Why Do Christians Trust Paul?

billy t

Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
747
1. If you worship God alone but rejected Mohamad as a prophet, will you go to heaven?
2. If you worship God alone and accepted all prophet but your sins outweigh your deeds, will you go to heaven?
3. Can you say without a shadow of a doubt that you will be in heaven?
1) In Islam there are 6 pillars of faith. The 4th is to believe in Allah's Messengers. If someone rejects one of them they are not Muslim. If they reject Jacob they have left the fold of Islam. If they reject David they are no longer Muslim. If they reject Jesus they are not Muslim. In fact if someone says anything bad about any of the Prophet then they are not Muslim. Like just cracking a joke for example then they have left the fold of Islam. So, yes whoever rejects the Prophet Muhammad salAllahu alaiyhi wasallam then it is like rejecting ALL of the Prophets. Allah says, "Say! we believe in Allah and that which is revealed to us and that which is revealed to Abraham and Ismail and Jacob and the tribes and that which is revealed to Moses and Jesus and the Prophets from their Lord we do not DIFFERENTIATE in any of them and we are Muslims (those who submit to God alone).

2) As for 2, great question! We have a concept of the meezan. The Prophet salAllahu 'alaiyhi wasallam said, "Verily Allah ta’ala has written down the good deeds and the evil deeds, and then explained it [by saying]: “Whosoever intended to perform a good deed, but did not do it, then Allah writes it down with Himself as a complete good deed. And if he intended to perform it and then did perform it, then Allah writes it down with Himself as from ten good deeds up to seven hundred times, up to many times multiplied. And if he intended to perform an evil deed, but did not do it, then Allah writes it down with Himself as a complete good deed. And if he intended it [i.e., the evil deed] and then performed it, then Allah writes it down as one evil deed.”

This shows the mercy of Allah. Now, on the Day of Judgement if somebody has many bad deeds then there is narrations that say a card will be brought with "la ilaha illa lah" the statement that none is worthy of worship but God. And that will be placed on the scale and will save many people who had more bad deeds. This further shows the mercy of Allah. Allah also punishes believers in this world to relieve them of sins before the next world. Repentance wipes out bad deeds which is why a believer must constantly repent and intend to not return to sins. If they do return to sins then they repent again because human beings are not perfect and we must try to do good deeds so they outweigh our bad deeds.

Now, if after all this the bad deeds still outweigh the good deeds then some Muslims will be punished in the hellfire. Some people will be removed from the hellfire. Some may be punished for a short duration and others longer but no Muslim will permanently stay in the hellfire. Even those with faith the size of a mustard seed will eventually be removed and then permanently reside in Paradise. They just have to be purified first. Also God can pardon sins from his infinite Mercy and his Mercy is from His Divine Attributes.

3) Can I say without a shadow of doubt that I will go to heaven? No. Absolutely not. I must constantly ask God for guidance and strive to do things purely for his sake so He has Mercy on me. For all I know you may become Muslim and I may go astray. Only Allah knows that. However, those with pure hearts then God will guide them and he is not unjust. Those who are lead astray deserve to go astray. God only lead the Devil astray after he become rebellious and arrogant. Hope this answers your questions.
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,908
Point 3 is fair and worthy of consideration yet what is the proof he is an "apostle" besides his own testimony and his mate Luke the physician?

. As for your claim that the Prophet salAllahu alaiyhi wasallam was inspired by a demon or whatever then that is ridiculous. Demons don't inspire people to worship God alone and not associate anyone in worship with him. On top of that, before Muslims recite the Qur'aan we are told to say authu billahi minashaytanir rajeem. "I seek refute with God from the devil". We are also taught to seek refute with God from the evils of the anti-Christ in every prayer.

The verse about the disciples you brought is speaking about the disciples of Jesus who helped him but you have no reliable way of quoting those disciples. Mark, Matthew, Luke and John did not meet Jesus. Those weren't even the names on the gospels they were added latter. "The Gospel according to Mark" so on and so on. How do we know they weren't eye witnesses? Because Matthew and Luke copied much of their gospels from Mark for example. It is basically agreed that they weren't eye witnesses.

As I pointed out before, the Quran tells us that Allah caused the BELIEVERS from bani israel (as in the ones who followed Jesus) to become victorious/uppermost over the disbelievers. By extention that exhonorates Paul, since it was his doctrine that became dominant. So if you think he was under demonic influence then it doesnt say much about the power of God.

Christianity was amended later through the trinitarian doctrine. You can criticise that.


Another thing is that the Quran confirms the legitimacy of the Injeel in the present tense (as in, what they had with them at the time of the prophet himself).
if paul's epistles are the most influential part of the NT, then why didnt the Quran directly address that?



"As for your claim that the Prophet salAllahu alaiyhi wasallam was inspired by a demon or whatever then that is ridiculous. "

let me make it clear, i didnt say that at all...i was applying your own reasoning to the christian argument against islam.
my point is those arguments are shit.
 

billy t

Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
747
As I pointed out before, the Quran tells us that Allah caused the BELIEVERS from bani israel (as in the ones who followed Jesus) to become victorious/uppermost over the disbelievers. By extention that exhonorates Paul, since it was his doctrine that became dominant. So if you think he was under demonic influence then it doesnt say much about the power of God.

Christianity was amended later through the trinitarian doctrine. You can criticise that.


Another thing is that the Quran confirms the legitimacy of the Injeel in the present tense (as in, what they had with them at the time of the prophet himself).
if paul's epistles are the most influential part of the NT, then why didnt the Quran directly address that?



"As for your claim that the Prophet salAllahu alaiyhi wasallam was inspired by a demon or whatever then that is ridiculous. "

let me make it clear, i didnt say that at all...i was applying your own reasoning to the christian argument against islam.
my point is those arguments are shit.
I am glad you highlighted the word BELIEVERS. Yes, those who believed from Bani Israe'eel. How that has anything to do with Paul is beyond me! Yeah, sounds like you got this one from David Wood. That guy makes all sorts of errors.

Anyway, you have misinterpreted the verse. None of the mufasireen (those who explain the Qur'aan) understood it this way. We take our interpretation of the Qur'aan from the Qur'aan itself, from the Prophet salAllahu 'alaiyhi wasallam and from his disciples who learned directly from him and their students. It is not based on what we THINK it means. Based on this methodology the verse can be understood as follows.

Abdullah ibn Abbas (a prominent disciple) mentioned that there were 3 groups at the time of Jesus. One group believed Jesus was God himself. The second group believed that Jesus was not God but the son of God. The third group believed that Jesus was the Prophet of God and this was the 12 disciples and they were Muslims. The Muslim group was fought against and they were killed. Others who adhered to the true teachings of Jesus i.e (that he was a Prophet of God and not God Himself) were also persecuted. There are other verses about how the true followers of Jesus were persecuted as well.

What is meant by Allah giving victory to those who believe is by the sending of the Prophet salAllahu 'alaiyhi wasllam and Islam becoming dominant over all other religions as Allah says in the same Surah "it is he who has sent His messenger with guidance and the religon of truth that it may prevail over all other religions even if the disbelievers dislike it". This is why the story is mentioned in the same chapter. This is the context based on what Abdullah ibn Abbas said. Anyone who contradicts Ibn Abbas and says it means something else are idiots. Who understands the verse the best the disciple of the Prophet or David Wood???!!!!

"and we aided those who believed (meaning the Muslims who believed he was a Prophet and they were small in number until the sending of the Prophet) and they become dominant". Meaning, Allah aided them and Islam spread over the world.
 
Last edited:

phipps

Star
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
4,193
Paul behaved like a politician to get as many converts as he possibly could. He would tell people what they wanted to hear even if it contradicted Jesus.

in 1 corinthian 9:19-22 Paul says, "Though I am free and belong to no one, I have made myself a slave to everyone, to win as many as possible. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law), so as to win those under the law. To those not having the law I became like one not having the law (though I am not free from God’s law but am under Christ’s law), so as to win those not having the law".

Sounds like a deceitful character to me.

Paul spoke from his own head and there is no evidence he was divinely inspired.

"Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I GIVE MY OWN JUDGEMENT as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy".
1: Cor 7.25

In Matthew 5:17 Jesus says, "do not think I came to abolish the law of the Prophets I have not came to abolish them but to fulfill them". Paul on the other hand says, "You are not under law but under grace" (Romans 6:14). He also made lawful what God made unlawful and vice versa. As Allah says in the Qur'aan "they took their rabbis and monks as lords besides Allah. One companions inquired about this to the Messenger salAllahu alaiyhi wasallam and said "we did not worship them". The Prophet salAllahu alaiyhi sallam said "didn't they make lawful what Allah made unlawful and you obeyed them in that and didn't they make unlawful what Allah made lawful and you also obeyed??" The companions said yes and he replied "that was your worship of them".

There are lots of other doubts raised against Islam above so I will answer those later inshaaAllah. For example one poster compared Umar to Paul. The Prophet salAllahu alaiyhi wasallam and other disciples of the Prophet testified to Umars trustworthiness as for Paul then neither Jesus or the other disciples did! False equivalent.
Paul behaved like a politician to get as many converts as he possibly could. He would tell people what they wanted to hear even if it contradicted Jesus.
Paul behaved like a Christian who travelled and taught about Christ to Jews and Gentiles alike. He was a sincere man of God and because of that many people became Christians. They could see his passion and sincerity about Christ. It was from the heart.

And you are wrong about Paul telling people what they wanted to hear. Some Christian Jews had an issue with Paul's message. He preached that Gentiles and Jews were all the same. All anyone had to do was have faith in Jesus and submit to Him and they could be part of the community. Some Jews were not happy with worshipping with Gentiles because they felt they were uncircumcised and the law of Moses still mattered. They wanted the Gentiles to be circumcised first before they join their Christian community. Because of that some Jews attempted to undermine Paul’s ministry. A council was held in Jerusalem which sided with Paul on the issue of circumcision, but the opposition to Paul’s ministry continued. About seven years later, during Paul’s final visit to Jerusalem, many were still suspicious about Paul’s gospel. In fact, when Paul visited the temple, he nearly lost his life when Jews from Asia cried out, “Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the law, and this place; and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place.” (Acts 21:28). This is all recorded in the book of Acts. Paul spoke the truth of God and only the truth of God and eventually its what got him killed.

Sounds like a deceitful character to me.
Well he wasn't. His writings would not be in the Bible if he was deceitful nor would they harmonise with the rest of the Bible.

Paul spoke from his own head and there is no evidence he was divinely inspired.
He did not. Have you compared what Paul said and wrote with the rest of the Bible at all to come to this conclusion? What you think does not count. You are wrong about this. Very wrong! If its not inspired of God, its not in the Bible. The whole Bible is inspired of God, it is God's Word, it is God Himself. And the Bible does not lie.

"Now concerning virgins: I have no commandment from the Lord; yet I GIVE MY OWN JUDGEMENT as one whom the Lord in His mercy has made trustworthy".
1: Cor 7.25
You are reaching here and I don't know if you are doing this intentionally or you have convinced yourself as a Muslim who does not study the Bible that you understand what Paul is really saying. You have taken this verse out of context, how could you not really if you think about it.

The whole chapter 7 of 1 Corinthians is about principles about marriage and singleness. Basically Paul says in the chapter that its best to be single but if people cannot be single then they should get married.

When he says in verse 25, "I have no commandment from the Lord...yet I give judgment" he means he cannot, and will not, give a commandment. But he will give inspired advice and principles. Paul does not give commandments, no human does, its God that gives commandments.

In Matthew 5:17 Jesus says, "do not think I came to abolish the law of the Prophets I have not came to abolish them but to fulfill them". Paul on the other hand says, "You are not under law but under grace" (Romans 6:14). He also made lawful what God made unlawful and vice versa. As Allah says in the Qur'aan "they took their rabbis and monks as lords besides Allah. One companions inquired about this to the Messenger salAllahu alaiyhi wasallam and said "we did not worship them". The Prophet salAllahu alaiyhi sallam said "didn't they make lawful what Allah made unlawful and you obeyed them in that and didn't they make unlawful what Allah made lawful and you also obeyed??" The companions said yes and he replied "that was your worship of them".
You misunderstand Paul. Even Christians misunderstand him here. First let me post what Paul has said about the law clearly and you will see that there is no way he is contradicting himself.

Romans 3:31, "Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law."

Romans 7:12, 14, 16, "Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good."

1 Corinthians 7:19, "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters."

1 Timothy 1:8, "But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully."

In those verses above Paul equated the keeping of God's commandments with a working faith and a new life in Christ. So then what did Paul mean in Romans 6:14 because he didn't mean we break the commandments of God that is for sure. We have to read the whole chapter or at least a few verses before and after the verse that we can't understand. That is one of the ways we are meant to study the Bible to understand in context what is being said. Verse 1 of Romans 6 says, "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?" In other words, does grace give us a license to disobey the law of God? Paul's answer in verse 2 is, "Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?" Paul is saying we have to obey the law.

If we read verses 14-15 together they say the same thing as verses 1 and 2, "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not!" Paul gives an explanation of his own statement in verse 14. After stating that we are not under the law but under grace, he asks, “What then?” Then he says in verse 15, “Shall we sin (break the law) because we are not under the law but under grace? Certainly not!” In the strongest possible language. He meant something else about not being under law but I'll leave it here for now. Christians have got to keep the law, the whole Bible is clear about that including all Paul's writings.

Many Christians misunderstand Paul, so naturally non Christians will misunderstand him too. He is not easy to understand and is a controversial figure in the Bible but one thing is for sure, he was a man of God. He taught and spoke according to God's Word after he met Christ on the Damascus road and changed his name from Saul to Paul after his conversion. Not one writing of his does not harmonise with the rest of the Bible. That is why his writings are in the Bible. They were inspired by God.
 
Last edited:

billy t

Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
747
Paul behaved like a Christian who travelled and taught about Christ to Jews and Gentiles alike. He was a sincere man of god and because of that many people became Christians. they could see his passion and sincerity about Christ. It was from the heart.

And you are wrong about Paul telling people what they wanted to hear. Some Christian Jews had an issue with Paul's message. He preached that Gentiles and Jews were all the same. All anyone had to do was have faith in Jesus and submit to Him and they could be part of the community. Some Jews were not happy with worshipping with Gentiles because they felt they were uncircumcised and the law of Moses still mattered. They wanted the Gentiles to be circumcised first before they join their Christian community. Because of that some Jews attempted to undermine Paul’s ministry. A council was held in Jerusalem which sided with Paul on the issue of circumcision, but the opposition to Paul’s ministry continued. About seven years later, during Paul’s final visit to Jerusalem, many were still suspicious about Paul’s gospel. In fact, when Paul visited the temple, he nearly lost his life when Jews from Asia cried out, “Men of Israel, help! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against the people, the law, and this place; and furthermore he also brought Greeks into the temple and has defiled this holy place.” (Acts 21:28). This is all recorded in the book of Acts. Paul spoke the truth of God and only the truth of God and eventually its what got him killed.


Well he wasn't. His writings would not be in the Bible if he was deceitful nor would they harmonise with the rest of the Bible.


He did not. Have you compared what Paul said and wrote with the rest of the Bible at all to come to this conclusion? What you think does not count. You are wrong about this. Very wrong! If its not inspired of God, its not in the Bible. The whole Bible is inspired of God, it is God's Word, it is God Himself. And the Bible does not lie.



You are reaching here and I don't know if you are doing this intentionally or you have convinced yourself as a Muslim who does not study the Bible that you understand what Paul is really saying. You have taken this verse out of context, how could you not really if you think about it.

The whole chapter 7 of 1 Corinthians is about principles about marriage and singleness. Basically Paul says in the chapter that its best to be single but if people cannot be single then they should get married.

When he says in verse 25, "I have no commandment from the Lord...yet I give judgment" he means he cannot, and will not, give a commandment. But he will give inspired advice and principles. Paul does not give commandments, no human does, its God that gives commandments.



You misunderstand Paul. Even Christians misunderstand him here. First let me post what Paul has said about the law clearly and you will see that there is no way he is contradicting himself.

Romans 3:31, "Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law."

Romans 7:12, 14, 16, "Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good."

1 Corinthians 7:19, "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters."

1 Timothy 1:8, "But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully."

In those verses above Paul equated the keeping of God's commandments with a working faith and a new life in Christ. So then what did Paul mean in Romans 6:14 because he didn't mean we break the commandments of God that is for sure. We have to read the whole chapter or at least a few verses before and after the verse that we can't understand. That is one of the ways we are meant to study the Bible to understand in context what is being said. Verse 1 of Romans 6 says, "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound?" In other words, does grace give us a license to disobey the law of God? Paul's answer in verse 2 is, "Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?" Paul is saying we have to obey the law.

If we read verses 14-15 together they say the same thing as verses 1 and 2, "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not!" Paul gives an explanation of his own statement in verse 14. After stating that we are not under the law but under grace, he asks, “What then?” Then he says in verse 15, “Shall we sin (break the law) because we are not under the law but under grace? Certainly not!” In the strongest possible language. He meant something else about not being under law but I'll leave it here for now. Christians have got to keep the law, the whole Bible is clear about that including all Paul's writings.

Many Christians misunderstand Paul, so naturally non Christians will misunderstand him too. He is not easy to understand and is a controversial figure in the Bible but one thing is for sure, he was a man of God. He taught and spoke according to God's Word after he met Christ on the Damascus road and changed his name from Saul to Paul after his conversion. Not one writing of his does not harmonise with the rest of the Bible. That is why his writings are in the Bible. they were inspired by God.
You just quoted a bunch of verses were Paul tells people to simply have faith and don't worry about the law because Jesus died for your sins and you are saved. Did Jesus teach this??!!
 

phipps

Star
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
4,193
You just quoted a bunch of verses were Paul tells people to simply have faith and don't worry about the law because Jesus died for your sins and you are saved. Did Jesus teach this??!!
I have been a Christian for over thirty years and studied the Bible for most of that time, so I am not just quoting scripture and you know it just from my response to you. This response of yours is very lazy just like what you've posted about Paul. It is clear you don't know much about him, you have not studied the Bible at large and compared what Paul wrote with the rest of the Bible. Just because you think something doesn't make it right, does it? You have not proved that you understand Paul at all. Taking him out of context is not proof I'm afraid. You've got to do better than that. I explained that Paul did not teach about not worrying about the law and I showed actual scripture which I am going to post again here. No Christian can be a true Christian and disobey the law nor did Paul teach that. Yes Jesus died for our sins but Paul does not give us licence to break the law. You are wrong!

Romans 3:31, "Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law."

Romans 6:1-2, "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?"

Romans 6:14-15, "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not!"

Romans 7:12, 14, 16,
"Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good."

1 Corinthians 7:19, "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters."

1 Timothy 1:8, "But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully."

God chose Paul to be His apostle that preached the gospel mainly to Gentiles and he did just that. His writings and teachings still change people's hearts everyday to this day and until Christ returns the second time, because his writings were inspired by God Himself. That is the truth of the Bible.
 
Last edited:

billy t

Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
747
I have been a Christian for over thirty years and studied the Bible for most of that time, so I am not just quoting scripture and you know it just from my response to you. This response is very lazy just like what you've posted about Paul. It is clear you don't know much about him, you have not studied the Bible at large and compared what Paul wrote with the rest of the Bible. Just because you think something doesn't make it right, does it? You have not proved that you understand Paul at all. Taking him out of context is not proof I'm afraid. You've got to do better than that. I explained that Paul did not teach about not worrying about the law and I showed actual scripture which I am going to post again here. No Christian can be a true Christian and disobey the law nor did Paul teach that. Yes Jesus dies for our sins but Paul does not give us licence to break the law. You are wrong!

Romans 3:31, "Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law."

Romans 6:1-2, "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?"

Romans 6:14-15, "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not!"

Romans 7:12, 14, 16,
"Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good."

1 Corinthians 7:19, "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters."

1 Timothy 1:8, "But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully."

God chose Paul to be His apostle that preached the gospel mainly to Gentiles and he did just that. His writings and teachings still change people's hearts everyday to this day and until Christ returns the second time, because his writings were inspired by God Himself. That is the truth of the Bible.
OK. Question: According to the teachings of Paul if someone accepts Christ died for their sins and believe fully in their heart that this is the truth yet they never go to Church and murder, r*pe and steal their entire lives will they go to heaven? Yes or no. If you answer yes then you have basically admitted that acts are next to useless and only faith matters.
 

billy t

Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
747
I have been a Christian for over thirty years and studied the Bible for most of that time, so I am not just quoting scripture and you know it just from my response to you. This response is very lazy just like what you've posted about Paul. It is clear you don't know much about him, you have not studied the Bible at large and compared what Paul wrote with the rest of the Bible. Just because you think something doesn't make it right, does it? You have not proved that you understand Paul at all. Taking him out of context is not proof I'm afraid. You've got to do better than that. I explained that Paul did not teach about not worrying about the law and I showed actual scripture which I am going to post again here. No Christian can be a true Christian and disobey the law nor did Paul teach that. Yes Jesus dies for our sins but Paul does not give us licence to break the law. You are wrong!

Romans 3:31, "Do we then make void the law through faith? Certainly not! On the contrary, we establish the law."

Romans 6:1-2, "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?"

Romans 6:14-15, "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace. What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not!"

Romans 7:12, 14, 16,
"Therefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy and just and good. For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good."

1 Corinthians 7:19, "Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters."

1 Timothy 1:8, "But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully."

God chose Paul to be His apostle that preached the gospel mainly to Gentiles and he did just that. His writings and teachings still change people's hearts everyday to this day and until Christ returns the second time, because his writings were inspired by God Himself. That is the truth of the Bible.
Also you said "God chose Paul to be his Apostle".

Where does God call Paul an apostle? Don't quote Paul himself show me where God says that. I will wait.....

Have you noticed that everything you have quoted so far is from Paul? Its like expecting me to believe Hitler is good based on his autobiography and no other accounts. Can you quote me anything that is not from Pauls letters??
 

phipps

Star
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
4,193
OK. Question: According to the teachings of Paul if someone accepts Christ died for their sins and believe fully in their heart that this is the truth yet they never go to Church and murder, r*pe and steal their entire lives will they go to heaven? Yes or no. If you answer yes then you have basically admitted that acts are next to useless and only faith matters.
What you are suggesting I'm saying is a teaching called "once saved always saved" and is taught in many Christian denominations but is not biblical. I am a biblical Christian and so my answer is a resounding no! And that is because that is the answer of the Bible too. I even have a thread here on that subject and most Christians here disagreed with the the truth of the Bible.

No one who reads Paul's writings (I doubt you do except to use his writings against Christians) and understands them even a little can ever say that Paul taught as long one accepts Christ its okay not to go to church and to commit sins like r*pe and murder and still make it to heaven. Paul went to church and taught that it is wrong to sin as the scripture above that I posted makes clear.
 
Last edited:

phipps

Star
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
4,193
Also you said "God chose Paul to be his Apostle".

Where does God call Paul an apostle? Don't quote Paul himself show me where God says that. I will wait.....

Have you noticed that everything you have quoted so far is from Paul? Its like expecting me to believe Hitler is good based on his autobiography and no other accounts. Can you quote me anything that is not from Pauls letters??
Also you said "God chose Paul to be his Apostle".
Yes I said God chose Paul as His apostle. Its written of in the book of Acts. I've posted the exact scripture below.

Where does God call Paul an apostle? Don't quote Paul himself show me where God says that. I will wait.....
I didn't say God called Paul an apostle specifically. That quote is not in the Bible. The fact that God chose Him directly in Acts 9:4-9 makes him an apostle. Also in Acts 9:15-16 God spoke to a man named Ananais about Paul: "But the Lord said to him, “Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name’s sake.”

Have you noticed that everything you have quoted so far is from Paul? Its like expecting me to believe Hitler is good based on his autobiography and no other accounts.
Yes I quote Paul because he wrote most of the New Testament. Also I have no problem quoting him because I believe his writings are the inspired word of God. Its not my problem that you don't trust his writings. You are coming at this from a Muslim point of view nor do you study the Bible to know whether Paul's writings are true or not. You have no leg to stand on I'm afraid here. You don't know what you're talking about. I find you never do when it comes to the Bible.

Can you quote me anything that is not from Pauls letters?
I could compare Paul's writings to parts of the Bible to show you how his writings harmonise with the rest of the Bible but that will be too long winded for me now. I would still quote Paul though. I doubt you will agree with anything I post though because you are determined to disagree even with the little I've posted above plus you are not well versed in Bible either. That is a lot of scripture I would have to post.
 
Last edited:

TokiEl

Superstar
Joined
Dec 13, 2017
Messages
7,239
So you agree the bible contradicts itself but you believe it all anyway?

Excellent!
Cognitive dissonance worthy of the White Queen
God's writ is ambiguous for a reason... the devil is trying to understand it.

Angels fallen or not are watching and wondering how it'll all play out...


Only the Holy spirit got a great grasp of God's writ.
 

TokiEl

Superstar
Joined
Dec 13, 2017
Messages
7,239
God sent the Good shepherd who sent the Holy spirit who sent the shepherde... well i'm just one of many really.


That's why i say it is as i say.
 

billy t

Veteran
Joined
Aug 2, 2020
Messages
747
Aspiringsoul mentioned that Paul was an apostle not a disciple. Seems that many Christian scholars though say ALL Apostles were disciples but not all disciples were apostles therefore that claim is null and void too....
 

TokiEl

Superstar
Joined
Dec 13, 2017
Messages
7,239
Aspiringsoul mentioned that Paul was an apostle not a disciple. Seems that many Christian scholars though say ALL Apostles were disciples but not all disciples were apostles therefore that claim is null and void too....
Nevertheless Muhammad was not an apostle nor a disciple.
 

Svabhava

Rookie
Joined
Jul 20, 2020
Messages
38
Moreover, St. Paul was someone who repented of his persecutions, traveled the Roman Empire turning pagans to the knowledge of the True God and made himself the target of persecution and was killed for his faith.
You mean Paul who persecuted the Nazarenes, then pretended to convert to their religion (and usurp James the Brother of Jesus) while continuing to persecute them, silence them and preach a completely different gospel to the Gentiles over in Europe. Paul is the definition of the antichrist.


The lecherous pedophilic prophet of the Muslims on the other hand raided and murdered pagan tribes.
Edgy you are. You probably say that with a boner too, as you Christians always do, because of your sexual perversions.

on the other hand raided and murdered pagan tribes.
You're not Marcionite by any chance are you? the God of the Old Testament demanded far more violent things. This doesn't make those prophets false, it makes you illiterate.

This alone makes St. Paul more trustworthy
Paul, the one who taught the polar opposite of everything Jesus taught, you mean.

since they uphold the preposterous belief of Muhammad's revelations as told in the Hadiths: that he was met by an apparition that terrorized him and made him suicidal but because his heretical Christian relatives convinced him it was Gabriel
All I'm hearing is a dumb parrot that doesn't even know what day of the week it is.

If Muhammad was a false prophet, then he must also be a true prophet for proving Judeo-Christianity to be themselves false (through the opposition Jews and Christian have automatically refutes Judaism and Christianity because what you have in place of the Qur'an is subpar). If Muhammad was a false prophet then he was a genius even smarter than todays philosophers, because of how far ahead of his time he was in so many areas of theology, textual criticism, 'revelation-realism', 'prophetic-realism', philosophy itself, spiritual discipline, and so forth.
The Qur'an is the only scripture of it's kind, unadulterated word of God written with the intention of actually being scripture, only God's direct speech throughout (literally the only text of it's kind at that point in history, and still nobody has really tried to compete with it). With full self-awareness and full intertextual intricacies with full self-awareness of the polemical war ground in which people like yourself are situated. Nothing you can say hasn't already been refuted by the Qur'an itself 1400 years ago.
As I said, you're just a parrot. Gawk gawk gawk.

spiritually handicapped.
More edgy. Continue to go to a building once a week and sing karaoke and listen to a moron yell at you for 30 minutes. You know nothing of the spirituality of Jesus and the Prophets, continue to scratch your arse and make dumb statements like that.
 
Last edited:

TokiEl

Superstar
Joined
Dec 13, 2017
Messages
7,239
All of mankind, not just the Jews (as Jesus and all of the Israelite prophets were).
You can believe what you want... but if you want truths you must shut up and hear the shepherde.

Swallow your vain pride and learn from the best.
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
3,908
I am glad you highlighted the word BELIEVERS. Yes, those who believed from Bani Israe'eel. How that has anything to do with Paul is beyond me! Yeah, sounds like you got this one from David Wood. That guy makes all sorts of errors.

Anyway, you have misinterpreted the verse. None of the mufasireen (those who explain the Qur'aan) understood it this way. We take our interpretation of the Qur'aan from the Qur'aan itself, from the Prophet salAllahu 'alaiyhi wasallam and from his disciples who learned directly from him and their students. It is not based on what we THINK it means. Based on this methodology the verse can be understood as follows.

Abdullah ibn Abbas (a prominent disciple) mentioned that there were 3 groups at the time of Jesus. One group believed Jesus was God himself. The second group believed that Jesus was not God but the son of God. The third group believed that Jesus was the Prophet of God and this was the 12 disciples and they were Muslims. The Muslim group was fought against and they were killed. Others who adhered to the true teachings of Jesus i.e (that he was a Prophet of God and not God Himself) were also persecuted. There are other verses about how the true followers of Jesus were persecuted as well.

What is meant by Allah giving victory to those who believe is by the sending of the Prophet salAllahu 'alaiyhi wasllam and Islam becoming dominant over all other religions as Allah says in the same Surah "it is he who has sent His messenger with guidance and the religon of truth that it may prevail over all other religions even if the disbelievers dislike it". This is why the story is mentioned in the same chapter. This is the context based on what Abdullah ibn Abbas said. Anyone who contradicts Ibn Abbas and says it means something else are idiots. Who understands the verse the best the disciple of the Prophet or David Wood???!!!!

"and we aided those who believed (meaning the Muslims who believed he was a Prophet and they were small in number until the sending of the Prophet) and they become dominant". Meaning, Allah aided them and Islam spread over the world.
1)
just to make it clear, im a muslim.
so dont mention david wood to me ever again. i may diss and mock you, but that doesnt mean im like that guy.
i think for myself and im true in my intentions
david wood is a clown who just begs for acceptance from the masses
i speak my mind knowing it'll piss off pseudo muslims like yourself.
if i was like David Wood, i would be pushing your narrative even further, praising you and pming you to tell you how great 'we are'.
i know who on here is like that..it isnt me..but there are guys like that on here amongst the muslims who just trying to make friends and be popular online (sad as that is).

2)
you said
"Abdullah ibn Abbas (a prominent disciple) mentioned"

no, no he didn't
ibn kathir's tafsir took from another tafsir
this text was written in the lifetime of ibn kathir, how very convenient...
it's a forgery, basically made up..and the link itself shows you im not alone in that opinion.


3)
you wrote
None of the mufasireen (those who explain the Qur'aan) understood it this way. We take our interpretation of the Qur'aan from the Qur'aan itself, from the Prophet salAllahu 'alaiyhi wasallam and from his disciples who learned directly from him and their students. It is not based on what we THINK it means.

None of the mufasireen (those who explain the Qur'aan) understood it this way.

that's total nonsense, how would you know if they did or didnt?
it used to be the tradition in islam for the learned to have at least 9 possible (valid) interpretations for the Quran..
to have 1 was considered ignorant.
that means, they had to be open minded to see different possible ways of understanding the Quran.
that was just tradition amongst the learned.
i for one, appreciate multiple opinions...but what i dont appreciate are those that use fabricated sources..to me that's satanic. i mean that's intentional right? read the wiki link above again...it's pretty damning in what it says about that fabricated tafseer and yet everywhere i see muslims going to that one. Who is pushing it? seriously...ibn kathirs tafsir has the highest google search results too, that tells me there's foul play at work.

in fact if you do your research you'll find various early islamic sources accepted Paul.

still ill answer that

- In Surah al-Isra, Allah reminds us that the bani israel(in the context, jews) were given 2 warnings and were punished twice (that is, the events that resulted in the destruction of the jewish temple in jerusalem).
The verses are very brief and touch on some of that history..
but the only way to gain insight on that history, is by studying the bible. You won't find any detail in the hadith..and certainly not in islamic sources. For example the first punishment was through Babylon. To appreciate that, you'd have to read texts like Habakkuk, Daniel, Zechariah Jeremiah especially
the second punishment came from the romans, also relies heavily on Daniel, Zechariah,

Another example is that in the Quran, Hell is called 'Jahannum' and yet no muslim can explain the origins of this term by only using islamic sources alone.
Jahannum comes from Gehenna which was a valley in Jerusalem. It was the place where jews used to sacrifice their children to a pagan idol (molech). After that, the place became a representation of evil. The jews used to burn their waste there...and it was the worst possible place to them. So...it became a symbol of hell...and hence hell got the name 'Gehenna' and hence the arabic Jahannum.

it is necessary to understand the bible, christian and jewish history, to understand the Quran better.
another example is that in the Quran, surah 18, the 'sleepers of the cave' story is told..yet this was a christian story..and btw they (who are considered awliya in islam) were PAULINE CHRISTIANS
and likewise in the hadith, St George (called juraij) is mentioned...and he too was an awliya and a pauline christian.


- related to the above, the Quran directly confirms the 'truth and guidance' in the OT and NT in the time of the prophet SAW. It is rather sad that somehow id need to spoonfeed you this info. As if you couldnt form those conclusions by actually paying some attention tot he Quran.

-relate to the above, since the Quran has confirmed the authenticity, truth, guidance etc of the OT and NT and refers to them as 'The Word of Allah'
and likewise the prophet SAW placed the Torah on a cusion and said to it "I BELIEVE IN THEE"
so of course your original point is totally wrong..

still, what point were you even trying to make? you were attacking Paul and i used the Quran to support him..only for you to quote a fabricated source claiming it's 'ibn abbas' (showcasing your own ignorance), to contradict the Quran itself.

4)
so you then wrote
What is meant by Allah giving victory to those who believe is by the sending of the Prophet salAllahu 'alaiyhi wasllam and Islam becoming dominant over all other religions as Allah says in the same Surah "it is he who has sent His messenger with guidance and the religon of truth that it may prevail over all other religions even if the disbelievers dislike it".

i actually quoted the Quranic verse directly..and you have spat at it and gone to your fabricated interpretations

here's the verse again
O you who believe! be helpers (in the cause) of Allah, as~ Isa son of Marium said to (his) disciples: Who are my helpers in the cause of Allah? The disciples said: We are helpers (in the cause) of Allah. So a party of the children of Israel believed and another party disbelieved; then We aided those who believed against their enemy, and they became uppermost.
(سورة الصف, As-Saff, Chapter #61, Verse #14)


this doesnt mention prophet Mohammad, it has nothing to do with him. There isnt a single credible source in islam that relates this verse to the prophet SAW.
This verse speaks for itself...it is exactly what it says

The group that were uppermost/successful in preaching their message, were the 'believers'
and yet that was the Pauline doctrine....

if the romans were from the wrong camp from the very beginning...as in paul was under satanic influence, then Allah would not even refer to them as 'Nasara', they would not be nasara at all.



actually it gets worse, you said
"and we aided those who believed (meaning the Muslims who believed he was a Prophet and they were small in number until the sending of the Prophet) and they become dominant". Meaning, Allah aided them and Islam spread over the world.

so the Quran was speaking in past tense? and at the time islam was 'spread all over the world'?


but before that you wrote

The Muslim group was fought against and they were killed. Others who adhered to the true teachings of Jesus i.e (that he was a Prophet of God and not God Himself) were also persecuted. There are other verses about how the true followers of Jesus were persecuted as well.

if they were killed/persecuted then they werent victorious/uppermost were they?
what actual message spread the farthest? it was pauline christianity..
and in the Quran the pauline christians are the ones who are called the nasara.
So clearly since Allah says He made the 'believers from bani israel' uppermost, this clearly means Pauline christianity and Paul were on the right track.

trinitarianism came later, in the 4th century..you can criticise that...
but Paul is off limits..as per Quranic logic, not your psuedo islamic, satanic version using forged works.
 
Last edited:
Top