It's not a coincidence Paul's epistles made it into the Bible. I believe everything Paul wrote down was inspired and moved by the Holy Spirit even if the word said it was Paul's own wisdom. If God did not inspired or moved his spirit through these mens in the Bible, it would not make it into His 66 books (e.g., Gospel of Thomas). I believe God is powerful to craft an infallible book, the Bible.
Except of course when Paul actually says "the rest is from me, not from the Lord " ?
“knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”
2 Peter 1:20-21 KJVA
Well that actually makes my case doesn't it? If Paul knew he was writting the word of God, why would he even dare to inject his own opinion into it, unless of course he did not agee with what Peter said in 2 Peter 1:20-21. But of course if that were the case either Paul or Peter was not inpsired by God then, correct? The likely possibility if want to assume that Paul's intentions and motives were pure, is that Paul did not really believe at the time that he was writing what would become "the sacred scripture".
I agree that it's not coincidence that his writings are in the Bible and it does not change my belief that the Bible as a whole is used by God to teach and inspire us. But for me it's not a simple black and white proposition that every single word in the Bible is the word of God. The Bible is man's recorded understanding of God and his dealing with his people. Much of man's understanding is insprired by God, but even Paul wrote that our understanding is not complete "For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known."
That is the whole point of God sending his own Spirit to indwell in us. The Holy Spirit came to inspire each of us individually and remind us of the words that Jesus spoke. The words of Jesus are the only words in the bible that I can take at face value as the direct words of God as Jesus was the only one who even claimed that the only words he spoke were God's words. By elevating our own interpretation of the Bible above the actual working of the Holy Spirit in our own Spirits, we are making an idol of the Bible. I believe that is one of the most significant mistakes that institutional Christianity has committed and a significant reason that institutional Christianity is so divided and un-unified. The institutional church has placed doctrine and dogma based on the interpretation of the Bible above the lving breathing relationship of every believer with the Spirit of God that is promised.
No amount of literary or theological gymnastics can make all the contradictions in the bible disappear. Even the accounts of Paul's conversion experience on the road to Damascus are not consistent within the Bible. Yes, God gave us the Bible so we would have a working understanding of the history of his covenant with his people. But God never intended the Bible to replace an actual spirit lead relationship with him.
So how do we know if soneone is being led by the Spirit of God? Jesus gave us two clues. One, he said they would know us by our love for one another. Two he said the Holy spirit would remind of us what he spoke...not what the apostles and the evangelist Paul spoke. Jesus never mentioned anything about correct doctrine and dogma being the sign of a true believer.
“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”
2 Timothy 3:16 KJVA
Circular reasoning at it's finest. Actually it's just another indicaton that Paul didn't even consider the fact he was writing the word of God at all times.
It seem to me you put all the Disciples above Paul just because they served Jesus face to face. I have to disagree, Paul's encounter with Christ was way more spiritual enlightened compared to most of the Disciples.
And the inconsistent accounts of his encounter check off many of the key points that Jesus gave as red flags of the appearance of false Christs.
This encounter changed Paul's destiny and the course of Christianity. Paul's testimony was amazing. He's a prime example of a true born again Christian. You can disagree with him all you want but he will always be a more inspirational evangelist/pastor than you will ever be.
Agreed! I already stated he was the single greatest evangelist in the history of the Church. But an evangelist does not perform the same function as an Apostle. An evangelist spreads the gospel and equips the saints to share their faith and be witnesses. Apostles alone are given the function of setting church doctrine and theology. Two different functions. When we try to use the writings of an evangelist to set doctrine and theology we put ourselves in danger of what Peter warned about.
Side question Todd. Look at this verse and let me know if Judas or Paul's name will be written among the other apostles.
“And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.”
Revelation 21:14 KJVA
Neither.... the book of Acts tells us that the disciples replaced Judas with Matthias, not Paul. It's poorly thought out assumptions like this that compound upon themselves and lead to bad theology and doctrine.