilliance, education, and experience.

I rather doubt that we are to take Jesus' message from Paul alone, and the Christian Church has a nasty habit of doing just that.

I am so well taught in Paul I cannot come up with the answers myself.

There is one who will give you all the answers you need, and he comes secretly, in dazzling light, through the backdoor of your mind.

Hi Forrest,

Doesn't Paul have the Lord's comendation in Acts 9:15

[b][color=660000]...for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: [/color][/b]

Paul preached a message that not even the 11 Apostles truly understood

Joh 1:16 For we have all received grace after grace from His fullness.
Joh 1:17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.

The early Jew understood grace, it was the gentiles who knew nothing of its meaning.

Yet Paul made a lot of rules for Gentiles to live by. Was that his job? In converting the Gentiles, was he to also tell them how to live?

16. As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

And can an Apostle be humanly wrong, and still have a true message?

Jesus also stated that there would be more teachings to come via the Holy Ghost:-

[color=000099]
Joh 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot, bear them now.

Joh 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever, he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come.
[/color]

PassingThru

Some attribute Heb. to Paul[author]. This is one of my favorites.
I cant Imagine being without Paul's important contributions.
Could all this be pride?
By pride I mean that feeling one gets when a pet doctrine gets demolished by scripture!
Had this happen many times to myself.
The word will "jerk you strait" but the word without the spirit is death.

David

Hi Rev,

Just to help explain.

Whoa! I didn't say that the other Apostles didn't grasp Paul's gospel of faith...because it is Jesus' gospel of faith, and they were well versed in that gospel. But the original 11 Apostles did not write about Jesus, or His gospel in the way that Paul did, nor do they seem to wish to dispute him from what survives of their written works.

But you started with...

Paul preached a message that not even the 11 Apostles truly understood. Grace through Faith in Jesus Christ. It is the heart of Christianity.

...Did Paul overstep his bounds? For there are conflicts in what Paul said that conflict with what the other Apostles said, and even what Jesus said.

I apologize if I am misreading this. certainly your 'inherently true but not inn-errantly true' position only amplifies my concern of your statement about Paul.

Regarding my comments about being tired; you unfortunately caught the sum of it. That is not fair to you. Without you knowing it, I perceived your critique of scripture as part of a trend around here.

In the past few weeks we have had to repave basic roads such as the authority of scripture, and to know the difference between spirit-led faith in the presuppositions of scripture, and superstitious faith in a god as we imagine him to be. Some of us even feel our thoughts are God's thoughts, and equal with scripture in their ability to inform us regarding life's moral and spiritual choices. From that self-referencing platform the forum here is deluged with an unedifying buffet of sophistry ranging from reckless accusations towards calvinists and arminians, treasonist propaganda posing as spiritual discernment, self-styled doctrines of dreams, and a general high mindedness against the testimony of scripture, not to mention a low-mindedness towards one another.

What have we come to SI for? From every tribe and nation, to be built up in our common faith in the light of God's Word. Instead we have to wear raincoats because there are so many damnable agendas soaking up our thoughts in here.

I'm starting to think we don't come here to be built up and to build up, but for stimulation. We don't want any of the questions we ask really settled. Our flesh likes the ambiguity of dreams and personal feelings...answers would force us to decide, to be accountable for our choices and plans. This is why the natural man is attracted to ambiguity and not objective truth.

I suppose it's not the fault of anyone per se.

I accept much of it is my own.

Blessings, Rev

MC

I doubt Paul will consider it any great personal loss if some one else abandons him. He lost His friends and all his religion when he met Jesus. All the members of the churches he established abandoned him and he was crucified with out anything but God for his love of God and the body of Christ.

Again:

Who anointed Paul???"

Acts 9:15-16 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he (Paul) is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.

Paul is called chosen because Christ had selected him, as he did his other apostles, for their service.

Acts 13:2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.

Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,

1 Corinthians 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

Galatians 1:15-16 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

Ephesians 3:7-8 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

crsschk, are you saying that Pauls Gospel is the same as the old testament gospel? If so, why was it necessary for Jesus Christ to set him apart and teach Paul this particular Gospel of Grace through Faith being born again of Incorruptable Seed of God of the Father? If Paul had this Gospel from the old testament why did Jesus Christ have to reveal it to Paul?

Paul's gospel is completely different from the Gospel of Moses and even The Gospel of Jesus Christ offered to the House of Israel, who were His own and they received Him not. Paul went to them first and they would not hear or see, then he was sent to the Gentile who would hear.

Acts 28:23-29 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening. And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not. And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers, Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive: For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it. And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.

That is why God gave Paul permission to call the revelation given to him as "My Gospel".

Rom 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

Rom 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

2Ti 2:8 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:

Jesus was the seed of David by Mary, but He was raised according to Paul's Gospel, Not anyone else until it was given to Paul and he revealed it to the world.

That we might separate the old from the new, praise God.

Old things have passed away and behold all things have become new.

Separating the Soul from the spirit of Satan, and given a new Spirit of Christ in you. The Holy Spirit now in us not just with us. This is completely different from the old testament.

This will probably cause a great gulf and explosion in the body, but I don't see anyone born again in the old testament. I don't see Christ in anyone "the hope of Glory". I see Paul fighting his whole ministry given him by Jesus Christ to present this Gospel and reveal The new way of salvation. Christ in you the Hope of Glory.

Hbr 4:12 For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Hebrews 4:5-13 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his. Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief. For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.

Did they have His rest? Do we have His rest?

2 Timothy 2:8-26 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel: Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, even unto bonds; but the word of God is not bound. Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him: If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us: If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself. Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work. Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

Sorry but I had to ask.

In Christ: Phillip

[color=993300]Brother Phillip, you know I love you, so do not take this personally.

Every word you have written is either taken from Paul's writings, or supports a gospel of 'Paul', as if his words were more important that Jesus' word's, or the 11 Apostles, who were taught by Jesus, and anointed directly by Jesus, when He breathed on them after His resurrection.

Without support of what Paul has said by the Gospels, by Jesus, Matthew, John, James, and Peter, Paul is preaching on his own understanding of Christianity.

I am not saying Paul was wrong in all counts, but I don't see all that Paul said supported even here on SI EXCEPT by quotes from Paul.

If you are not supporting Paul's writings from Scriptures given by other than Paul, Paul's message of Grace through Faith, as well as his explanations of doctrine, and commands on organization, and Christian behavior, could well be a false doctrine.

It only takes one thing being unsupported in Paul to make it tainted, and thus, false and misleading.

I am asking questions about Paul, and only a few at a time, but I receive no true answers DOCUMENTED by Jesus or the 11 Apostles.

There are a lot of Christians in the world that place their hope for eternity in Christ by their belief in Him, and only their belief. But belief alone is not enough.

The demons believe in Christ, and fear Him. But they have no salvation for their belief, and there are millions attending Christian Churches that consider themselves safe merely because of their belief in Christ as their Saviour.

Faith alone not enough, if we believe in and trust in Jesus as our Saviour, since He himself said, 'that whomever believed on Him, and confessed it with his mouth would be saved'. John 14:6

Well, Jesus also said, 'If ye love me, keep my commandments'. John 14:15.

You know all this, but a good proportion of the world is being taught from Paul alone, and too many people reverence Paul's word's more than Jesus' words, or the 11 Apostle's words.[/color]

Christinyou wrote:
Again:

Who anointed Paul???"

Acts 9:15-16 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he (Paul) is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.

Paul is called chosen because Christ had selected him, as he did his other apostles, for their service.

Acts 13:2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.

Romans 1:1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,

1 Corinthians 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.

Galatians 1:15-16 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

Ephesians 3:7-8 Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

Christinyou wrote:
crsschk, are you saying that Pauls Gospel is the same as the old testament gospel? If so, why was it necessary for Jesus Christ to set him apart and teach Paul this particular Gospel of Grace through Faith being born again of Incorruptable Seed of God of the Father? If Paul had this Gospel from the old testament why did Jesus Christ have to reveal it to Paul?

[color=993300]This is exactly my point![/color]

Christinyou wrote:
Paul's gospel is completely different from the Gospel of Moses and even The Gospel of Jesus Christ offered to the House of Israel, who were His own and they received Him not. Paul went to them first and they would not hear or see, then he was sent to the Gentile who would hear.

[color=993300]This is a very dangerous statement. PLEASE be careful.[/color]

Christinyou wrote:
Acts 28:23-29 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening. And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not. And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word,

Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers, Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive: For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it. And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.

That is why God gave Paul permission to call the revelation given to him as "My Gospel".

[color=993300]Hmmm....and where did GOD say this??? And if Paul told it to Luke for the writing of Acts, it has no secondary witness, as Jesus and the 11 Apostles do.[/color]

Christinyou wrote:
Rom 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

Rom 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

2Ti 2:8 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:

[color=993300] All this is Paul speaking...not anyone else.[/color]

Christinyou wrote:
Jesus was the seed of David by Mary, but He was raised according to Paul's Gospel, Not anyone else until it was given to Paul and he revealed it to the world.

That we might separate the old from the new, praise God.

[color=993300]This sounds like heresy to me...and a lie of the Devil. Sorry, but it does![/color]

Christinyou wrote:
Old things have passed away and behold all things have become new.

Separating the Soul from the spirit of Satan, and given a new Spirit of Christ in you. The Holy Spirit now in us not just with us. This is completely different from the old testament.

This will probably cause a great gulf and explosion in the body, but I don't see anyone born again in the old testament. I don't see Christ in anyone "the hope of Glory". I see Paul fighting his whole ministry given him by Jesus Christ to present this Gospel and reveal The new way of salvation. Christ in you the Hope of Glory.

Hbr 4:12 For the word of God [is] quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and [is] a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.

Hebrews 4:5-13 And in this place again, If they shall enter into my rest. Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: Again, he limiteth a certain day, saying in David, To day, after so long a time; as it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts. For if Jesus had given them rest, then would he not afterward have spoken of another day. There remaineth therefore a rest to the people of God. For he that is entered into his rest, he also hath ceased from his own works, as God did from his. Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest, lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief. For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight: but all things are naked and opened unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do.

Did they have His rest? Do we have His rest?

2 Timothy 2:8-26 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel: Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, even unto bonds; but the word of God is not bound. Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him: If we suffer, we shall also reign with him: if we deny him, he also will deny us: If we believe not, yet he abideth faithful: he cannot deny himself. Of these things put them in remembrance, charging them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers. Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness. And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some. Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour. If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work. Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

Sorry but I had to ask.

In Christ: Phillip

[color=993300]And now you know why I had to ask if Paul was not a false apostle, or merely a true commentator.

Because if Paul is not an Apostle, a lot of people are going to have to start taking Paul a tad less serious, and go back to Jesus.

At the moment, I can only consider Paul the greatest and best comentator on Scripture, Old and New Testament, and not an Apostle of God.

When the Bible was put together, it appears from this vantage point, having the entire book of the Bible, that the Christians of the time may have suppressed the true message of Jesus, and allowed in the Gospels of Matthew and John, and the non-Pauline epistles only where it supported or did not contradict Paul.

But I will be more than happy, and even relieved, if people will start answering the valid questions with supporting quotes that are not taken from Paul or Luke, since Luke was taught by Paul.

And yes, I will grant that Luke is a great historian of the Christian faith, his gospel is a great history of what was told by the all the others, but he is not God-Breathed upon.

And regretfully, I am expecting a firestorm from outraged Paulinites, but we are supposed to be Jesusites first.

Blessings,

Forrest[/color]

Hi everyone.

Forrest,

I appologise if this has been addressed already, but doesn't Paul have the commendation of the Lord Jesus Christ in Acts chapter 9?

[b][color=660033]Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: [/color][/b]

Also Forrest,

"...the 11 Apostles, who were taught by Jesus, and anointed directly by Jesus, when He breathed on them after His resurrection."

After seeing that the Holy Spirit was poured out upon those he was speaking to, hearing them speak with tounges, the Apostle Peter said in Acts chapter 10:

"Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?"

[i]...which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we[/i]

On the Day of Pentecost, when, after having recieved the Holy Spirit also, and speaking with other tongues, Peter said

"This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear."

[i]...he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear[/i]

This they had recieved, which the Lord Jesus spoke of as the promise of the Father, after waiting as he had also told them, to be endued with power from on high. And by that they preached and were His witnesses.

ChrisJD wrote:
Also Forrest,

"...the 11 Apostles, who were taught by Jesus, and anointed directly by Jesus, when He breathed on them after His resurrection."

After seeing that the Holy Spirit was poured out upon those he was speaking to, hearing them speak with tounges, the Apostle Peter said in Acts chapter 10:

"Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?"

[i]...which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we[/i]

On the Day of Pentecost, when, after having recieved the Holy Spirit also, and speaking with other tongues, Peter said "This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear."

[i]...he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear[/i]

This they had recieved, which the Lord Jesus spoke of as the promise of the Father, after waiting as he had also told them, to be endued with power from on high. And by that they preached and were His witnesses.

[color=993300]

Dear Chris,

Alas, Luke was taught, as far as we know, exclusively by Paul.

If Paul told it to Luke for the writing of Acts, it has no secondary witness, as Jesus and the 11 Apostles do.

I don't like putting Luke aside either, but we are not getting to Paul via Jesus, or the 11 Apostles, and their writings.

And yes, I am asking EVERYONE to look and see if Paul can be supported, point by point, solely through the 11 Apostles, because only they are not suspect.

I would also like to disallow 2nd Peter, as there are doubts about it's author.

This will allow for a PURE proving of the Gospel according to Paul. And I state again, I want it to be proved true.

Blessings,

Forrest[/color]

Hi Compton, I was speaking on this wise about 6 months ago, and u and many ripped me...

Hi ejg,

I am sorry for this. I do not remember the occasion you are talking about but I wish I had conducted myself better to you. Forgive me.

MC

Hi Forrest,

"Alas, Luke was taught, as far as we know, exclusively by Paul."

Why do you say this?

In the opening of Luke's account of the Gospel he seems to me to indicate that he was taught what he believed by the Apostles, or at least had knowledge of what they believed.

He writes:

"Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed."

- Luke chapter 1 verse 1-4(KJV)

[b][color=000000]Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word[/color][/b]

What are you basing your statement upon apart from this?

Here is something that the Puritan writer John Owen wrote concerning certain objections to the doctrine of imputed righteousness in his day. I know that we are not discussing imputed righteousness here but he makes some good points concerning the authority of both the gospels and the epistles. (note he uses the word "evangelists" for the gospels.)

-excerpted from [i]The Doctrine of Justification by Faith[/i] by John Owen

2. Socinus objects, in particular, against this doctrine of justification by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, and of his satisfaction, that there is nothing said of it in the Evangelists, nor in the report of the sermons of Christ unto the people, nor yet in those of his private discourses with his disciples; and he urges it vehemently and at large against the whole of the expiation of sin by his death, De Servator., par. iv., cap. 9. And as it is easy “malis inventis pejora addere,” this notion of his is not only made use of and pressed at large by one among ourselves, but improved also by a dangerous comparison between the writings of the evangelists and the other writings of the New Testament. For to enforce this argument, that the histories of the gospel, wherein the sermons of Christ are recorded, do make no mention of the imputation of the righteousness of Christ (as in his judgment they do not), nor of his satisfaction, or merit, or expiation of sin, or of redemption by his death (as they do not in the judgment of Socinus), it is added by him, that for his part he is apt to admire our Saviour’s sermons, who was the author of our religion, before the writings of the apostles, though inspired men. Whereunto many dangerous insinuations and reflections on the writings of St Paul, contrary to the faith and sense of the church in all ages, are subjoined. See pp. 240, 241.

But this boldness is not only unwarrantable, but to be abhorred. What place of Scripture, what ecclesiastical tradition, what single precedent of any one sober Christian writer, what theological reason, will countenance a man in making the comparison mentioned, and so determining thereon? Such juvenile boldness, such want of a due apprehension and understanding of the nature of divine inspiration, with the order and design of the writings of the New Testament, which are the springs of this precipitate censure, ought to be reflected on. At present, to remove this pretence out of our way, it may be observed, —

(1.) That what the Lord Christ taught his disciples, in his personal ministry on the earth, was suited unto that economy of the church which was antecedent unto his death and resurrection. Nothing did he withhold from them that was needful to their faith, obedience, and consolation in that state. Many things he instructed them in out of the Scripture, many new revelations 59
he made unto them, 59and many times did he occasionally instruct and rectify their judgments; howbeit he made no clear,
distinct revelation of those sacred mysteries unto them which are peculiar unto the faith of the New Testament, nor were to be distinctly apprehended before his death and resurrection.

(2.) What the Lord Christ revealed afterward by his Spirit unto the apostles, was no less immediately from himself than was the truth which he spoke unto them with his own mouth in the days of his flesh. An apprehension to the contrary is destructive of Christian religion. The epistles of the apostles are no less Christ’s sermons than that which he delivered on the mount. Wherefore —

(3.) Neither in the things themselves, nor in the way of their delivery or revelation, is there any advantage of the one sort of writings above the other. The things written in the epistles proceed from the same wisdom, the same grace, the same love, with the things which he spoke with his own mouth in the days of his flesh, and are of the same divine veracity, authority, and efficacy. The revelation which he made by his Spirit is no less divine and immediate from himself, than what he spoke unto his disciples on the earth. To distinguish between these things, on any of these accounts, is intolerable folly.

(4.) The writings of the evangelists do not contain the whole of all the instructions which the Lord Christ gave unto his disciples personally on the earth. For he was seen of them after his resurrection forty days, and spoke with them of “the things pertaining to the kingdom of God,” Acts i. 3; and yet nothing hereof is recorded in their writings, but only some few occasional speeches. Nor had he given before unto them a clear and distinct understanding of those things which were delivered concerning his death and resurrection in the Old Testament; as is plainly declared, Luke xxiv. 25–27. For it was not necessary for them, in that state wherein they were. Wherefore, —

(5.) As to the extent of divine revelations objectively, those which he granted, by his Spirit, unto his apostles after his ascension, were beyond those which he personally taught them, so far as they are recorded in the writings of the evangelists. For he told them plainly, not long before his death, that he had many things to say unto them which “then they could not bear,” John xvi. 12. And for the knowledge of those things, he refers them to the coming of the Spirit to make revelation of them from himself, in the next words, “Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come. He shall 60
glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it 60unto you,” verses 13, 14. And on this account he had told them
before, that it was expedient for them that he should go away, that the Holy Spirit might come unto them, whom he would send from the Father, verse 7. Hereunto he referred the full and clear manifestation of the mysteries of the gospel. So false, as well as dangerous and scandalous, are those insinuations of Socinus and his followers.

(6.) The writings of the evangelists are full unto their proper ends and purposes. These were, to record the genealogy, conception, birth, acts, miracles, and teachings of our Saviour, so far as to evince him to be the true, only-promised Messiah. So he testifies who wrote the last of them: “Many other signs truly did Jesus, which are not written in this book: but these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God,” John xx. 30, 31. Unto this end every thing is recorded by them that is needful unto the ingenerating and establishing of faith. Upon this confirmation, all things declared in the Old Testament concerning him — all that was taught in types and sacrifices — became the object of faith, in that sense wherein they were interpreted in the accomplishment; and that in them this doctrine was before revealed, shall be proved afterward. It is, therefore, no wonder if some things, and those of the highest importance, should be declared more fully in other writings of the New Testament than they are in those of the evangelists.

(7.) The pretence itself is wholly false; for there are as many pregnant testimonies given unto this truth in one alone of the evangelists as in any other book of the New Testament, — namely, in the book of John. I shall refer to some of them, which will be pleaded in their proper place, chap. i. 12, 17; iii. 14–18, 36; v. 24.

The epistles of the apostles are no less Christ’s sermons than that which he delivered on the mount.

Well said. An excellent article.

Also Forrest,

"And yes, I am asking EVERYONE to look and see if Paul can be supported, point by point, solely through the 11 Apostles, because only they are not suspect."

Why do you say this?

The Lord Jesus said,

[b][color=660033]Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and [i]some[/i] of them ye shall kill and crucify; and [i]some[/i] of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute [i]them[/i] from city to city: [/color][/b]

- Matthew chapter 23 verse 34(KJV)

[i]Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes...[/i]

and also He said

[b][color=660033]Therefore every scribe [i]which is[/i] instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man [i]that is[/i] a householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure [i]things[/i] new and old. [/color][/b]

- Matthew chapter 13 verse 52(KJV)

I think both Paul and Luke qualify, bringing forth things both new and old.

Chris

ChrisJD wrote:
Also Forrest,

"And yes, I am asking EVERYONE to look and see if Paul can be supported, point by point, solely through the 11 Apostles, because only they are not suspect."

Why do you say this?

The Lord Jesus said,

[b][color=660033]Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and [i]some[/i] of them ye shall kill and crucify; and [i]some[/i] of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute [i]them[/i] from city to city: [/color][/b]

- Matthew chapter 23 verse 34(KJV)

[i]Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes...[/i]

and also He said

[b][color=660033]Therefore every scribe [i]which is[/i] instructed unto the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man [i]that is[/i] a householder, which bringeth forth out of his treasure [i]things[/i] new and old. [/color][/b]

- Matthew chapter 13 verse 52(KJV)

I think both Paul and Luke qualify, bringing forth things both new and old.

Chris

Chris,

Paul and Luke may qualify as scribes and prophets, for or against Jesus.

The 11 Apostles are the only ones we know of that were taught by Jesus, and breathed on by Jesus after His resurrection, and if other scribes or prophets don't match what they said, they are false scribes and false prophets.

And Jesus warned about those, as well, if you recall.

Blessings,

Forrest

Hi forrest,

So you think Luke was a false scribe and prophet?

Chris,

I am only removing Luke because he is not one of the 11 breathed upon Apostles.

For all any of us know, he was in the upper room, and was a witness to it all, but he doesn't say so.

All of his information may have gotten to him second or third hand, so for the extent of proving Paul valid through what Jesus said, and the 11 breathed upon Apostles, supported by the Septuagint, which was validated by Jesus,Luke is not a valid souce.

And please recall, I want Paul validated...by the 11 and Jesus. I am not playing scriptural or doctrinal games...I want to KNOW, and be sure of the witnesses.

If Paul cannot stand without, there is something seriously wrong.

Blessings,

Forrest

Hi Forrest,

"I am only removing Luke because he is not one of the 11 breathed upon Apostles."

But who gave you that right Forrest?

About knowing, John wrote that it is the anointing that teaches all things.

Luke gives testimony tht the things he learned he learned from the Apostles and eye witnesess.

Edit: I think Luke also indicates that he became an eyewitness in Acts 16:10, where it says "we".

This is practically unbelievable ...

Who anointed Forrest is the real question here.

Saul claimed to be anointed by Jesus ...
Yet Paul made a lot of rules for Gentiles to live by. Was that his job? In converting the Gentiles, was he to also tell them how to live?

Or merely to give them Jesus' message on grace?

Did Paul overstep his bounds? For there are conflicts in what Paul said that conflict with what the other Apostles said, and even what Jesus said.

For those that love Paul and his message, please note that this is a question on doctrine, not an attack on Paul's message of Grace through Faith.

I simply want to discuss why God would have Paul contradict some things that Jesus said...is it merely contextual?

But many people question not the message of Paul, but his frequently odd behavior.

Let this not be personal, but a true discussion of points that bother many people about Paul. And they do bother people...enough to lead them away from Christianity, or to doubt God's message.

And I am asking because I am asked these questions, and I'd like to have some really good answers...if there are any!

Not an attack, not personal? "Paul claimed", "Paul is conflicted", just the way these questions are framed ... But you are yet proving otherwise, that your intention is not merely for those who are asking you but because you yourself have unresolved issues and want a contest, not answers. Furthermore how do expect this to be not 'personal' by using terminology such as "Paulites" ...

This is a load of rubbish. You have already attempted to make Paul suspect with your 'odd behavior' and taking a colloquialism to be a lie and a 'problem'. You would rewrite the scriptures to suit your own taste and come here to challenge, no contest, by making us the ones bearing the burden of proof? I do not know what you have been reading or where you are getting these notions, but assuredly as MC put it someplace there are some who have no real intentions of seeking answers only rounds and rounds of endless point counter point, trying to get someone to back down and using scripture to support it all. It is dishonest, disheartening and grievous and that is about as mildly as I can put it ...

Actually, there is an indignation that I cannot even fathom trying to burst through here while simultaneously trying to suppress some of the blasphemous things you are stating. You are attempting to dissect, discredit and separate the word of God, the apostles didn't have an issue with Paul whatsoever and to hear mere wordlings attempt to supplant even them ... It's ludicrous. Unfathomable. This is rank heresy. Who the hell do you think you are? You would like to disallow this and disallow that? You have doubt's about this authorship and that? Are you a liberal theologian? Why should we be taking anything you state as serious inquiry? You do not want anything proved true except your foolish notions. Off the deep end Forrest. I could but pray you seriously reconsider just what it is you think you are doing, the scriptures are written not for your amusement to pit your intellect against but for our learning last and God's glory first ... This certainly has the truest sense of "Has God said?" that I have yet to see here. You have made it personal alright and you need to be humbled from your high mindedness.

You are damn right you have some outrage ...

** post deleted by author

One of these days I'll learn to censor my thoughts and stifle my impulses.

Mike B - I share your frustration.

Luke 1:1-3 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus,

Acts 1:1-3 The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that Jesus began both to do and teach, Until the day in which he was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen: To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God:

This was Luke and Paul;

Acts 27:1 And when it was determined that we should sail into Italy, they delivered Paul and certain other prisoners unto one named Julius, a centurion of Augustus' band.

This we is Luke and Paul;

Col 4:14 Luke, the beloved physician, and Demas, greet you.

2Ti 4:11 Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is profitable to me for the ministry.

Luke was with Paul from the beginning and went almost everywhere Paul went. Luke was Paul's doctor and did most of His writing for him. Pauls eyes were bad and he makes a big deal of writing in his own hand.

Colossians 4:18 The salutation by the hand of me Paul. Remember my bonds. Grace be with you. Amen.

Tertius wrote Romans for Paul. Luke wrote Acts for history and Paul.

If we disregard Luke and Paul, that wipes out the Acts, Gospel of Luke, and most of Paul's writings written by other that for Pauls hand, but His seal was always on all of His epistles and all knew it was Paul. There were false epistles being written and Paul's salutation was well known.

A personal prejudice I can understand toward Paul, but a biblical truth prejudice I cannot see in any of the scriptures and written by the hand of God through the Holy Spirit, which all scripture is given by. This is truly an attack on the Word of God and its blotting out the greatest Apostle there is to the born again believer in Christ. The in Christ position of Paul is truly under attack from all sides.

In Christ: Phillip

Reply to Forrest

Forrest take some time and think about who is writing and when he is writing and what he is writing and who established those churches and Who is standing in their midst.

Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last and what thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks and in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.
His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire and his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace and his voice as the sound of many waters and he had in his right hand seven stars and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.

Forrest you are painting outside the lines.

your outrage is too,, tooo much. over the top and sounds like you are expressing it in this manner because you don't have a good response to Forrest's point.

I disagree with this comment. The thoughts and questionings brought up in this thread that strike at the nature of divine inspiration need to be dealt with harshly. I for one appreciate Mike's boldness in speaking out the way he did. Although I don't know Mike beyond this forum, I have seen him bare his heart in this place and I believe he is an Israelite in whom there is no guile.

He expressed what was in my own heart on this matter though I lack the boldness to say it. As I reflect on this my thought is to excuse my lack of boldness with a cloak of humility or diffidence but in reality it is probably just a lack of faith on my part. Anyway, the insinuations made in this thread are dangerous as brother Paul has pointed out, they need to be handled with discipline and Mike, being a moderator, is the proper one to do so.

In Christ,

Ron

Paul said in Philippians:

"WHO BEING IN THE FORM OF GOD, THOUGHT IT NOT ROBBERY TO BE EQUAL WITH GOD:
BUT MADE HIMSELF OF NO REPUTATION, AND TOOK UPON HIM THE FORM OF A SERVANT, AND WAS MADE IN THE LIKENESS OF MEN: AND BEING FOUND IN FASHION AS A MAN, HE HUMBLED HIMSELF, AND BECAME OBEDIENT UNTO DEATH, EVEN THE DEATH OF THE CROSS.
WHEREFORE GOD ALSO HATH HIGHLY EXALTED HIM, AND GIVEN HIM A NAME WHICH IS ABOVE EVERY NAME: "

IN JOHN 13 IT IS WRITTEN:

"JESUS KNOWING THAT THE FATHER HAD GIVEN ALL THINGS INTO HIS HANDS, AND THAT HE WAS COME FROM GODK, AND WENT TO GOD;
HE RISETH FROM SUPPER, AND LAID ASIDE HIS GARMENTS; TOOK A TOWEL, AND GIRDED HIMSELF. AFTER THAT HE POURETH WATER INTO A BASON, AND BEGAN TO WASH THE DISCIPLES FEET................."

Here we see He made Himself of no reputation, became a servant............Paul told us to have this mind in us that was in Christ Jesus.................Jesus told us He He had done these things as an example to us, and that we should do as He had done...............

Let us not be timid or draw back from contending for the faith, and the precious anointed Word of God!

In His amazing love,
Lowly
_______________________________________________
"Take my yoke upon you and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart; and you shall find rest unto your souls."

Anyway, the insinuations made in this thread are dangerous

This is my greatest concern. What is being written here, surmised here, insinuated here is totally lethal. It is like slipping strychnine into a baby's milk bottle under the guise of a vitamin supplement. Many brothers and sisters here are strong enough by the grace of God to withstand this poison; others are not. We need to understand that if any part of the Bible can be proved speculative, if any claim of Paul may be deemed spurious, the whole entire structure collapses, as every single book is a main support beam for the Whole. The walls, the ceiling literally all come down. The unguarded tower of our faith is now a refuge for bandits, for usurping powers in high places, and the believer will very soon meet with absolute destruction from the inside out. The jackels will come to lodge in the inner chambers.

Once left to cultivate, this "Hath God said" bacterium will proliferate in the Petri dish of the mind and cause immeasurable damage. Such is the disease of liberal theology. Satan, from the beginning of Eden, has struck mainly with one particular blow: "Hath God said?" Eve took the bait, and so successful was the devil that he tried the same coup de grace with God Himself in the wilderness. Imagine this! How lethal, how effective, imagine how much weight Satan places upon the successful influence of doubting God's Word. It is his ultimate trump card; it is his nuclear bomb when all else fails. If he can't get a believer to fall through sex, money and spiritual pride, he pulls out the ancient ace of all aces: "Hath God said?"

We here at SermonIndex need to see this quiet onslaught for what it is. I can't stop thinking that someone, somewhere has stumbled upon (providentially, of course) this thread and because of their weakened and susceptible condition, unknowingly acquired a strain of this bacteria. Infected in a moment, a colony of doubt has begun its growth using rationale and logic as its oxygen and pet convictions and wounded pride as ideal temperature.

May the moderators provide an antibiotic in the wisdom of God.

Brother Paul

I think it takes more faith to believe if you see problems with the Bible, than if you hold that it was handed, word for word, to us from God.

I haven't been given any reason thus far to embrace the contrary. Can you show me a problem or an error or anything at all that would allow me [i]not[/i] to believe the Bible is inerrant? I would gladly concede to the truth of emphirical science if the facts disproved the Bible's absolutism, but all I have experienced thus far is scientific substantiation.

Attempts to disprove scripture validity via scientific contradiction (or any other contradiction) is really nothing new to Christianity; the only recourse for the skeptics to do now is try to malign the testimonial authenticity of those [i]in the Bible itself[/i] (like Paul) who upheld Bible inerrancy. Blighting Paul is the key to demolishing all scriptural authority, for Paul himself upholds it in no uncertain terms. Trying to disparage Jesus Christ won't work too easily with believers; the next in line is Paul, and the enemy well knows the diabolical worth in decimating Paul's words, his testimony, his anointing. Take out Paul, and the walls simply come down, the New Testament implodes from the inside out, and this is why Satan as of late is having such a heyday with him. Paul is despised by the liberal theologian.

From his own mouth:

"O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, [i]and oppositions of science falsely so called[/i], which some professing have erred from the faith.." (I Tim 6:20-21)

If science cannot successfully prevail upon the integrity of the Word (I only say this because you mention 'geology'), what else is left? Discredit the man who said it, and thus nullify the testimony? Do we have personal convictions that are irreconciliable to God? The offended human intelligence will go to great lengths to keep itself afloat.

[i]I have not read every post in this thread[/i], but I don't think anyone is being asked to stop believing Paul is who he claimed, or, was claimed for him by others in the New Testament record.

Hi Dorcas,

Please read every post and come back. Thanks.

Which walls?...

The walls I spoke about in my second-to-last post. Not salvation, of course.

Brother Paul

Hi everyone.

Dear Dorcas,

I don't think it is necessary to answer every question on the terms it is asked(Proverbs 26:4).

[i]Also, I don't mean to suggest that anyone here is a fool by making refrence to that verse[/i]

Chris

Hi Dorcas,

"But, that doesn't mean one can totally ignore the concerns of the person who asked the question."

Think that would be covered in verse 5.

:-)

Would you agree?

Chris

EDIT: want to to be clear again that I'm not suggesting anyone here is a fool by making reference to the verses from Proverbs.

Hi Dorcas,

I'm not sure I'm understanding you here.

Maybe it will help if I put this again this way:

I made refrence to the verses from proverbs because I think there is a principle there that is applicable here. That being this,

Sometimes it is wise to avoid answering people on their terms because those terms can force you into their reasoning, especially if they do not begin with the fear of the Lord.

At the same time, we do not, or even should not, avoid giving an answer altogether, for their sake.

I was thinking of the principle in the verses.

Is that more clear or no?

Thanks.

ChrisJD wrote:
Sometimes it is wise to avoid answering people on their terms because those terms can force you into their reasoning, especially if they do not begin with the fear of the Lord.

This is wise thought, brother Chris. I have been taught on this, and thanks for reminding.

Kire

"Who anointed Paul"? I think it's a good question to ask.

The "Who Anointed Paul" question is a favorite among liberal theologians and skeptics and those otherwise intent on bashing down the infallibility of Holy Scripture. The answer to the question is a very obvious and simple and non-negotiable one - [i]God[/i] anointed Paul. But when a person (especially one professing to be a mature believer and a "reverend" teacher of babes) asks this, it is meant to be a snare and can only mean one thing: the person is not persuaded that Paul was anointed and appointed by God to pen infallible scripture. It is a subtle way of asking "Hath God said" without coming right out and plucking the fruit. What many do not realise, however, is that the person asking this question has already made up his or her mind and is challenging everyone else to prove it wrong.

It's good to take a spiritual inventory on our beliefs and the ones that influence us.

This is relating to a matter completely different. We are encouraged to examine ourselves as to our footing in the truth, but not to consider if heresy has any truth for us to stand in.

PaulWest wrote:
The "Who Anointed Paul" question is a favorite among liberal theologians and skeptics and those otherwise intent on bashing down the infallibility of Holy Scripture. The answer to the question is very obvious and simple and non-negotiable - God anointed Paul. But when a person (especially one professing to be a mature believer and a "reverend" teacher of babes) asks this, it can only mean one thing: They are not persuaded that Paul was anointed and appointed by God to pen infallible scripture. It is a subtle way of asking "Hath God said" without coming right out and plucking the fruit. What many do not realise, however, is that the person asking this question has already made up his or her mind and is challenging everyone else to prove it wrong.

And it will do no good and will left without profit if just stay playing here on similar question and not going a bit deeper to the root of the problem.

And that is when man doesn't want to submit to some of the God's commandments, and instead he/she to be changed under the authority of the Scriptures, he/she is trying to change the Scriptures with similar questions with the purpose to be fit into their theology as an excuse to their lifestyle or 'ministry'.

There is no life and there is no 'ministry' unto the Holy One of Israel outside of His will and His principles.

K.Daniel used to say:

"Shame on you liberal theologians sending people to hell so you can keep a job."

Linn, I'm really in no mood to go tit-for-tat with you here. Others might be willing to take you up on it, but I'm tired. I believe that what I wrote can stand all by itself, and, frankly, I'm a little surprised that [i]you're suprised[/i] at my post. I see you've dissected just about every line of what I wrote for the purpose of advocating what most here outright reject.

I'm not quite sure you understand the severity of this thread, and nothing I can say here will obviously change that. We've been through this before in other posts, and I've always found it best to just go our separate ways. Please respect my decision to disengage whatever you were hoping for in terms of a reply.

Brother Paul

I am not seeking what you call a 'tit-for-tat' but, I felt your comments were particularly undermining of the person, rather than reflecting an honest attempt to wrestle with the challenge of the questions.

This is because I see no sense in wrestling with a straw man, and besides, I really don't see my posts as undermining as you make them out to be. Why aren't you applying the same concern to the undermining of Paul the Apostle?

I deliberately stayed out of it earlier, because I thought the brethren would answer with a decent level of academic prowess, but I am genuinely amazed at the lack of forensic engagement with the topic.

What kind of academic prowess would you like? Mile-long threads of disingenious and dead psychobabble? Forensic is a good word choice.

crsschk wrote:
This is practically unbelievable ...

Who anointed Forrest is the real question here.

Saul claimed to be anointed by Jesus ...

Did Paul overstep his bounds? For there are conflicts in what Paul said that conflict with what the other Apostles said, and even what Jesus said.

For those that love Paul and his message, please note that this is a question on doctrine, not an attack on Paul's message of Grace through Faith, BECAUSE that message is merely a restatement of what Jesus DID by becoming our Paschal Lamb.

I simply want to discuss why God would have Paul contradict some things that Jesus said...is it merely contextual?

But many people question not the message of Paul, but his frequently odd behavior.

Let this not be personal, but a true discussion of points that bother many people about Paul. And they do bother people...enough to lead them away from Christianity, or to doubt God's message.

And I am asking because I am asked these questions, and I'd like to have some really good answers...if there are any!

Not an attack, not personal? "Paul claimed", "Paul is conflicted", just the way these questions are framed.

[color=993300]Very well, I will rephrase them, and carefully attempt to question Paul's writings without provoking anything but a discussion of the question.[/color]

But you are yet proving otherwise, that your intention is not merely for those who are asking you but because you yourself have unresolved issues and want a contest, not answers.

[color=993300]This is not a contest, and my unresolved issues have nothing to do with anything in the Bible, proved or unproved.

I do not want a contest. I want to ask questions, as reasonably as I know how to, and get answers.[/color]

Furthermore how do expect this to be not 'personal' by using terminology such as "Paulites" ...

[color=993300][If someone, like Paul, is talking about their own gospel, as opposed to Jesus' gospel, and it is being quoted here on SI in that manner, it seems reasonable to used the word Paulite.

I will happily cease to do so if only people speak of Jesus' gospel, for it is Jesus' good news that everyone is talking about in the New Testament, including Paul.[/color]

This is a load of rubbish. You have already attempted to make Paul suspect with your 'odd behavior' and taking a colloquialism to be a lie and a 'problem'.

[color=993300]I only dispute Gill's defense of Paul because he uses Paul's words to defend Paul.

If there is a defense for lying, I do not know it.[/color]

You would rewrite the scriptures to suit your own taste and come here to challenge, no contest, by making us the ones bearing the burden of proof?

[color=993300]I would not rewrite one word of the Old Testament, or what Jesus said according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the epistle of James, the 1st epistle of Peter, or the epistle to the Hebrews. I would challenge or contest the scriptures, Act's. all of Paul's epistles, and 2nd Peter. And I question and challenge them here because that is what this forum is for.

As for your bearing the burden of proof, when I have openly acknowledged that I do not know enough to answer these questions, of course I would.

The best scholars in the world come here.

But if the questions cannot be answered, then I will simply cease asking them.

However, the questions will still be there.[/color]

I do not know what you have been reading or where you are getting these notions...

[color=993300]I have been reading Paul, Luke, John, Matthew, James, 1Peter, The OT, Revelation, and so forth, the History of the Christian Church, and talking to other Christians.

And I have questions I cannot answer, so I have come to my bretheren for help. That's all.[/color]

but assuredly as MC put it someplace there are some who have no real intentions of seeking answers only rounds and rounds of endless point counter point, trying to get someone to back down and using scripture to support it all.

[color=993300]So you are saying that Paul is not supported by Jesus or the 11 Apostles?[/color]

It is dishonest, disheartening and grievous and that is about as mildly as I can put it ...

[color=993300]I am not being dishonest in asking these questions.

They are honest questions, and I am becoming more interested in the answers the more you all prevaricate, attack me for not being an inerrant believer, and refuse to address the questions.
[/color]

Actually, there is an indignation that I cannot even fathom trying to burst through here while simultaneously trying to suppress some of the blasphemous things you are stating.

[color=993300]
[b]Topics: Blasphemy

Text: In general the word means simply slander or insult and includes any action (e.g., a gesture) as well as any word that devalues another person or being, living or dead. This general secular idea was made more specific in religious contexts, where blasphemy means to insult, mock, or doubt the power of god.

Elwell's Theological Dictionary.[/b]

Paul would not be insulted by my questions, unless he could not answer them, particular if he knew how earnestly I am asking them.

I am not slandering Paul, or mocking him. I do him the courtesy of taking him seriously, indeed, so seriously that I want him to be right in all that he said.

And since Paul is not God, I am not doubting the power of God.

I believe it to be possible for the Christians in the late 3rd century to pick and choose what gospel they thought they should present, and that they were in a dangerous dispute with Jewish believers.

I am aware that men can be deceived, and believe all that they think, and write.

I have questions about some of the things Paul said and did, and hence, I am asking if Paul might not be in error.

I am also not underestimating the power of the evil one to deceive Paul, and hence Luke, or the Christians making the decision on which scriptures to include, and which to discard.

I am still trying to find out if my questions can be answered by one more knowledgable than I.[/color]

You are attempting to dissect, discredit and separate the word of God,

[color=993300]No. I am merely asking if Paul, a man, could have been deceived, or could have made an error, and I have many questions that are about what Paul wrote and did.

If Paul was in error, it doesn't discredit anyone except Paul, possibly Luke, and the Christians at the canonization of the scriptures.

It makes them men, not gods, that's all.

I believe that the 11 Apostles were perfectly accurate BECAUSE they were hand picked and personally taught by Jesus, and breathed on by Him in his resurrected body.

My questions are not about the gospel of Jesus, our salvation in Christ, and so forth. My questions are about Paul, and his effect on the Christian Church, and whether that effect was not planned by the evil one to create dissension, and minimize Jewish believers at the time of the canonization of the scriptures.[/color]

the apostles didn't have an issue with Paul whatsoever and to hear mere wordlings attempt to supplant even them ...

[color=993300]We don't know that at all. We do not know what was excluded from the Bible, we only know what was approved.

If Paul isn't 100% supported by those men that handpicked, taught and breathed on by Jesus, there may be a problem with some things Paul said, and did, which only invalidates the idea of inerrancy of scripture, and Paul's gospel, which does have a lot of ramifications, particularly the mystery of the rapture, which I consider to be the devil's ploy to deceive Christians.[/color]

It's ludicrous. Unfathomable. This is rank heresy.

[color=993300]My questions are honest, and not ludicrous.

My questions are not unfathomable.

And heresy only means we do not see eye to eye on doctrine.

[b]Topics: Heresy

Text: The Greek word hairesis means: (1) a choice e.g., Lev. 22:18, 21 (LXX), where "gifts according to their choice" means free-will offering; (2) a chosen opinion, the only NT example being in II Pet. 2:1, where "destructive opinions" are caused by false teaching;

Elwells Theological Dictionary.[/b]

Asking questions is not disallowed me, and anger because I am setting the bound of the proof's being limited to Jesus and the 11 breathed upon, hand taught Apostles, is beginning to make my point for me.

If there are no proof's for Paul outside of Paul and Luke, then there is room for questioning Paul, no matter how much we love him.

I am asking my bretheran at SI these questions because I cannot get an answer to them elsewhere, and I want Paul to be vindicated...by Jesus, and the 11 Apostles.

I am not a good enough scholar EXCEPT in Paul, and I wonder if anyone in the Christian Church is, to prove Paul valid through unimpeachable witnesses.

[b]1 Peter 3:8. Finally, be ye all of one mind, having compassion one of another, love as brethren, be pitiful, be courteous:
9. Not rendering evil for evil, or railing for railing: but contrariwise blessing; knowing that ye are thereunto called, that ye should inherit a blessing.
10. For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile:
11. Let him eschew evil, and do good; let him seek peace, and ensue it.
12. For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil.
13. And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good?
14. But and if ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled;
15. But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:[/b]

If Paul cannot stand on what Jesus wrote, and the Apostles passed on, then Paul is in error.[/color]

Who the hell do you think you are?

[color=993300]I am your sister in Christ, asking questions about a man who is an honored by many men, for several people that I have discussed these matters with, and now, because your refusal, and others, to answer the questions has raised real doubts in me about Paul.

I do not deny Paul is a great teacher on Jesus's gospel.

I do not KNOW if he goes too far, and I want to know if Paul is perfect in his grasp, and teaching of Jesus' gospel. And consequently, I have questions.

But since a lot of Christians do not claim inerrency for the Bible, I do feel able to ask questions about what is in the Bible since the days of the Apostles.

And I want the test to be framed by irreproachable quotes...for no one can doubt the validity of Jesus, and the validated epistles of the 11 breathed upon Apostles.[/color]

You would like to disallow this and disallow that?

[color=993300]Yes, of course, for the deepest question in my heart now is, did the church in the late 3rd century suppress scripture that disagreed with Paul, and his close friend Luke.

If they had no need to do so, I will be very relieved.

But if that is the case, then the questions I have asked, and the ones I have yet to ask will be able to be answered by Jesus and the 11 Apostles.[/color]

You have doubt's about this authorship and that?
Are you a liberal theologian?

[color=993300]I have some doubts about Paul that I would like to have relieved, and since Luke was, due to their close association, Paul's friend, I think that we have to eliminate Luke on the expectation that Paul may have taught him, or influenced his thought.

But no, I am not a liberal theologian. I accept all that is written in the Old Testament, for Jesus validated it.

I accept all that Jesus said because of the reports and actions of the 11 Apostles, and because all the fulfilled prophecies prove that Jesus is the one and only Christ.

I accept all the 11 Apostles, for they vouched for one another.

I believe that Paul and Luke are both Christians, and Paul especially was a great teacher of the Gospel.

However, I know that Paul was a man, did not have the special anointing that the 11 Apostles did, and MAY have been deceived.[/color]

Why should we be taking anything you state as serious inquiry?

[color=993300]Because I am asking it seriously, in a real search for Paul to be validated, as your sister in Christ.[/color]

You do not want anything proved true except your foolish notions. Off the deep end Forrest.

[color=993300]I am not off the deep end. I am merely asking uncomfortable questions.

I am not concerned about anything except some points about Paul's ministry and doctrine that should be able to be answered by the scriptures, by someone that knows them better than I do.

But if the doctrinal questions about Paul's gospel of Jesus, so very well taught to all of us, do not stand up to what Jesus taught, and the 11 Apostles taught and verified, then Paul could have been deceived in a few points.

And if Paul WAS deceived at all, then we CAN question his witness.

My point is that Jesus and the 11 Apostles were enough to get us all saved, and if they don't back what all of what Paul says, then there are serious problems with Paul's gospel, and possibly Luke's as well.

I realize that by questioning Paul, I cannot help questioning your belief in the inerrency of the gospel, but taking Paul away from the Bible would not invalidate Jesus, or the 11 Apostles, or Christianity.[/color]

I could but pray you seriously reconsider just what it is you think you are doing, the scriptures are written not for your amusement to pit your intellect against but for our learning last and God's glory first ...

[color=993300]I am not attempting to pit my intellect against any one else's.

I am not asking these questions for amusement, but because doubts have been raised in me about the validity of Paul's Gospel, and Luke's, as Paul's disciple and friend.[/color]

This certainly has the truest sense of "Has God said?" that I have yet to see here.

[color=993300]If my only fault was being deceived by the great deceiver only once in my life, I would be greatly relieved.

Comparing me to Eve for questioning some few things about a man, however anointed, is not in the same class as questioning God.[/color]

You have made it personal alright and you need to be humbled from your high mindedness.

[color=993300]Truly, I am not seeking anything but the truth.

It has nothing to do with my pride, or highmindedness, because I am seeking answers to reasonable questions. I may have phrased them badly, but I mean the questions honestly.

And the questions are reasonable to anyone who doesn't believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, and there are a lot of Christians who don't believe in the inerrancy of the Bible.

It's doesn't make us non-Christians, just people with questions.[/color]

You are damn right you have some outrage ...

[color=993300]I am truly sorry you are offended in me, but the questions remain, and there are more pending in me about Paul's teaching.

If no one amongst the very great scholars on this board are willing to answer the questions that are truly and seriously troubling me, your sister in Christ, it does not make them invalid. It might even make them more valid.

I want Paul to be vindicated. Are you saying that he cannot be?

In all humility I ask for an unemotional discussion of my questions.[/color]

PaulWest wrote:

Are you a liberal theologian?

Brother Mike, this is indeed liberal theology 101 - a textbook case - and we really shouldn't be surprised when we encounter it.

[color=993300]Really? You could have waited for me to answer Mike, and not answer for me.[/color]

This woman has put herself in a very dangerous predicament as she assumes to be a teacher...she is in a position to receieve all the more condemnation, and I fear for her soul.

[color=993300]Actually, I do not teach...I am not taking authority over anyone, and those that come to my site come because they want to. I write, because God told me to. And since I consult Him on when I write for my blog, and listen for the least objection when I write at SI, and I have only heard from the Holy Spirit to ask what is in my heart, and to ask quietly and respectflly, and since I am truly in doubt over the answers I am asking, I do not feel afraid for asking questions, the more because none of you want to answer them.[/color]

God forbid she is speading this terrible conjecture and subverting the faith of weaker believers.

[color=993300]Actually, I am spreading nothing, just asking questions. Your lack of answers may however be leading to weakening the faith of other believers.[/color]

It is a fearful thing to tamper with the Word and cast seeds of doubt in the minds of babes.

[color=993300]I am not tampering with the Word of God, Who is Jesus. I do not worship the Bible, althought I value it highly as the revealed word of God.

I am asking questions about certain writers in the Bible, where questions have come up, first in others, and now in me.[/color]

Let this be a sober warning to us all to remain rooted in sound doctrine. It would do us all very well to read through Timothy I & II a few times this week.

Brother Paul

[color=993300]There's only one problem with 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy...they were written by Paul, and you have not answered my questions about Paul.

The questions are reasonable, because Paul could have been deceived, and so could have Luke, because he was taught by Paul.

Paul and Luke were men, and that leaves Paul and Luke still in doubt. As men. Paul himself could have made an error or two, being a man, and subject to being deceived.

And if I am asked questions, and ask them of you, and you do not answer me, I grow yet more curious about whether those questions are not valid ones, because you will not answer them.

And I begin to ask them in my own name as well as for others.

What you do not seem to see is that the questions are out there, the world is watching, and they are seeing you dodging the questions.

Any babe's in Christ are grounded in the word of Jesus, and they are perfectly safe there, for Jesus says he will not let them fall.

[b]Jude 1:24. Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy,
25. To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.[/b][/color]

Christinyou wrote:

If we disregard Luke and Paul, that wipes out the Acts, Gospel of Luke, and most of Paul's writings written by other that for Pauls hand, but His seal was always on all of His epistles and all knew it was Paul. There were false epistles being written and Paul's salutation was well known.

[color=993300]I value Paul and Luke very much as ministers of God. However, it does not mean, because they taught well, or wrote brilliantly, that they were the difinitive explanation of Jesus' gospel.

Jesus was the definitive expositor on Himself, and He had a lot of great Apostles, who spoke the Gospel accurately.

Evidently, you do not feel that Jesus or the Eleven can explain Christianity, but only Paul and Luke.[/color]

A personal prejudice I can understand toward Paul, but a biblical truth prejudice I cannot see in any of the scriptures and written by the hand of God through the Holy Spirit, which all scripture is given by. This is truly an attack on the Word of God and its blotting out the greatest Apostle there is to the born again believer in Christ. The in Christ position of Paul is truly under attack from all sides.

In Christ: Phillip

[color=993300]I have no personal predjudice against Paul...I merely have some questions that none of you seem to want to answer.

But by not answering the questions, you merely point out that you do not want to, or cannot answer the questions.

Forrest[/color]

rowdy2 wrote:
Reply to Forrest

Forrest take some time and think about who is writing and when he is writing and what he is writing and who established those churches and Who is standing in their midst.

Saying, I am Alpha and Omega, the first and the last and what thou seest, write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches which are in Asia; unto Ephesus, and unto Smyrna, and unto Pergamos, and unto Thyatira, and unto Sardis, and unto Philadelphia, and unto Laodicea.
And I turned to see the voice that spake with me. And being turned, I saw seven golden candlesticks and in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.
His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire and his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace and his voice as the sound of many waters and he had in his right hand seven stars and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength.

Forrest you are painting outside the lines.

[color=993300]I have no doubt that Paul established the Churches, nor that Paul was an awesome preacher.

Jesus, in choosing Paul's churches to make his points, does not make Paul infallible. Jesus chose these churches because they spoke particularly to issues He was disturbed by. But I have never denyed that Paul is a great teacher of the Word.

I want to ask some questions that no one seems to want to answer, and the more everyone tries to convince me that Paul is perfect, the more I doubt it.

Here is part of what I have been asked, with the scriptural contradictions.

[b]The Road to Damascus[/b]

In Chapter Nine of the Book of Acts, Luke, a Physician and Saul’s traveling companion, recounts how Saul encounters the Risen Lord Jesus Christ while on the “Road to Damascus” to persecute the Church there.

“And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.” (ACTS 9:3-8)

Curiously, the phrase “kick against the pricks” is found nowhere else in scripture. The phrase this “Lord” speaks to Saul was written four hundred and fifty years earlier by the Greek poet, Aeschylus, in his mythological work "Prometheus Bound". Here, the Titan Oceanus says,

[i]Such punishment, Prometheus, is the wage.
But thou, not yet brought low by suffering,
To what thou hast of ill would'st add far worse.
Therefore, while thou hast me for schoolmaster,
[b]Thou shalt not kick against the pricks[/b]; the more
That an arch-despot who no audit dreads
Rules by his own rough will.[/i]

According to ancient Greek mythology, Prometheus was the rebellious god that brought fire to man. This displeased Zeus, who chained him to a rock where he suffered unimaginable torments for the rest of eternity.

Oceanus was the ancient Greeks’ Titan of the world’s saltwater bodies (seas and oceans). He is not to be confused with the ancient Greek god of the Mediterranean, Prometheus. Statues of Oceanus depict the upper half of his body as a muscular human torso, arms and a head adorned by a long beard and horns. His lower half consists of a scaly, fish-like, coiling tail. Please note that this particular titan holds a [i]fish[/i] in one hand and a [i]serpent in the other.[/i]

The Lord appears to Saul as a “light from heaven”. But the Lord God of Heaven is not the only being that may sometimes appear as a being of light, as Saul elsewhere states,

“Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.” (II COR 11:14)

Throughout our Lord’s earthly ministry He gave sight to the blind. Yet, according to Saul Jesus took away his sight.

There is also a contradiction between two conflicting reports from the witnesses surrounding Saul on the road,

“And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.” (ACTS 9:7)

“And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.” (ACTS 22:9)

In the first description of Saul’s event on the road, the men hear a voice but see nothing. In the second description, the men see a light, but hear nothing.

Thus, during the early hours of his conversion,

1.\tSaul hears a voice speaking the very same phrase, word for word, spoken by an ancient Greek titan nearly four-and-a-half centuries earlier;
2.\tSaul sees a brilliant light which he later admits could very well have been the Devil;
3.\tTwo conflicting reports emerge concerning the events that transpired that fateful night.

It is improbable that our Omniscient Lord would speak, word-for-word, the words of a pagan deity, such as Oceanus, to Saul the Apostle since God’s says of pagan gods,

“Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.” (EXO 20:3-6)

But this is not the only place in the Bible where Saul communes with pagan deity. At Mars’ Hill, he equates the Father with the pagan “Unknown God” of the Romans.

“Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, [i]TO THE UNKNOWN GOD.[/i] Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.” (ACTS 17:22-23)

Later on in his epistles he calls Him the “invisible God”.

“Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light: Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son: In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins: Who is [i]the image of the invisible God[/i], the firstborn of every creature…” (I COL 1:12-15)

“Now unto the King eternal, immortal, [i]invisible[/i], the only wise God, be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.” (I TIM 1:17)

The words “unknown” and “invisible” (not to mention “unknown God” or “invisible God”) are found nowhere else in scripture but in the writings of Saul and Luke.

But what does our Lord God Almighty say about those who would command us to follow after “unknown/invisible” pagan gods?

“If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, [i]Let us go after other gods, [b]which thou hast not known,[/b] and let us serve them[/i]; Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.” (DEU 13:1-3)

The Lord Almighty is quite visible to His faithful prophets and saints. He walked with Adam and Eve in the Eden. He sent His Holy Angels to Abraham and Lot. He wrestled with Jacob by the river. He spoke with Moses out of the Burning Bush. He dwelt as a Pillar of Fire among the Israelites in the wilderness for a span of forty years. He revealed Himself to the prophets in many ways. He walked on Earth, preached the Gospel, healed us, and forgave us our sins.

However, according to the scripture cited above, the Lord does allow false prophets to walk amongst His Bride to test their faithfulness to Him. Will you remain loyal to the God you’ve known? Or will you whore after a pretender’s unknown god?

[b]“Saul” Becomes “Paul” and Blinds Elymas “the Sorcerer”[/b]

The first instance of the Saul’s new name, “Paul”, appears in Acts 13, where Saul faces off with Elymas “the Sorcerer”,

“But Elymas the sorcerer (for so is his name by interpretation) withstood them, seeking to turn away the deputy from the faith. Then Saul, (who also is called Paul,) filled with the Holy Ghost, set his eyes on him, And said, O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord? And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season. And immediately there fell on him a mist and a darkness; and he went about seeking some to lead him by the hand.” (ACTS 13:8-11)

Two important events must be noted. First, “Saul” is now called “Paul”. Second, Paul curses a man with blindness for denying Paul’s doctrines.

Nowhere in Acts or in Paul’s Epistles is this name change explained. We know the Lord bequeathed the name “Peter”, or “The Rock”, on His disciple Simon. But how and where did Saul become Paul?

One of our Lord’s warnings concerning false prophets springs to mind,

“I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: [i]if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.[/i]” (JOHN 5:43)

Now Elymas may or may not have been a genuine sorcerer since Luke states in parentheses, “for so is his name by interpretation”. Whatever the case, we know that this man withstood “Paul’s” doctrines and because of this, Paul, “filled with the Holy Ghost”, curses the man with blindness – just as Paul himself was blinded on the road to Damascus.

But doesn’t this conflict with our Lord’s ministry on Earth? When Jesus was filled with the Holy Ghost, He forgave sins, preached the Gospel, healed the sick, and gave sight to the blind. He also said,

“But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.” (MATT 5:44)

It was prophesied of Messiah,

[i]“The LORD openeth the eyes of the blind[/i]: the LORD raiseth them that are bowed down: the LORD loveth the righteous.” (PSA 146:8)

“And in that day shall the deaf hear the words of the book, and [i]the eyes of the blind shall see out of obscurity[/i], and out of darkness.” (ISA 29:18)

And Jesus said to the messengers of John the Baptist,

[i]“The blind receive their sight[/i], and the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear, the dead are raised up, and the poor have the gospel preached to them.” (MATT 11:5)

Saul was blinded on the road and, after he receives his sight again, curses another with blindness. What says the Lord of those who are blinded by the blind?

“Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.” (MATT 15:14)

Now, we must admit that the Angels of the Lord temporarily blinded the rape gangs surrounding Lot’s house in Sodom. But we must also admit that they did so in self-defense to protect themselves and the family from the multitude of Sodomites, and to give them time to escape God’s impending Judgment on the city. The angels’ actions were necessity to mercifully protect Lot’s family.

This is an exception, not the rule.

As a rule, the Lord of Truth opens the eyes of the blind. As a rule, Satan lies to us and deceives us.

Thus, those who preach the truth, love their enemies, and give sight to the blind are of God. Those who preach lies, hate their enemies, and blind the sighted are of the Devil.

[b]Do You Follow Jesus or Paul?[/b]

Paul exhorts believers to follow him as he follows Christ,

[i]“Be ye followers of me,[i] even as I also am of Christ.” (I COR 11:1)

“Brethren, [i]be followers together of me,[/i] and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.” (PHIL 3:17)

But the Lord says,

“And he saith unto them, [i]Follow me,[/i] and I will make you fishers of men.” (MATT 4:19)

“Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and [i]follow me.[/i]” (MATT 16:24)

“And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and [i]the sheep follow him:[/i] for they know his voice. And [i]a stranger will they not follow,[i] but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.” (JOHN 10:4-5)

[b]Is God or Paul Your Father?[/b]

Paul says he is “like a father” to his disciples who he has “begotten” through the Gospel,

“For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, [i]yet have ye not many fathers:[/i] for in Christ Jesus [b]I have begotten you[/b] [i]through the gospel.[/i] Wherefore I beseech you, [i]be ye followers of me.[/i]” (I COR 4:15)

“Ye are witnesses, and God also, how holily and justly and unblameably we behaved ourselves among you that believe: As ye know how we exhorted and comforted and charged every one of you, [i]as a father doth his children,[/i] That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory.” (I THES 2:10-12)

Jesus said we have but one Father,

“And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.” (MATT 23:9)

[b]Do You Obey Jesus Christ or the “Official Church Authorities”?[/b]

Paul implements a church system wherein “Bishops”, “Deacons”, and “Elders” are anointed, ordained and awarded authority above and beyond the powers of church laity. He describes the personal characteristics, family history, and social skills necessary to fulfill these “offices”.

“This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a [i]bishop[/i], he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.”

“Likewise must the [i]deacons[/i] be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless. Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things. Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.” (I TIM 3:1-16)

Rebuke not an [i]elder[/i], but intreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren… Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn. And, The labourer is worthy of his reward. Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear. I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality. (I TIM 5:1-23)

Compare Paul’s “system” with the Word of Jesus Christ.

“But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. [i]But it shall not be so among you:[/i] but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant: Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.” (MATT 20:25-28)

James concurs with a warning.

“My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.” (JAM 3:1)

Again, Jesus warns us to avoid official-sounding titles like “rabbi”, “father”, or “master”. Also note how our Lord despises those who seek positions of religious power and the applause of men (respect of persons – please compare with Paul’s socialite bishops and deacons, who must have a house, be married, be well-liked by everyone, etc).

“The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers. But all their works they do for to be seen of men: they make broad their phylacteries, and enlarge the borders of their garments, And love the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the synagogues, And greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. [i][i]But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.[/i] But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted. (MATT 23:2-12)

James agrees once more with the Lord’s commandment regarding temporal authority – that the “haves” are no more worthy of religious authority than the “have-nots”.

“My brethren, [i]have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons.[/i] For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: Are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts? Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: But [i]if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.”[/i] (JAM 2:1-9)

Now, keep Paul’s authoritative system in mind as you read the Word of our Lord to the Church of the Ephesians via the Revelation of John:

“Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks; I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and [i]thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:[/i] And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name's sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted. Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love. Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent. [i]But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.”[/i] (REV 2:1-6)

“Nicolaitans” is a Greek word: “Leaders” (Nico) of the “Laity” (laitans).

As for the “false apostles” the Ephesians “tried” and found to be “liars”…

[b]According to Paul, Paul Doesn’t Lie![/b]

“The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is blessed for evermore, knoweth that [i]I lie not.[/i]” (II COR 11:31)

“Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, [i]I lie not.[/i]” (GAL 1:20)

“Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and [i]lie not;[/i]) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.” (I TIM 2:7)

“I say the truth in Christ, I [i]lie not[/i], my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart.” (ROM 9:1-2)

Would you believe the child who felt compelled to explain to his mother, father, uncle and aunt, “I didn’t steal any cookies”?

[b]But, According to Paul, Paul Does Lie![/b]

“God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged… For if the truth of God hath more abounded through [i]my lie[/i] unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?” (ROM 3:4-7)

[b]Paul’s Crafty and Uses Guile to Catch the Heathen[/b]

“But be it so, I did not burden you: [i]nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.”[/i] (II COR 12:16)

Yet, Paul says elsewhere,

“For our exhortation was not of deceit, nor of uncleanness, [i]nor in guile."[/i] (I THES 2:3)

Whatever the case, the Word is clear when it comes to guile, craftiness, and trickery.

“Blessed is the man unto whom the LORD imputeth not iniquity, and in whose spirit there is no guile.” (PSA 32:2)

“Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips from speaking guile.” (PSA 34:13)

“Wickedness is in the midst thereof: deceit and guile depart not from her streets.” (PSA 55:11)

[i]“And in their mouth was found no guile:[/i] for they are without fault before the throne of God.” (REV 14:5)

[b]Three Warnings from Paul are Equal to Three Witnesses[/b]

“This is the third time I am coming to you. [i]In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.”[/i] (II COR 13:1)

However, Moses and Jesus here describe the proper method of determining justice below.

“One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.” (DEU 19:15)

“But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.” (MATT 18:16)

[b]Paul Like Jesus, and Unlike the Apostles, Doesn’t Baptise[/b]

“Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. [i]For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel:[/i] not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.” (I COR 1:12-17)

Jesus commanded His Apostles and Disciples to baptize all nations. Jesus, however, did not baptize. Thus, if Paul does not baptize, who does he make himself out to be, an Apostle… or an equal to Jesus?

“When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, [i](Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)[/i]” (JOHN 4:1-2)

[i]“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:[/i] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.” (MATT 28:19-20)

[b]Paul Doesn’t Sin. His “Flesh” Does.[/b]

“But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. [i]And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.[/i] Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. [i]For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me…[/i] But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. [i]So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.[/i]” (ROM 7:6-25)

The Galatians seemed not to have minded Paul’s fleshly infirmities and temptations… whatever they might have been.

“Ye know how through [i]infirmity of the flesh[/i] I preached the gospel unto you at the first. And [/i]my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected;[/i] but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus.” (GAL 4:14)

Perhaps Paul’s fleshly infirmities, temptations, and sins have something to do with his demonic traveling companion.

“And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a [i]thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan[/i] to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure. (II COR 12:7)

Yet, the Lord Himself says that He came to destroy the works of the Devil and that He saves us from our sins. Is it possible for an Apostle of the Lord to be “buffeted” by a demon while in the Lord’s employ? Can a Holy Apostle sin in the flesh and serve the Lord?

Jesus says of those who actively sin,

[i]“He that committeth sin is of the devil;[/i] for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil.” (I JOHN 3:18)

John says,

“We know that [i]whosoever is born of God sinneth not;[/i] but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.” (I JOHN 5:18)

And James says,

“Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But [i]every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.[/i] Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. Do not err, my beloved brethren.” (JAM 1:13-16)

Jesus says of demonic possession,

“When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none. Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation.” (MATT 12:43-45)

[b]Now, let’s explore James the Just’s refutation of some of Paul’s core doctrines [/b]

[b]Paul Says of Temptation[/b]

“There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.” (I COR 10:13)

[b]But James says[/b]

“Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: But [i]every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.[/i] Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. Do not err, my beloved brethren.” (JAM 1:13-16)

[b]Paul Teaches Abraham Was Justified by Faith Alone[/b]

O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain. He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? [b]Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.[/b] Know ye therefore that [i]they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.[/i] And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed. [i]So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.[/i] For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith. [i]And the law is not of faith;[/i] but, The man that doeth them shall live in them. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith. Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. [i]For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.[/i] Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator. Now a mediator is not a mediator of one, but God is one. Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for [i]if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.[/i] But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, [i]we are no longer under a schoolmaster.[/i] (GAL 3:1-25)

In the argument above, Paul quotes from Genesis,

“And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness. (GEN 15:6)

[b]James Uses the Very Same Scripture to Prove that Abraham’s Faith was Void if He Hadn’t Acted on His Faith[/b]

[i]What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?[/i] If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: [i]shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.[/i] Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble. But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, [b]Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness:[/b] and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that [i]by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.[/i] Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? [i]For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also.[/i] (JAM 2:14-26)

[b]Paul Utilizes the Word “Glass” to Describe First, His Inability to View God,[/b]

For now [i]we see through a glass, darkly;[/i] but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. (I COR 13:12)

[b]And Paul Uses the Same Word “Glass” Again to Describe the Way He Views God,[/b]
\t
But we all, with open face [i]beholding as in a glass[/i] the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord. (II COR 3:18)

[b]James, Uses Paul’s Descriptive Word “Glass” the Same Way He Uses Paul’s Citation from Genesis… to Leave no Doubt in the Alert Reader’s Mind About Who’s False Doctrine He is Warning Against[/b]

But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves. [i]For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man [b]beholding his natural face in a glass:[/i][/b] For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was. (JAM 1:22-23)

[b]Paul teaches his followers they are “liberated” from the Commandments he considers to be “the yoke of bondage”,[/b]

“Stand fast therefore in the [i]liberty[/i] wherewith Christ hath made us free, and [i]be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.[/i] Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth? This persuasion cometh not of him that calleth you. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. I have confidence in you through the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded: but he that troubleth you shall bear his judgment, whosoever he be… This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. [i]But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.[/i]” (GAL 5:1-18)

“Now the Lord is that Spirit: and [i]where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.[/i] But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.” (II COR 3:17-18)

[b]But again, James cites the very same word Paul uses, “liberty”, to describe the Commandments: “The Law of Liberty” by which we shall be judged[/b]

“But whoso looketh into the perfect [i]law of liberty,[/i] and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.” (JAM 1:25)

“So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the [i]law of liberty.[/i]” (JAM 2:12)

[b]And John is equally clear on the law.[/b]

And John cites Jesus as saying; [i]"If ye love me, keep my commandments.[/i]" (JOHN 14:16)

There are many other questions, but these will do for a start. Please, consider them in all seriousness.

Forrest[/color]

Hello...

I am amazed that this thread is continuing with such contention. As has already been pointed out (and mostly agreed upon), Peter equated Paul's epistles as SCRIPTURE (2 Peter 3:16). This implies that his epistles were holy and God inspired, which is also indicative of the definition provided by Paul in 2 Timothy 3:16. We also are certain that Paul was an Apostle chosen by God (rather than men).

How can this be questioned? This has been the foundation of the Church since, well, Christ resurrected (and the apostles wrote about it)!

:-)

Really, no biblical doctrine is in danger here, but we may be in danger of losing contact with souls who are uncertain, and who need our brotherly love to pull them onto safer ground.

No Biblical doctrine is in danger here??? How about the God-inspired testimony of the [i]man who wrote the book of Romans?[/i] I can't believe this, like Mike Balog said - this is practically unbelieveable. We shouldn't even be having this converation.

As far as the brotherly love to pull weaker believers unto safer ground, would you expect us to first sit them down and demonstrate by going word-for-word with a coldly calculated dissertation to defend against this satanic effort of debunking Paul? That's just what she wants. These forums are already filling up to the brim with empty discussions and fruitless debates that do not promote holiness in the lives of believers or a greater immersion in God's Word. And this thread would now try to destroy it altogether. When will we at last grow backbones and bodly stand for truth and not feel as though we have to "discuss" every straw topic in a pedantic and political manner. There needs to be a point where we draw the line.

Hear me, Paul doesn't need defending, God will defend him. God [i]has[/i] defended him, and will continue to do so long after you and I are dead, even to the end of the world. The Word of God is indestructible to man, but man destroys himself when he tampers with it.

I am also not underestimating the power of the evil one to deceive Paul, and hence Luke, or the Christians making the decision on which scriptures to include, and which to discard.

Nonsense. Again, who are you to make this incredible insinuation?

I believe that the 11 Apostles were perfectly accurate BECAUSE they were hand picked and personally taught by Jesus, and breathed on by Him in his resurrected body.

More nonsense. Which is is truly? You keep contradicting yourself with this idea that you are merly trying to answer questions posed to you while simultaneously interjecting your suppositions and your agenda. There is so much here it seems impossible to even begin. Had shelved this wondering if it is was necessary ...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Appeal to your patience with this, far too long I fear, but I don't know another way. Please, all the way to the end if you might indulge me.

(Bubbaguy)

When Christians insist that every word in the Bible is true or none of it is trustworthy, i guess the word "lazy" comes to mind. If you start from this premise, it is soooo much easier to read the Bible. You don't have to give consideration to ANYTHING that doesn't agree, like geology. You don't have to rely upon Faith, because if all of the Bible is literally true, you don't need faith. and asking questions about things like evolution is impudent.

I think it takes more faith to believe if you see problems with the Bible, than if you hold that it was handed, word for word, to us from God. It is man's account of our striving to become reconciled with God. and as such, it is full of Truth and also has evidenced within it the imperfections of human beings.

That may be somewhat true if you are speaking in sweeping generalities but if you purport to apply that to those here who are disputing heretical hermeneutics and the like, you couldn't be farther from the truth. Rather, some of us dig down into the marrow of our souls wrestling with both it's wretchedness and essence of finding truth in the inward parts as they try and get at, to quote the maligned associate of Paul; [i]in which are some things hard to be understood,[/i].

What he has said here about Paul has always bothered me. as has the doctrine of Grace by Faith alone. if a person has faith but produces a life of wretchedness, Jesus' word speaks against it. (pay attention to the fruits!!)

What are the fruits of this doctrine? Corruption! the shameful idea that while we go on sinning today, we can still repent tomorrow and all will be right between us and God. this is the fruit of Paul's corrupted religion.

Paul may well have been earnest and thought he was doing the work of God, but throughout his writings i hear his ego coming through. he believes fully in the saving Grace of Jesus, but it is Him (Paul) who is going to be the pivitol person because, without him (paul), all the wonderful works and testimony of Jesus would just fall by the wayside of history.

[i]God forbid![/i]

Rom 3:4, 3:6, 3:31, 6:2, 6:15, 7:7, 7:13, 9:14, 11:1, 11:11
1 Cor 6:15
Gal 2:17, 3:21, 6:14

You and Forrest alike are setting up yourselves as judges of the man's character and by way of that insinuating ... God knows what of his integrity. You want the crux of the indignation and outrage?, there you have it. Am not about to get into didactic nit picking over your still yet fallacious reasonings and parsing of the scriptures to fit your intellectual discard-met, still you slice and dice that which is acceptable and discard that which doesn't fit into the little scheme concocted in your head. We have traveled this road here in endless circles Bubba as you well know.

Went back and reread this in it's entirety as even my indignation aught to be re-examined and that it wasn't just an emotional-knee jerk reaction to what I was hearing.

To be sure, this was not an open and honest inquiry as it was purported to be or at best it certainly was confused and contradictory, know of no other way than to present it in it's own words ...

(Forrest)

I simply want to discuss why God would have Paul contradict some things that Jesus said...is it merely contextual?

Is it appropriate for a man of God to 'be all things to all people'? That sounds like manpleasing, but it could be read differently.

Many things that the Catholic Church latched on to have to do with Paul.

His Hierarchy of Bishops and Elders; His unfortunate words against a women speaking in Church, when it was actually a Synagogue,(and Synagogues are very noisy places.)even though many women have spoken for God in the past. Still, Paul's words have been used against women for centuries...heavens, how many women have been killed for disagreeing with a man, much less a priest?

[b]I do not even in my website teach with authority...nor do I know who visits it, or whether they are male or female, since I don't ask for money, and hence can't know who comes there.[/b]

Since they are not my questions, but questions put to me, and to this august body, through me, because I would love to have the quotes to come back at these answers that are not from Paul, or Luke, Luke being suspect to some by virtue of his long friendship with Paul.

But oddly, everyone seeks to avoid the essential question in their outrage over 'an attack on Paul', when Paul is open to attack through what he said, as are the other Apostles, as well as you, me, and everyone who presumes to put Jesus' thoughts into descriptive passages.

The questions have been put forth to me, and I must answer them.

If I cannot get help from my brethern and sistern because they are too offended in me, then where am I to go?

These remarks to me or my attitude or behavior are illustrative of my very real life, and reactions, and are not recomendations or permissions given. It is how I live, in the way I must live.

But I would rather be answered, as I asked these questions, in all seriousness, and not from Paul.

Every answer I have is from Paul. If I get no others, I will have to toss Paul out, and I love the man and his works too much to want to do that.

But I do not have to agree with the societal constraints placed on the pagan society of the 1st Century by Paul. My altars are not set up to worship my god or goddess with sex, and I am too well broken, by Jesus, to worship money or power.

I need to agree with what Jesus taught, in Paul, and elsewhere. I don't mind in the least going by the Noahide Laws, plus modern convention for women old enough to be your mother or grandmother, and Jesus' love and mercy. Oddly, He does not demand near as much of me as you might do, being God, and knowing my heart.

Like all of the Christians out there that truly love Him, I am trying to learn to submit to Him, but I won't take your word for what I am to do if you cannot answer me outside of Paul. Because if Jesus and the other apostles didn't cover it, I am going to have to admit that Paul was in error.

And Paul is quite open about being a very faulty man, with a major pride problem. Having the same pride problem, and a huge thorn in my side to go with it, and understanding the very cosmopolitan Paul a little too well for my comfort, compared to the more earthy, and simplistic Apostles, like Peter and John, James and Matthew, who knew the Law of their fathers, and what Jesus taught them from an experiential point of view more than from an theoretical point of view, I can see how the Grace message resonates in our culture.

And since Paul is being questioned, inerrancy, or even the real belief in Paul's teachings won't do. So Gill's answer to my question won't do either.

And I have a lot more questions when the ones I first posed are answered, if anyone is willing to seriously answer them, and not make this a personal discussion.

The questions are seriously put forward.

I am asking questions about Paul, and only a few at a time, but I receive no true answers DOCUMENTED by Jesus or the 11 Apostles.

And now you know why I had to ask if Paul was not a false apostle, or merely a true commentator.

Because if Paul is not an Apostle, a lot of people are going to have to start taking Paul a tad less serious, and go back to Jesus.

At the moment, I can only consider Paul the greatest and best comentator on Scripture, Old and New Testament, and not an Apostle of God.

When the Bible was put together, it appears from this vantage point, having the entire book of the Bible, that the Christians of the time may have suppressed the true message of Jesus, and allowed in the Gospels of Matthew and John, and the non-Pauline epistles only where it supported or did not contradict Paul.

But I will be more than happy, and even relieved, if people will start answering the valid questions with supporting quotes that are not taken from Paul or Luke, since Luke was taught by Paul.

And yes, I will grant that Luke is a great historian of the Christian faith, his gospel is a great history of what was told by the all the others, but he is not God-Breathed upon.

And regretfully, I am expecting a firestorm from outraged Paulinites, but we are supposed to be Jesusites first.

Alas, Luke was taught, as far as we know, exclusively by Paul.

If Paul told it to Luke for the writing of Acts, it has no secondary witness, as Jesus and the 11 Apostles do.

I don't like putting Luke aside either, but we are not getting to Paul via Jesus, or the 11 Apostles, and their writings.

And yes, I am asking EVERYONE to look and see if Paul can be supported, point by point, solely through the 11 Apostles, because only they are not suspect.

I would also like to disallow 2nd Peter, as there are doubts about it's author.

If you are not supporting Paul's writings from Scriptures given by other than Paul, Paul's message of Grace through Faith, as well as his explanations of doctrine, and commands on organization, and Christian behavior, could well be a false doctrine.

It only takes one thing being unsupported in Paul to make it tainted, and thus, false and misleading.

Now we are to believe that this whole progression is one of answering questions being put to Forest while at the same time she is rejecting this and that, setting the parameters, framing the questions and statements with all kinds of rhetorical qualifiers and lastly that there is no agenda of her own rejection of Paul with a whole host of accusations and pragmatic reasonings? Poppycock! Malarkey!

Paul's pride, Paul's 'ego', '[i]the very cosmopolitan Paul a little too well for my comfort, compared to the more earthy, and simplistic Apostles, like Peter and John, James and Matthew[/i]' and Bubba's [i]'Paul may well have been earnest and thought he was doing the work of God, but throughout his writings i hear his ego coming through.[/i] Again, just who the hell do you people think you are? This is just the most incredulous and high minded nonsense, are you book critics or are you reading Dr. Seuss by mistake? You bet the tables are turned now. I would champion and have gone far out of the way here to stop the personal effrontery that often accompanies this space with the Brethren going after each other in this manner, but you have brought a reproach upon a mans character and integrity, fueled foolish notions on the unsuspecting and newer, weaker of those either amongst us or peering in from afar and think that it might go unchallenged, nay, even anticipating the outrage and going right on ahead with it anyway ...

No. This needs the strongest rebuke possible. Tell me, just what is it that makes anyone truly believable? Is it not in the very essence of character and integrity?

[i]The officers answered, Never man spake like this man.[/i] Joh 7:46

Is it being 'nice' so that we may contrast 'Paul' with Jesus or the rest?

[i]You brood of vipers! How can you speak good, when you are evil? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.[/i] Mat 12:34 ESV

The same 'cosmopolitan Paul' who turned on a dime and rejected a lifetimes worth of religious fervor calling it [i]Rubbish[/i], who anointed Paul? What kind of question is this to begin with? Is he not believable? Does his integrity and character get put to the test by a handful of wordlings, don't begin to tell me that this is not what is under assault here for that is exactly what is going on with this little mathematical questionnaire. To attempt to put Paul up against the rest by qualifying it with the 'breathed upon' is sheer foolishness ...

[i]1Co 15:5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve:
1Co 15:6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep.
1Co 15:7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles.
1Co 15:8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.
1Co 15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God.
1Co 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me.
1Co 15:11 Therefore whether it were [b]I or they[/b], so we preach, and so ye believed. [/i] 1Co 15:5

There is your answer from the self effacing and self debasing Paul, the least, the wretched man, the foolish man, the man who gave his very soul and his own body to ...

[i]2Co 11:23 Are they ministers of Christ? (I speak as a fool) I am more; in labours more abundant, in stripes above measure, in prisons more frequent, in deaths oft.
2Co 11:24 Of the Jews five times received I forty stripes save one.
2Co 11:25 Thrice was I beaten with rods, once was I stoned, thrice I suffered shipwreck, a night and a day I have been in the deep;
2Co 11:26 In journeyings often, in perils of waters, in perils of robbers, in perils by mine own countrymen, in perils by the heathen, in perils in the city, in perils in the wilderness, in perils in the sea, in perils among false brethren;
2Co 11:27 In weariness and painfulness, in watchings often, in hunger and thirst, in fastings often, in cold and nakedness.
2Co 11:28 Beside those things that are without, that which cometh upon me daily, the care of all the churches.
2Co 11:29 Who is weak, and I am not weak? who is offended, and I burn not?[/i]

Boasting? Ego? Tell me it is not your own boasting and ego to challenge one of the greatest hearts to ever utter words and malign his incredible character. He gave us his [i]bowels[/i] as it were and you would make mental hopscotch of it by playing fast and loose, flippant and absurdly disrespectful ... not a game? Whatever the intention, that is what is being made plain enough.

The whole construct of this idea in piting the apostles one against another, though they each independantly had their own work to do and speak as we have it is just increduolous. Earlier Ron brought forth these points;

[i]3.) Neither in the things themselves, nor in the way of their delivery or revelation, is there any advantage of the one sort of writings above the other. The things written in the epistles proceed from the same wisdom, the same grace, the same love, with the things which he spoke with his own mouth in the days of his flesh, and are of the same divine veracity, authority, and efficacy. The revelation which he made by his Spirit is no less divine and immediate from himself, than what he spoke unto his disciples on the earth. To distinguish between these things, on any of these accounts, is intolerable folly.

The writings of the evangelists are full unto their proper ends and purposes.

The pretence itself is wholly false; for there are as many pregnant testimonies given unto this truth in one alone of the evangelists as in any other book of the New Testament, — namely, in the book of John.[/i] ~ Owen

The 'canonization party'. Just what do you honestly think these men were about doing, like yourselves, finding nice 'fit's' to a popularity contest or appeasing the masses when the very Scriptures themselves are [i]demanding[/i] sheer honesty and integrity? You would like to speculate that this was not the very criteria for deciding that which was inerantly true versus that which was heretical. I defy your logic and reasoning that it was anything other than that. The reason we do believe in the whole counsel and the inerrancy of the scriptures as given, codified and endued by and through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is because they are self proclaiming. Their character, earnestness and integrity are self explanatory. If you are finding trouble with something that doesn't fit your paradigm then the onus is on [i]you[/i] to come under them, not they being put to your test of logistics. I must ask what does it say to the character and integrity that finds ourselves in the post of judges without humility. It is certainly one thing to say "I do not understand" and quite another to make it seem so all the while properly preparred to bring a defense, that is an agenda, not a disciple, one who is a [i]learner[/i].

If these are truly your questions ...

Is it appropriate for a man of God to 'be all things to all people'? That sounds like manpleasing, but it could be read differently.

Most certainly it could be read differently as that was the intention in the first place, not to be retched from it's context. That's not a question, it's a veiled accusation and not worthy of a response.

Many things that the Catholic Church latched on to have to do with Paul.

Which means squat. Its no different than discarding Jesus Christ because the crusades got it all wrong or taking the Koran's point of view because they did likewise.

His Hierarchy of Bishops and Elders;

Problem being ... ? That his was a continuing role of establishment as the early church began, there is nothing in this despite all the abuses thereafter.

His unfortunate words against a women speaking in Church, when it was actually a Synagogue,(and Synagogues are very noisy places.)even though many women have spoken for God in the past. Still, Paul's words have been used against women for centuries...heavens, how many women have been killed for disagreeing with a man, much less a priest?

Now we get to the heart of the matter and your prerogative, namely "unfortunate". It comes down to the same old, repeated agenda that you have fostered here in the past, that you just do not like hearing what has been stated and rebel against the spiritual and natural consequences that are afforded you. You will not accept your role as a woman and wish to transgress authority as it is given by God and to your dislike expressed through Paul. Though he takes us back to established principles of created beings in Adam and Eve you would wedge the wisdom of this world, the feminism and liberal casting off of your own makeup to supplant and usurp the way things are supposed to be. And it is a sad commentary on where we find ourselves in this day and age, woman lording over men, disputing with them and setting themselves up as equals in their very DNA which is contrary and decidedly purposeful by God Himself. Your argument is there and it grieves profoundly that the very beauty and attributes given to women are cast back behind the back so that if many had their druthers would be out riding bare breasted slaughtering pigs with spears in their contorted and perverted understandings, as they once did. Today, the only difference is in more subdued policy and the strange overlooking of what morals we do have left, one would be arrested in most places short of San Francisco ... Take it harshly, chuck it in the garbage can, I couldn't care less except for those here peering into these matters. Am using some hyperbole to press the point home, that inwardly there is still so much rebellion that the out-workings of it are all around us, in subtle ways and in more obvious. "[i]Paul's words have been used against women for centuries[/i]" and women have used Paul's words against intention as you yourself have done, so just where does the fault lie? We are full circle back to blaming the messenger, why not apply the same logic to ...

Mat 15:25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.
Mat 15:26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.

What's the difference? Jesus can be 'cut some slack' in context but Paul is berated? I cannot for certain and will not give anything but a 'perhaps-ed' opinion on the matter, but I am well convinced that Paul laid down these rules for very good reason and I do find it highly ironic that too often some women are proving the very point of the matter, that they ought to be silent ... Again just frank opinion but I have to wonder if some of the very disputings, similar to these here are what propelled him to lay down this 'law' in the first place, that things were getting out of hand, that women were usurping their roles, not that he set a precedence before a predicament.

Lastly, there is often a coming to the rescue after someone starts a fire in the kitchen, complains of the heat and then expects someone else to come clean up the mess. You just cannot have it both ways. If you are going to bring the heat don't come in her defending the fire-starter with whatever predicaments one finds themselves in, it has nothing to do with the situation at hand and is just as much an undermining and grievous trick to make things personal when the fire got started and the full capacity is suddenly changed after the fire extinguishers are brought in to put out the flames.

Even if it does undermine somewhat of what has been said here and I truly hate this age of ... political correctness and forced niceties, it may have more to do with the constraints placed by no fault of anyone on their own, just the combined maladjusted spirituality of the day coupled with the misconstruing of words and intentions of those things brought forth in this setting ... I must therefore digress to the [i]what I am not saying[/i] business. It dishevels me to even have to bring any of this up, the irony of even Paul's' [i]boasting[/i] which he called foolish and I likewise, but if anything there be of a track record here it is my profound love of the Brethren of all stripes and genders. If I am to be truly honest, my weakness is with women and their sheer beauty. All of their makeup (not of the face type). If I was not a sinful man I must wonder just how differently the collusion and dance with the flesh, the inherent danger of [i]looking[/i] might be. You must understand that I have a even higher respect for women as they [i]are[/i], as they are created and for the Christian woman ... Oh can you not see it? The higher nobility, the very pure essence of ...

Tit 2:5 To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

1Pe 3:1 Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
1Pe 3:2 While they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.
1Pe 3:3 Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel;
1Pe 3:4 But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price.
1Pe 3:5 For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
1Pe 3:6 Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.

Let me just say that this has been wrecked by both men and woman alike. All the pure elements. Abuse and manipulation on the one hand and usurping on the other. I know this is well redundant but there is a power in silence and contentment, in fewer words that can cut through the hardest heart from a woman that a man will never be able to mimic. It is Gods [i]way![/i] Why do we not rather champion it and uphold it, foster it and appeal to it in it's incredible spiritual logic? Rather than buttressing up against it, repelling and rebelling, accusing Paul or anyone else for that matter of these incredible, profound attributes given by God. Look again to the women of the scriptures, how they interacted with the Lord, with the disciples, with each other. What of their character and integrity, conduct? These are the things that ultimately matter and spell us before this world gone mad, we will never be any kind of witness against it nor for the Lord without them.

1Pe 2:12 Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation.

Oh, there is something very sinister indeed here ... Either you yourself are being sucked right into it Forrest or the devil himself is writing these little trivialities ...

The Road to Damascus

In Chapter Nine of the Book of Acts, Luke, a Physician and Saul’s traveling companion, recounts how Saul encounters the Risen Lord Jesus Christ while on the “Road to Damascus” to persecute the Church there.

“And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.” (ACTS 9:3-8)

Curiously, the phrase “kick against the pricks” is found nowhere else in scripture.

Intention: Suspicion. What pray else is not found nowhere else in the scripture ... [i]and Judas went and hanged himself[/i], must not have happened according to this logic.

The phrase this “Lord” speaks ...

What? The whole of this is already under an assumption and a sinister insinuation ...

...

to Saul was written four hundred and fifty years earlier by the Greek poet, Aeschylus, in his mythological work "Prometheus Bound". Here, the Titan Oceanus says,

Such punishment, Prometheus, is the wage.
But thou, not yet brought low by suffering,
To what thou hast of ill would'st add far worse.
Therefore, while thou hast me for schoolmaster,
Thou shalt not kick against the pricks; the more
That an arch-despot who no audit dreads
Rules by his own rough will.

According to ancient Greek mythology, Prometheus was the rebellious god that brought fire to man. This displeased Zeus, who chained him to a rock where he suffered unimaginable torments for the rest of eternity.

Oceanus was the ancient Greeks’ Titan of the world’s saltwater bodies (seas and oceans). He is not to be confused with the ancient Greek god of the Mediterranean, Prometheus. Statues of Oceanus depict the upper half of his body as a muscular human torso, arms and a head adorned by a long beard and horns. His lower half consists of a scaly, fish-like, coiling tail. Please note that this particular titan holds a fish in one hand and a serpent in the other.

So tie it to some deity and use it to undermine the scriptures;

[b]it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks;[/b] or "to resist me", as the Arabic version renders it; and which is the sense of the phrase; it is a proverbial expression, taken from beasts that are goaded, who kick against the goads or pricks, and hurt themselves the more thereby; and Christ uses it, suggesting hereby, that should Saul go on to persecute him and his people, to oppose his Gospel ...

Yeah, Gill again.

The Lord appears to Saul as a “light from heaven”. But the Lord God of Heaven is not the only being that may sometimes appear as a being of light, as Saul elsewhere states,

“Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.” (II COR 11:14)

Oh the conspiracy and plotting, this is evil undermining from a devious mind...

Throughout our Lord’s earthly ministry He gave sight to the blind. Yet, according to Saul Jesus took away his sight.

And the Lord made, who was it again, deaf for a season ... ?

There is also a contradiction between two conflicting reports from the witnesses surrounding Saul on the road,

No. This is pure rubbish. Whoever this is asking these "questions" is up to no good and you ought to be able to see clearly through it. Veiled or not so veiled attempts like these are not stated in mind to an answer but towards an agenda, there is no getting around it.

“And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.” (ACTS 9:7)

“And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.” (ACTS 22:9)

In the first description of Saul’s event on the road, the men hear a voice but see nothing. In the second description, the men see a light, but hear nothing.

Misappropriated.

[b]hearing a voice[/b], but seeing no [b]man[/b]
[b]saw indeed the [u]light[/u][/b] .... but they heard not the voice [b]of him that spake to me[/b]

This is not difficult to understand. But the 'author' here is contradicting his\\her own self. In the first account, it is not stated they saw 'nothing' but [i][b]no man[/b][/i]. In the second, hearing a voice and hearing a voice intelligibly are two different things ...

[i]The people therefore, that stood by, and heard it, said that it thundered: others said, An angel spake to him.[/i] Joh 12:29

Thus, during the early hours of his conversion,

1. Saul hears a voice speaking the very same phrase, word for word, spoken by an ancient Greek titan nearly four-and-a-half centuries earlier;

1. The devil insinuates that there is something of a comparison.

2. Saul sees a brilliant light which he later admits could very well have been the Devil;

This would be hilarious if it wasn't so laced with ... Forrest, is the devil writing you love letters? Honestly, I am not now taking shot's at you but whoever this is needs to work on his polish and disguise, this isn't even clever trying to tie the two together ...

3. Two conflicting reports emerge concerning the events that transpired that fateful night.

Ah, no. Not conflicting ...

It is improbable that our Omniscient Lord would speak, word-for-word, the words of a pagan deity, such as Oceanus, to Saul the Apostle since God’s says of pagan gods,

“Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.” (EXO 20:3-6)

Twisting the intentions, retching the scriptures from their context ... pathetic ...

But this is not the only place in the Bible where Saul communes with pagan deity.

Communes! Now that's clever ... :-o

At Mars’ Hill, he equates the Father with the pagan “Unknown God” of the Romans.

Please ...

“Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious. For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.” (ACTS 17:22-23)

Later on in his epistles he calls Him the “invisible God”. ...

Sigh ...

At this point it is just check out time. None of this is questioning with any intent at an answer. It's springs and motivations are sinister and of no purpose other than to bring Paul and the scriptures into disrepute. If the rest of this follows along the same lines, then what is being presented is fit for the dung hill, the rubbish heap, the very fires of the pit that it came from. That you Forrest, would bring these in here as serious inquiry and your own misgivings and hypocritical murmurings as you continue to side step your own logical deductions before you even hear a response ...

This is isn't sincerity and I would far rather take you at your word, but that is not in any way what you are conveying. This is an axe to grind, not a sword to sharpen. I pray you loose yourself from the bondage of this nonsense.

Forrest,

I have engaged with you in the past on the thread regarding women usurping authority, keeping silent,etc. I discerned in your writings something that made my spirit uneasy.

I have just read this thread from beginning to end so I am not going off half-cocked as it were. This thread and the previous thread I mentioned tell me exactly what is going on for you right now.

A little back story from me, around four years ago I was dating a divorced woman. I was a nominal Christian at best (unconverted to be honest). Everytime I opened the bible I would open to "A man that marries a divorced woman commits adultery". I did not like that scripture, it was not what I wanted to hear. I sought out other scriptures hoping for an exception. There was not one. Not satisfied with this, I started consulting man and not God. Still nothing. Then I went to my next door neighbour who was I woman I believed to be a Christian and posed my problem to her. She dug around her house for a small book that dealt with the exact question I was asking. And the book told me what I wanted to hear, I can't remember what it was called or even what it said for that matter. But it was enough.

I married the divorced woman in February 2004 and she left me in February 2007. At first I was praying to be reconciled to her, because I believed that was the right thing to do. It wasn't until I attended a mennonite church and told the pastor of my situation and asked if I should continue praying for reconciliation. He looked at me without batting an eye and said "No, that relationship is sinful being that it is adultery." The words penetrated my heart like a knife, the scripture came flooding back to my mind and I knew he was right.

This is what I belive about your situation. You despise what Paul wrote about woman in his epistles. Just as I hated Jesus's words about marrying a divorced woman.

If you will be honest with yourself, you will know what I am saying is true. You love the idea of being a Reverend, it is even included in your username. I pray you will be wiser than I was. I persisted in my folly and self delusion. You are not a reverend or a pastor even if you have a paper that man gave you stating otherwise.

Submit to the word and unto the Lord. Our flesh would glory in throwing about 3/4's of the bible in the trash can and maybe just keep the stuff about prosperity and heaven and God's love. But as you know it does not work like that. Every word of it is meant to be there.

I know what you are going through, but please receive correction while it is still called Today.

Murray

Words ...

[i]Defiance.
Deviousness
Deceitful[/i]

Many others come to mind, rebellion ... But I do want to strike at the roots here. Leaving off with mixed feeling last night, compassion came into play yet the defiance at hand, are we speaking of one or the other? That is, one who is caught unaware or wide awake?

[b]Deceit
DECE'IT,[/b]

1. Literally, a catching or ensnaring. Hence, the misleading of a person; the leading of another person to believe what is false, or not to believe what is true, and thus to ensnare him; fraud; fallacy; cheat; any declaration, artifice or practice, which misleads another, or causes him to believe what is false.

My lips shall not speak wickedness, nor my tongue utter deceit. Job 27.

2. Stratagem; artifice; device intended to mislead.

They imagine deceits all the day long. Psa 38.

3. In scripture, that which is obtained by guile, fraud or oppression.

Their houses are full of deceit. Jer 5. Zeph. I.

4. In law, any trick, device, craft, collusion, shift, covin, or underhand practice, used to defraud another.

There is an undermining that needs to be addressed here in the fullest measure. The little patience being shown towards the frame work that all of this is couched in is right and true. This forum has, at it's core an earnestness that it is fueled by though that may not always be in evidence given any particular set of circumstances.

What is in evidence here, throughout this posting will serve as a warning and a caution to the unsuspecting and the gullible alike. Don't take the thought too much to heart, we all have been or currently are being swayed by the wisdom of this world, the fleshly states of our minds and the craftiness of the devil. To say this much often lends towards flights of fancy and painting a demon under every tree. Even our penchant to future cast 'prophetically' and derive too much 'news' out of the news and make sport of it through scripture is endemic of the same underpinnings ... [i]swayed[/i].

Perhaps that is the better word, it is a devious word in conjunction with the inherent subtlety's that can permeate the thoughts unaware.

2Co 2:11 Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices.

Do allow the fuller context as it applies to restoration, but my intention is to hone in on our ignorance and 'bewitching';

Gal 3:1 O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?

This, I am afraid is what is highly probable by intaking this cyanide into the system as it is here. Note the similarities to the disgruntled atheist who jumps through the scriptures attempting to find "[i]Aha[/i]!" moments of contradiction and then presents them as stand alone case studies. Note the similarities to those statements used of the devil himself to supplant scripture against the Lord of the scriptures. Being this is an age of the other side of the coin, surely there are the agnostic or atheist that may well be seeking truth wholeheartedly.

So how to ascribe intention here? It is it's own evidence. There is a craftiness to place an intention against a question and call them equal. A statement disguised in this cloak is prearranged intentional or not only to draw in and be drawn off. It is presented as an inquiry but has a presupposition and that is why it is often termed a 'straw man', something set up and then dared to be knocked back down again.

And so some of us have set about to do just this. Expose it for what it is inherently at it's foundational level and tear down the structure before the building is erected.

There is something very diabolical to suggest, at it's onset that something needs to be proved by way of extraction, in this case Paul without his own defense. If the same logic was applied to Jesus, putting him in doubt as a preposition, what have we? We have exactly that which was mentioned earlier here, and that is planting seeds of doubt into the minds of the unsuspecting. Precisely the attempt curiously forwarded by the devil to the Lord. It is an antidote that [i]suggests[/i], another very key word here, that the preposition is first true and therefore must be proven wrong somewhere later on down the line, after the supposed question has been answered. It's a trick however it is motivated.

So we have an equivalent in suggesting that Paul is isolated by not being one of the 'breathed on" ones and curiously convoluted further by making a mistake in simultaneously calling all of them 'just men' at one point and later on making a distinction, that the 'breathed upon' are perfected and their words hold true while the others are faulty. Yet Paul rebukes Peter well after the fact, of course the logic being that this is of no recourse since Paul is under suspicion to begin with and his own words are not qualifiable.

Interesting how tangled this all can become by not cutting the tree down at its roots. You can find yourself in almost a dilemma trying to sort it out, it has a mechanism that springs like a trap, but I will state that this is a trap pre-baited and set by the framework and construct it is presented in. Again, note the similarities to the bait\\trap used of the adversary in tempting the Lord.

Chucking the brains at the expense of believing only as you are admonished. Another ad hominen presupposition. You are lazy, unstudied, you accept just what you are told without question. It is a preemptive strike meant to disparage and often put one on the defensive. Again it is laced with a vindictive, an assumption and attempts to skirt or throw one offside to accept a presupposition on it's own merits.

These are the starting points that we have to guard against in conversing with those for whatever the reasonings are set about to do. Well before being sucked down into a didactic mental chess match. [i]Why[/i] do you ask? Is the question that ought to be first-most in our minds. Is it to forward an agenda, a construct or an honest inquiry set about to an end of earnest understanding?

If we truly stop to think about it we believe some rather fantastical things by a matter of faith and as it is written. Let me hover on that a moment. [i]It is written[/i]. All of a sudden we are face with a dilemma of logic and faith, we are at the point of [i]believability[/i]. If we do not have good reason to believe [i]it is written[/i] then perhaps the supposition is true after all, we have chucked our fleshly brains in the garbage can and have been led astray to esoteric, abstract myths and fables, we believe because we want them to be ... believable.

But that is not why the majority of us are here, digging down further and further, ever on and on to greater and profoundly deeper understandings, finding the more we do in fact know internally, intuitively if I may, the more we are in awe and wonder at what lies still ahead and that which is far past our understanding. Even for some us, so far, that we now understand incredibly the truth of;

[i]O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out![/i] Rom 11:33

And go figure, it would be Paul to put it to us in this fashion. I am about to be highly redundant as you might have suspected. We believe ultimately by [i]authenticity[/i] and the only safe guard we have, the only provability is whether or not there is something tangible to place our trust, our minds, our hearts and souls into. And that leaves us with the only elements that are quantifiable towards a believability that is authentic and true ...

Character, integrity, honesty. What makes Jesus Christ believable is His entirety. All of what He said, all of what He did, all that has been captured into written verse ([i]It is written[/i]. I still, to this very hour marvel at how the same Man who is both the epitome of compassion can level a Pharisee, a hypocrite, look straight through a praying man under a tree, answer the profoundest question ever uttered; "[i]What is truth?[/i]" without a stitch of malice, a hint of pride or any other thing that would be forwarded to any other of us created beings. [i]Blameless. Spotless.[/i]

I could wax on eloquently for endless pages just to think on these matters. There was a time when I used to entertain the thought of how impossible it is that any imagination ever created could have come up with such a Man. I believe I have posited in the past that we could take the greatest minds that ever lived, all that are presently with an intake of oxygen, put them all in a think tank and you could never have created such a mythical person. It (he rather) would be tainted and biased one way or the other, he would be flawed, suspect or wrong merits associated other than sheer honesty and integrity. Can you see where I am going with all this? Certainly in His day and in ours alike the attempts to punch holes in Him go ever on and on, but I dare the earnest inquirer to touch his character and integrity, it is here that all is spelled out before us. This where the Dominic Crossans of the world, the liberal theolog's and the spurious re-writers of history, the Davinci Code and all the new age re-crafting is fully up against it, against an immovable attribute, not one, but many.

This matter is of the utmost importance! What makes a man credible? What makes the now maligned and suspected Paul honorable, believable, [i]authentic[/i]? It is these very same foundational qualities.

I was almost in a great hurry to stress this and feared I might even forget, but may I put something to all of us just here? There is a vast difference in us and the Lord. He is without reproach and we are ... full of it! Do take that as both Freudian and derogatory. We are dirt bags (Check Genesis for confirmation), confused, contradictory, prone to failure even at this stage of being yet on our way with the unbelievable invasion of our own being with the Holy Spirit, the [i]One and the same[/i] Spirit! Mind that!

But towards our character and integrity, our own believability. Our words indict us far too often, we fail to live up to our expressions though we often mean well. But what makes us worthy of a hearing in the first place? Our bible knowledge or the often opposite, simplistic, child-like faith, some combination of both? Or is there something more profoundly telling of us, some element that cut's through despite ourselves? Am not about to get needle in the hay stack deep into what we are able to accomplish without the Holy Spirit or if we can indeed do any such thing [i]apart[/i] from the Lord. (John 15:5). But may I forward something that came into my thoughts late last night?

Our very failures, when they are frankly admitted, our earnest humility in admission, our sincere repentance, these are perhaps even more attributable to our authenticity than our good deeds and our right understanding. Our Holiness that we are ever supposed to be after, that incredibly maligned word, to even utter it conjuring up the attached legalisms and abstract sophistry, "piety" that is more defined as [i]pie-in the sky[/i] frankly ... It is heart honesty that will spell us, there is our integrity, character and believability, there authenticity does its own work and its own speaking. And the scriptures themselves hide nothing from us of this as we well know. Noah and Moses, yes Saul turned Paul, Peter and on and on. Warts, bruises, bumps and all.

With all my heart believe that if even some of the recent high profile failings of ministers and preachers out in he greater regions of this crass Christendom would truly accept, admit and then do the very thing necessary, step down [i]permanently[/i] and, alas that grand phrase uttered by our own Philologos comes to mind ...

[i]When their repentance becomes as notorious as their sin[/i]

If we had [i]that[/i], my God what might the difference be? What I was indeed musing on was the paradox of how this kind of earnest [i]proves[i/] out character and integrity, it may be shame and reproach at the beginning but coming clean draws it is own merits and if anyone this earnest of heart and soul draws me like a magnet and because I am so well versed in it by experience. Then the heart in earnestness goes out to them. Then we are partakers in their sorrows and encouragers unto restoration. Now we have a true, quantifiable forgiveness. Now we have an authenticity that cannot be shredded. Character spells nobility and honor, integrity and authenticity.

And ultimately, believability.

This is the testing of all things that we have to do with. This is the Berean nobility. This is the ground of which we stand upon to thwart spurious logic and diabolical efforts at undermining. This is what makes Paul the Apostle an apostle and untouchable in his authenticity and likewise the 11 and does not set them at odds one against the other. This is the essence and purity of what we believe. Don't you believe any other thing, don't you dare. Don't be deceived.

I cant think of the man that was martyred for printing bibles. Was it Tyndale?
Anyway I think the book of Hebrews alone would be worth martyrdom......and we are not sure of the author.

Are the unsure books in danger too?

David

Ok we've loaded the guns and shot everyone down. Now it's time to get to the root of this thread. It's time for Forrest to bring forth her grievances with Paul. What are the scriptures that your having trouble with? Lets have them on display here so we can examine them. We are not getting anywhere, we are just going back and forth in our zeal.

Have you read through or tracked along the enirety of the posting? Go back a page and you will find the questions, if you could call them that. Don't make light of this.

Edit; Missed this;

I haven't read the entire thread, I read bits and pieces of it. I was commenting on the title, not so much what Webrev was actually getting at.

If that is still the case, then go back and read through it before making comment brother, this is not a trivial matter at stake here.

If that is still the case, then go back and read through it before making comment brother, this is not a trivial matter at stake here.

Yes, there's nothing trivial about this. People are tempted to come on to this thread without first reading what has already been posted. I guess they're allured by the catchy title. It seems they've already made up their minds as to what needs to be done and how it should be handled. It isn't about "shooting people down" as much as it is guarding against error in a forthright manner. The purpose, from the very inception of this thread, was a calculated effort to cast doubt on scripture by blighting Paul. Her mind was already made up - probably for years now - and she is simply "going public" in the hopes of spreading the poison to gain converts. The long, red diatribe she posted bears witness to the premeditated intent. All her ducks are in a row and she's calling us out to defend the Word of God against a diabolical straw man predicated upon twisted scripture.

We need to thank God for a moderator who recognizes that - and holds nothing back.

Brother Paul

Dorcas,

Let her do her own speaking and defending, this was not done in a corner. Besides, your intrusion and overloading of the forum lately is becoming something of a nuisance. Please, slow down and back off.

I just found this reading, I think it fits here. Although this is just a small part of what today's 'ministers' would possibly write to Paul.

[u][b]WHAT IF PAUL WERE ALIVE TODAY?[/b][/u]

Dear Mr. Paul:

I have your application for missionary appointment before me, and will be as frank as possible concerning your qualifications as a foreign missionary. We have to be very careful in choosing our missionaries, and our Missions Board has reviewed your case thoroughly. We have decided that it would be unwise to send you to the foreign field for the following reasons:

1.

It has come to our attention that you are doing secular work on the side. We do not feel that making tents and a full time ministry go together very well. It seems that you do not have enough experience in trusting the Lord for your income. You should make up your mind whether you want to preach or continue your profession.

2.

Your previous actions have been very rash and unseemly for a minister. We learned that in a public meeting you opposed Dr. Simon Peter, an esteemed minister with an excellent reputation. We also hear that you argued so violently with some of our ministers that a special council meeting had to be called at Jerusalem to prevent a serious split in the churches. We frown on such radicalism. For your own good, I am enclosing a copy of Daius' Carnegus book on "How to Win Jews and Influence Greeks."

3.

We understand that you do not agree with all the points in our constitution and by-laws, and do not even believe in all our doctrines. In checking back, we discovered your Christian education consisted of a three-year course in Arabia . We find that the Arabian school has not been approved by our accreditation board and we hear that there are some strange unknown doctrines being taught in that school. We also hear a rumor that you are a snake handler. Such a reputation could only hurt the true cause of Christ and the Church. We don't have all the details on that episode at Melita, but we understand you claim immunity to harm from snakebites through a promise of Christ. It has come to the attention also that you preach much about "the Power of God" and the "gifts of the Spirit." Also that you speak in tongues a great deal. Surely you realize that such as this only drives off the better class of people, and attracts only the riff-raff.

4.

We see here that you have a jail record in several places. If this is true, it puts you in a bad light, for our denomination has always stood for a high standard of holiness, and I fear it would damage our reputation to have someone representing us that had served time in jails and prisons. Frankly, Mr. Paul, we seriously doubt you could have been innocent and the judge wrong in so many cases. It just doesn't look right.

5.

It seems that you are a troublemaker Mr. Paul. Several businessmen of Ephesus have written us that you were the cause of severe loss of business to them and even stirred mob violence. You must learn to cultivate the friendship and influence of men such as these. We also have some details of a lurid "over the wall in a basket" episode at Damascus, plus a stoning at Lystra, and several other violent actions taken against your ministry. Haven't you ever suspected that conciliatory behavior and gentler words might gain you more friends? We have never condoned such sensationalism in the ministry. This is just not the type of ministers that we send out. We have learned through channels that following some trouble with a preacher on the island of Cyprus; you had to change your name. This does not seem to us to be conduct becoming to the ministry.

6.

You admitted in your application that in the past you neglected such needy fields as Bithynia, just because "the Spirit didn't lead that way," and that you undertook a hazardous journey on the strength of a dream you had at Troas . Mr. Paul, surely you don't expect us to go along with such flimsy and fantastic excuses for your seemingly purposeless wanderings. Many times you did not stay long enough, in our opinion, to get a church established. You left your converts many times without even a pastor to guide them, and without setting the church in order in some good fundamental denomination. We hear also from Troas that you preach too long, one sermon lasting almost twenty-four hours, even to the extent that a young man fell asleep and was seriously injured. We understand that you claim to have restored his life and raised him from the dead by falling on him and embracing him. What nonsense! If the man was injured, you should have called in a competent physician.

7.

We understand from your own home church that you could not get along with your fellow ministers, that John Mark, a commendable young man and nephew of one of our leading ministers, had to leave your party in the middle of a journey, and that you had a violent quarrel with gentle, good natured Barnabas. Now these men are well thought of in Jerusalem and we wonder why you are always having trouble with your fellow workers? We have notarized affidavits from three fine brethren, Diotrephes, Demas, and Alexander, to the effect that it is impossible for them to cooperate with either you or your program. From what we hear, you seem to have a self-exalted spirit, boasting about your revelations and that God has chosen you to reveal some "new Mystery." Can't you realize that any new truth that is to be revealed would come through Headquarters to the recognized, more mature brethren, and that after it had been checked by our Procedure and Doctrine Committee that we would establish it? As you see, Mr. Paul, we feel definitely after close scrutiny of your case, that you are undoubtedly the most unqualified applicant we have ever seen, and my advice for you is to find a church where you can Work in harmony, and use your past education as perhaps a Sunday School teacher. I hope I have prevented you from making a terrible mistake in your life.

Head Minister
First Christian Church

Dear Jeannette,

I am not in the least saying that the works of Paul are not inspired...I believe that they are. I merely do not believe the Bible to be perfectly inerrent, and Paul, for all his brilliance, is not Jesus, our Lord.

I became very aggravated in the last week or so when I saw repeatedly a use of Paul's works and guidance to the Gentile Church as being some how seperate from, but equal, or even superior to the ministry of Jesus, and I am merely trying to document all my thoughts about this matter properly before attempting to answer anyone further.

No one wanted to hear what I was saying, nor even what I was getting at, and for that I blame myself, for allowing myself to be pushed farther and faster by everyone's ire at me daring to question Paul, or the Bible as being inerrent.

I am also a bit weary of being charged, tried, condemned, and hung in effigy as each person reads from post to post, and I cannot keep up with you all. I have answered posts as calmly and politely as I could under the circumstances, but I really never expected this reaction to what was an academically posed set of questions. I actually had the hope of scholarly answers, but I see now that I was mistaken to expect such a thing.

I will finish my thoughts on the matter as quickly as I can, and bring them to SI, but I will not speak again until I am ready, and that may take a few days, or perhaps a week. I will not again act in a rushed manner, publishing questions sent to me without a clear explanation of my thoughts, in an attempt to keep everyone answered, even as I am preparing a considered response.

As to the rest of the brethern and sistern, I appreciate your dislike of the topic, but the topic is none the less valid in my eyes, and is of concern to me for not only my spiritual well being, but for yours as well.

Blessings,

Forrest

I am also a bit weary of being charged, tried, condemned, and hung in effigy as each person reads from post to post, and I cannot keep up with you all. I have answered posts as calmly and politely as I could under the circumstances, but I really never expected this reaction to what was an academically posed set of questions. I actually had the hope of scholarly answers, but I see now that I was mistaken to expect such a thing.

Be sure of this, it is not [i]you[/i] that is being tried here but your question\\reasonings. If you cannot well recognize the duplicity of predetermined dismissal in your '[i]academically posed set of questions[/i]' you most certainly will not find answers, how can you when the framework is such that you have no expectations of receiving any?

If you are couching the same devious minded reasonings that you say were put to you as "questions" though they also are straw men, as likewise "scholarly", there is no other response than [i]rubbish[/i].

The reason you are receiving no scholarly answers may well be that you are not in the midst of 'scholars of theology' but Brethren of the Spirit, the one and same Spirit of truth, that same Spirit that demands integrity and honesty not slashing and thrashing through the scriptures to support some fallacious reasoning from his or her fallen mind.

You have shown nothing but defiance to the questions posed to you throughout, the very starting points of authenticity and believability, foundational aspects. You would again overlook and posit as a first insinuation that Paul is already under suspicion and to your mind as actual and factual. That is what you have set out as a presupposition, read your own words!

What you fail to take note of is just where this all leads to. Who's next up on the chopping block, John? Perhaps [i]he[/i] was deceived also, what with his esoteric meanderings of a "Revelation of Jesus Christ"... ?

Your reasonings are in a liberal and rebellious stance against revealed truth and you would tear the seamless cloth that it is by trying to put the apostles and disciples at odds one to another. It is diabolical and if you think there is to be no outrage at it makes your deception only more pronounced.

As to the rest of the brethern and sistern, I appreciate your dislike of the topic, but the topic is none the less valid in my eyes, and is of concern to me for not only my spiritual well being, but for yours as well.

Don't fool yourself, "our" spiritual well being is not what is at stake here but yours and that is why, precisely why this has even been allowed to continue. Step out of your paradigm and look at this from the concern side that those who love your soul are looking at it from, I [i]beg[/i] you. This is a snare of the adversary to detach you from historical orthodoxy and I mean in the very essence of it, the spiritual authenticity.

Forrest, if anything, step away from this for a season. Go back and read Christian history, read the Puritans, not because it is my "cup of tea" or anyone else's for that matterm, but just to see if not perhaps these things have taken you unaware.

Mike said:Don't fool yourself, "our" spiritual well being is not what is at stake here but yours and that is why, precisely why this has even been allowed to continue. Step out of your paradigm and look at this from the concern side that those who love your soul are looking at it from, I beg you. This is a snare of the adversary to detach you from historical orthodoxy and I mean in the very essence of it, the spiritual authenticity.

I agree with our moderators... and these scriptures that back up the assesment of this whole thread:Titus 3:10 - 11 (NASB) 10Reject a factious man after a first and second warning, 11knowing that such a man is perverted and is sinning, being self-condemned.

2 Corinthians 11:3 (NASB) 3But I am afraid that, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, your minds will be led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.

Proverbs 30:5 - 6 (NKJV) 5 Every word of God is pure; He is a shield to those who put their trust in Him. 6 Do not add to His words, Lest He rebuke you, and you be found a liar.

James 3:17 (NKJV) 17But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy.

Clint

Hi everyone.

I do not know if this question is still wanting but I wanted to offer my understanding of it.

There was a question in regards to Romans chapter 3 verse 3 where Paul writes:

"For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?"

So what is Paul's "lie" here?

I think Paul is writting about [b]our unrighteousness[/b](verse 5) in failing to keep God's laws. Look back in chapter 2 also, verses 17-25. I think that builds up to this.

Later on I think he uses this same thing to assert that God is just in [b]justifying[/b] us through faith, apart from the works of the law.

I hope this will be helpfull,

Chris

[b]To designate March 26, 1991, as `Education Day, U.S.A.'. (Enrolled as Agreed to or Passed by Both House and Senate)[/b]

--H.J.Res.104--

H.J.Res.104

[b][i]One Hundred Second Congress of the United States of America[/i][/b]

[i]AT THE FIRST SESSION[/i]

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday, the third day of January,

one thousand nine hundred and ninety-one

Joint Resolution

To designate March 26, 1991, as `Education Day, U.S.A.'.

Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was founded;

Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws;

Whereas without these ethical values and principles the edifice of civilization stands in serious peril of returning to chaos;

Whereas society is profoundly concerned with the recent weakening of these principles that has resulted in crises that beleaguer and threaten the fabric of civilized society;

Whereas the justified preoccupation with these crises must not let the citizens of this Nation lose sight of their responsibility to transmit these historical ethical values from our distinguished past to the generations of the future;

Whereas the Lubavitch movement has fostered and promoted these ethical values and principles throughout the world;

Whereas Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, leader of the Lubavitch movement, is universally respected and revered and his eighty-ninth birthday falls on March 26, 1991;

Whereas in tribute to this great spiritual leader, `the rebbe', this, his ninetieth year will be seen as one of `education and giving', the year in which we turn to education and charity to return the world to the moral and ethical values contained in the Seven Noahide Laws; and

Whereas this will be reflected in an international scroll of honor signed by the President of the United States and other heads of state: Now, therefore, be it

[i]Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled[/i], That March 26, 1991, the start of the ninetieth year of Rabbi Menachem Schneerson, leader of the worldwide Lubavitch movement, is designated as `Education Day, U.S.A.'. The President is requested to issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to observe such day with appropriate ceremonies and activities.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.

[url=http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c102:H.J.RES.104.ENR:]The Library of Congress[/url]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

There are two different things going on here. One, the content and derivatives of these 'Noahide laws' themselves, the interpretations thereof and so forth. As it applies to that which was raised here earlier fair enough if they wish to be appealed to and we would strongly disagree, that is to just the stating of them, it is appreciated for even I had gone right past the comment. However ...

It is not common knowledge that the U.S. House of Representatives passed a Joint Resolution on March 20, 1991 by which the [u]Noahide Laws became Public Law #102-14[/u], after passage by both Houses of Congress and the signature of former President George Bush. A Rabbi Schneerson, the messianic leader of a worldwide ultra-orthodox sect known as The Lubavitch Movement, as being responsible for this unknown [b]law[/b].

That is completely [i]false[/i]. It is [i]not[/i] a law as a plain reading of what it's purposes are is contained and explained within the resolution itself.

This needs to stop. Enough with these frivolous conspiracy's.