Was Paul A False Apostle And Were His Writings Correct?

Todd

Star
Joined
Apr 16, 2017
Messages
2,525
@Artful Revealer ....from the who would you talk to in heaven thread....
I would ask James what he really thought about Paul.
Why not ask Jesus? :p
I already asked him. I don't pray to dead saints so I haven't asked James yet:D
l guess he didn't reply back :p
To be truthful we are still in the middle of that conversation. As I am sure you know, Jesus often answered questions with another question...he rarely gave a direct straight forward answer, but he always lead the discussion to encourage people to seek and understand for themselves and guide them in the right direction. Answers are more life changing when we have to put some effort into finding them.

This forum serves as a place for me to "think out loud" and express in words the thoughts and ideas I am wrestling through. It's human nature when we make a radical change in our paradigm to follow a pendulum cycle. We swing from one extreme to another before the pendulum eventually comes to rest in the middle somewhere.

I believe my pendulum on the subject of Paul reached it's maximum swing a little while ago and it is back towards finding the middle ground. I do think Paul's writings were meant by God to be in the Bible as they bring important insight into the growth and evolution of Chrisitianity, both good and bad. I do think Paul was an incredibly gifted person and he was used by God to spread the gospel. But God uses imperfect people (like me) all the time to serve his purposes. Paul was not infallible, nor are his writings.

I do not believe the New Testament writers (except John when he wrote the book of Revelation) ever believed the letters they were writing would one day be considered the word of God. Paul himself makes this very clear many times in his writings. I do believe that James, Peter and John had significant theological/doctrinal differences with Paul. But nobody has perfect theology or doctrine. My presonal choice is to err on the side of those who walked with Jesus in the flesh and were discipled directly be Jesus. I am not satisfied with the standard convulted logic used to try to try to prove that the disciples and Paul were not at odds on many doctrinal issues. There is nothing new under the sun and the first century church did not agree on every point of doctrine just as the church today does not.

Again my personal conviction is that when the words credited to Paul appear to me to contradict the words of Jesus and the disciples I will always default to Jesus and the disciples over Paul. It does not mean that I think anyone who believes in Paul is not a Christian or not in fellowship with God. We can always agree to disagree and in the ages to come we will all find out the truth...hence my future question to James of how he really felt about Paul. It would not be a yes or no question and answer. It would be a true curiousity of how he viewed their doctrinal differences and what that meant as far as James' perspective on Paul's ministry as a whole. I can disagree with someone else's doctrine but still recognize that God is using them for his purposes. I'm begining to think that is how Peter, James and John might have viewed Paul.

I kind of look at like the book of Galatians and the Book of James was Paul and James version of how we debate doctrinal issues on this forum. Granted Paul and James has a much wider sphere of influence then we do and I doubt that anyone will be discussing our debates 2000 years from now!
 

The Zone

Star
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
3,165

JoChris

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,168
@Artful Revealer ....from the who would you talk to in heaven thread....





To be truthful we are still in the middle of that conversation. As I am sure you know, Jesus often answered questions with another question...he rarely gave a direct straight forward answer, but he always lead the discussion to encourage people to seek and understand for themselves and guide them in the right direction. Answers are more life changing when we have to put some effort into finding them.

This forum serves as a place for me to "think out loud" and express in words the thoughts and ideas I am wrestling through. It's human nature when we make a radical change in our paradigm to follow a pendulum cycle. We swing from one extreme to another before the pendulum eventually comes to rest in the middle somewhere.

I believe my pendulum on the subject of Paul reached it's maximum swing a little while ago and it is back towards finding the middle ground. I do think Paul's writings were meant by God to be in the Bible as they bring important insight into the growth and evolution of Chrisitianity, both good and bad. I do think Paul was an incredibly gifted person and he was used by God to spread the gospel. But God uses imperfect people (like me) all the time to serve his purposes. Paul was not infallible, nor are his writings.

I do not believe the New Testament writers (except John when he wrote the book of Revelation) ever believed the letters they were writing would one day be considered the word of God. Paul himself makes this very clear many times in his writings. I do believe that James, Peter and John had significant theological/doctrinal differences with Paul. But nobody has perfect theology or doctrine. My presonal choice is to err on the side of those who walked with Jesus in the flesh and were discipled directly be Jesus. I am not satisfied with the standard convulted logic used to try to try to prove that the disciples and Paul were not at odds on many doctrinal issues. There is nothing new under the sun and the first century church did not agree on every point of doctrine just as the church today does not.

Again my personal conviction is that when the words credited to Paul appear to me to contradict the words of Jesus and the disciples I will always default to Jesus and the disciples over Paul. It does not mean that I think anyone who believes in Paul is not a Christian or not in fellowship with God. We can always agree to disagree and in the ages to come we will all find out the truth...hence my future question to James of how he really felt about Paul. It would not be a yes or no question and answer. It would be a true curiousity of how he viewed their doctrinal differences and what that meant as far as James' perspective on Paul's ministry as a whole. I can disagree with someone else's doctrine but still recognize that God is using them for his purposes. I'm begining to think that is how Peter, James and John might have viewed Paul.

I kind of look at like the book of Galatians and the Book of James was Paul and James version of how we debate doctrinal issues on this forum. Granted Paul and James has a much wider sphere of influence then we do and I doubt that anyone will be discussing our debates 2000 years from now!
But Paul doesn't contradict anything Jesus or the apostles said.
If you disagree with that please give examples, using chapter and verse for both sides.
 

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
This forum serves as a place for me to "think out loud" and express in words the thoughts and ideas I am wrestling through. It's human nature when we make a radical change in our paradigm to follow a pendulum cycle. We swing from one extreme to another before the pendulum eventually comes to rest in the middle somewhere.
I really appreciate you pointing this out. I absolutely agree that this is a primary reason that forums like this are useful. Writing is a great way to grow spiritually I think.
 

Tatilina

Star
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
1,846
Hi @Tanya

Do you think that any of our "misconceptions about wicca" can be traced to St. Paul's admonitions against witchcraft, divination, etc., and to Moses' commandments before that? If so, when you say that you "love" Paul, does that mean that you think his preaching should be obeyed, or do you just love him on some academic or other level?
After talking with a few and realizing that Wicca is not the right path and neither was walking away from the Lord, I have decided to no longer pursue it. I wasn't practicing witchcraft or divination. I absolutely believe that his preaching should be obeyed and respected yes.

I love Paul because when I read what he wrote in scripture, out of all the apostles, I could relate to him the most. I hope that cures your curiosity about me.

I appreciate those who have given me wise counsel.

@Serveto academic level had me laughing lol.
 
Last edited:

Serveto

Star
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
1,043
After talking with a few and realizing that Wicca is not the right path and neither was walking away from the Lord, I have decided to no longer pursue it. I wasn't practicing witchcraft or divination. I absolutely believe that his preaching should be obeyed and respected yes.
That's cool. I hadn't read the "misconceptions" thread in its entirety, but thought I had heard you mention that you had an Ouija board and had tried, unsuccessfully (?), to use it, and I thought that a method of divination. Most of the wiccans it has simultaneously been my good and bad pleasure to know have been into some form of divination, including, usually, Tarot cards, and I find that incompatible with both Pauline and Mosaic instruction.
Tanya said:
I love Paul because when I read what he wrote in scripture, out of all the apostles, I could relate to him the most.
I like the fact that Paul was a tireless evangelist to the gentiles, and, given that I am a gentile, that includes me. With that said, I often find myself in the unenviable position, in relation to Paul, as was Agrippa, when he said "almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian," with the emphasis, in my case, upon the word almost.
Tanya said:
I hope that cures your curiosity about me.
I hope you didn't mind my asking. This can sometimes be an overly personal board and I wondered how it was that you were able to balance a love of Paul with wicca. At any rate, I better understand now, even if I didn't necessarily need to be cured of anything.
Tanya said:
I appreciate those who have given me wise counsel.
I appreciate people who give me wise counsel as well. All the better when it can be found here, on this board, and elsewhere.
@Serveto academic level had me laughing lol.
Well, I didn't know how else to put it :cool:. I kind of have an academic relationship with St. Paul, but I don't delude myself into thinking that that will gain me any points on Judgement Day.

Thank you for responding, and, I might add, for the cure.
 
Last edited:

manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,827
A non-Christian text written at least 500 years AFTER the last book of New Testament is disqualified.
No Muslim was present in 1st century AD, therefore Islamic beliefs have no relevance.
Similarly to how christian texts were written decades after Jesus's supposed death so they also have no relevance? like how Paul saw the vision of Jesus way after that so does that have no relevance either? lmao
 

JoChris

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,168
Manama, those people actually knew Jesus personally OR the apostles personally.

If Islamic texts are to be considered on the same level as New Testament texts, please show evidence that the self-proclaimed Muhammad was present in the 1st AD as an actual witness of Christ/ apostles, not half a millenium later.
 

Tatilina

Star
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
1,846
Manama, those people actually knew Jesus personally OR the apostles personally.

If Islamic texts are to be considered on the same level as New Testament texts, please show evidence that the self-proclaimed Muhammad was present in the 1st AD as an actual witness of Christ/ apostles, not half a millenium later.
Ouch! Hardball lol.
 

manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,827
Manama, those people actually knew Jesus personally OR the apostles personally.

If Islamic texts are to be considered on the same level as New Testament texts, please show evidence that the self-proclaimed Muhammad was present in the 1st AD as an actual witness of Christ/ apostles, not half a millenium later.
The book comes from God not man. In that terms every old tale or event told in the Bible would be incorrect since its written way too later that time. It really not about Paul or the apostles, you said that Islamic texts do not matter about Jesus because they were written way later, in that terms Bible is as well. Either both work or none works.
 

Daciple

Star
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
1,157
I have come to see that those who reject Paul end up cherry picking from the Entire Bible, and essentially create their own personal religion that usually doesnt line up with the core Christian doctrines and understandings as they have been known, believed and taught since the inception of Christianity, that is since the Apostles began to preach the Good News to all. Some have began to cover it but if you reject Paul, then if you dont want to be intellectually dishonest you must also exclude both of Peters writings as he clearly endorses Paul to a point in outright condemning those who reject and dont understand Pauls writings.

2 Peter 3:15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
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 the conclusion Peter makes of those who reject Paul is the same as I see, which is that those who reject Paul tend not to understand the doctrine not only within his writing but also are not able to comprehend other scriptures, showing themselves unlearned and unstable and most usually end up either falling away totally or end up attaching themselves to false doctrines that explicitly go against the Faith, some of which are Salvation Dependent thus they truly are falling into destruction.

Not only does Peter denounce those who reject Paul, he also clearly has proven that Pauls writings were being circulated among the Early Church and that they were to being used as Scripture to exhort teach and rebuke those in the Church, again rebuffing one of the points I saw brought up in an earlier post.

So we throw away Paul, now we must throw away Peter, and we must also reject Acts as it clearly shows that all the Apostles accepted Paul as one of their own, and speak in a truthful manner stating that they were even weary to accept him at first. To me I can not see why an author that is just wanting to lie to make it as tho Paul was an Apostle or accepted by the other Apostles would include anything that would make Paul out to be anything other than a perfect acceptable person to the faith. However that is not at all what we see in Acts, this is what Acts tells us of the other believers concerning Paul:

Acts 9:13 Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
14 And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.

Acts 9:26 And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple.

Again if I am making up a story to ingratiate Paul the absolute last thing I would be writing would be how others were weary of him, but alas here it is written for all to see, that indeed others were at first weary of him, as tho he was exactly as it is stated in the Word of God, one who at one pointed murdered Christians, but then as we see later in Acts, preaches the Gospel, the same exact Gospel that Peter preaches at Pentecost and at Solomons court. That he was later fully accepted by all the Elders and Apostles..

Acts 15:2..they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them,...
13 And after they had held their peace, James answered, saying...

Acts 21:18 And the day following Paul went in with us unto James; and all the elders were present.

Not once but twice in Acts it is declared that Paul came unto James, Peter, the Apostles and the Elders and we see that both Peter and James agree with Paul concerning the issue which he had come unto them about, in fact the entire Church at Jerusalem were all in unity and under one accord with Paul and the doctrine he proposed to them all.

So yeah if we reject Paul we must now reject Peter, and Acts and well the same author that wrote Acts wrote Luke so lets throw away one of the Gospel as well. If there is any validity to be found from Acts while rejecting Paul then you must reject James as James and all the other Apostles accepted Paul and what he taught. If one believes that Matthew wrote Matthew, John wrote John and Mark wrote Mark, well if we reject Paul and see that ALL the Apostles accepted Paul and his doctrine then we ought to reject Matthew Mark and John. Rejecting John we ought to reject 1-3 John and Revelations seeing he wrote them but he was so foolish as to accept Paul and we being much more intelligent and 2000 yrs removed can see Paul isnt worthy to be accepted how could we accept the writings of John who ignorantly accepted Paul? Away with John!!

This is the logical progression for those who decide to reject Paul, although I know many who are intellectually dishonest and make excuses as to how they can reject Paul and accept these other texts somehow but again as I originally stated those who reject Paul end up creating their own Religion usually clinging to false doctrine many of which come down to Salvation Dependent issues. They say they are Christians but I dont really know if they are, in my view they are as Christian as those who claim to be Christians while saying that the God of the Old Testament is the Devil and Jesus and the God of the Old Testament are set against each other. Its only possible to come to the conclusions these so called Christians do if they pick and choose from the Bible and then create unto themselves their own personal made up Religion that isnt really one of following the Christ and God of the Bible...
 

Tatilina

Star
Joined
Apr 6, 2017
Messages
1,846
That's cool. I hadn't read the "misconceptions" thread in its entirety, but thought I had heard you mention that you had an Ouija board and had tried, unsuccessfully (?), to use it, and I thought that a method of divination. Most of the wiccans it has simultaneously been my good and bad pleasure to know have been into some form of divination, including, usually, Tarot cards, and I find that incompatible with both Pauline and Mosaic instruction.

It was a poor and pathetic attempt at that. It was stupid of me.

I like the fact that Paul was a tireless evangelist to the gentiles, and, given that I am a gentile, that includes me. With that said, I often find myself in the unenviable position, in relation to Paul, as was Agrippa, when he said "almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian," with the emphasis, in my case, upon the word almost.

I hope you didn't mind my asking. This can sometimes be an overly personal board and I wondered how it was that you were able to balance a love of Paul with wicca. At any rate, I better understand now, even if I didn't necessarily need to be cured of anything.

Because you don't know me and because of that you didn't know I was in the process of rethinking, recanting and renouncing Wicca, that's why. There was no balance of a love for Paul and Wicca.

I appreciate people who give me wise counsel as well. All the better when it can be found here, on this board, and elsewhere.

Well, I didn't know how else to put it :cool:. I kind of have an academic relationship with St. Paul, but I don't delude myself into thinking that that will gain me any points on Judgement Day.

Thank you for responding, and, I might add, for the cure.
Answers in bold^^^^

It seems like so many are infatuated with me, some from the old board that I never knew or had private conversations with anyone like yourself, Serveto. I find it to be so strange, so weird and creepy that strangers want to know all the significant and intricate details of my life. It really does freak me out, plus I don't trust a lot of the older members for a very good reason. I find it odd.
So please excuse me for taking so long to respond.

This I do want to say and it will be the last time I mention it because Vigilant Citizen, asked all of us to not continue any further drama or beef on other threads, which has been extremely hard for some of you because face it, you can't help yourselves. I watched a plenty of times for over a year, how a lot of you, who are trying to engage in conversation with me because you can't take a hint and respect my wishes that I want nothing to do with those that I watched bash me and slander me with such glee. I forgive, but I don't forget. I seen what you said about me and I never got the chance to defend myself. You all enjoyed yourselves trash talking me. It's pretty obvious not just to me but a few others when some of you are up to no good and all I'm trying to do
is what Vigilant Citizen asked. Stop this insanity right now.
IMG_3544.PNG
Now, I'm leaving it at that, if any of you choose to continue on than that's on you. I have the right to choose who I allow into my life and all those that took great pleaure in trashing me at VF are not welcome in my life.
 
Last edited:

JoChris

Superstar
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
6,168
The book comes from God not man. In that terms every old tale or event told in the Bible would be incorrect since its written way too later that time. It really not about Paul or the apostles, you said that Islamic texts do not matter about Jesus because they were written way later, in that terms Bible is as well. Either both work or none works.
If the bible comes from man then the Quran cannot be trusted either. It *claims* to highly respect parts of the bible.

No, some modern scholars make those claims about the Old Testament. Archeology consistently backs up historical accounts of bible.
 
Joined
Mar 17, 2017
Messages
2,342
But Paul doesn't contradict anything Jesus or the apostles said.
If you disagree with that please give examples, using chapter and verse for both sides.
Ephesians 2
For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.

Matthew 5
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
 

manama

Star
Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
3,827
If the bible comes from man then the Quran cannot be trusted either. It *claims* to highly respect parts of the bible.

No, some modern scholars make those claims about the Old Testament. Archeology consistently backs up historical accounts of bible.
We believe in the Gospel of Jesus not Bible. We respect parts of Bible because it includes stuff from the Gospel.
 

rainerann

Star
Joined
Mar 18, 2017
Messages
4,550
Ephesians 2
For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, 15 having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, 16 and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity.

Matthew 5
17 “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. 18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. 19 Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
How is the passage from Ephesians not a description of the fulfillment of the law? What does it mean to fulfill the law then?
 
Top