> General Discussions
Questioning Paul
Astrapho:
Hey guys!
Anyway I was having a discussion with someone over the internet, and he brought up something quite interesting...
--- Quote ---A difference that I have, that I have noticed among people who follow Jesus is that they seem to be less adamant on quoting his actual words and favor quoting other peoples more, I only quote Jesus because I KNOW his word is no argument, more valid than anyone else. Reading the other words of people is very relevant, as it is part of the whole search, yet when you start to really pick at scripture you discover some startling truths.
I feel safe enough to raise anything as I have already stated that I have a thinking character and I will continue this way otherwise truth will never come about. I appreciate the letters to the Romans you quote yet, at the end of the day these were written by Paul. Obviously Paul never met Jesus so to me he automatically loses credibility. I cannot even be sure that he was not the first version of Joseph Smith (founder of mormonism). He had a vision of Jesus just like Paul claims. I start to question the reliability of Paul when he even has differing viewpoints of James and the original disciples of Jesus, who were actually with him. Straight away I must ask, "Who is more reliable? the one who says he had a vision, the ones who lived and walked with him, or even better, Jesus himself?"
It is basically a question of Jesus came and taught truth, he fulfilled his calling, died and resurrected, he himself admitting that his death and resurrection is the ONLY sign that would be given to the people of who he is(Matt 16;4), not to mention on the cross Jesus final words were..."It is finished" before finally saying "Father,into your hands I commend my spirit."
"It is finished" he is saying "Mission complete." His disciples were who had to carry on the message as he revealed all to them,after doing all he did in his life and choosing the twelve and revealing everything to them, Pauls whole story seems out of place, maybe even not required. It might sound blasphemous to doubt Paul, but I will not let man stop my inquiring mind, I cannot honestly rule out that he was the first opportunist for starting a religion, Scurrying about sending his opinion to all surrounding provinces, Jesus warned of false teachers coming after him, I understand that he glorified Jesus but so do many Charlatans today but we know it does not mean they are true, in fact a lot of his warnings about a lot of things happened very soon after, it doesn't mean it all has to take place 2000 years later., after all Jesus founded the rock of his church on Peter, not Paul (Matt 16:18)
--- End quote ---
I've been thinking about this, but quite frankly I'm going nowhere other than, "Hey, this kinda makes sense." .
What do you guys think? :)
Wallaby:
Hi
I also used to think that because Paul never knew Jesus personally that maybe something wasn't quite right. Then I realised how important the conversion of Paul really was. Isn't it amazing to think that Paul was on his way to torture and kill the early Christians when Jesus himself spoke to Paul. It is much better that someone who never met Jesus personally was so converted and did such good work than should it have been somebody who has always been part of the inner circle and who had met Jesus personally. Doesn't it sometimes have more impact when somebody who was seen to be a real big sinner comes to the Truth and starts following the Word?
Marius
onelovedread:
Are we really questioning Paul? Consider the following excerpt from the Concordant New Testament Commentary:
"...Paul comes to that which is doubtless, his greatest ground for glorying. Fourteen years before finds him on his first missionary journey after his severance at Antioch. At Lystra he is stoned and left for dead (Ac.14:26). It is more than likely that this, the time when his battered body was supposed to be finished with this life, is when he is transported in spirit to the third heaven. There are three heavens in Scripture. The first was of old (2Pet.3:5) and perished, but was followed by "the heavens which are now" (2 Pet.3:7). But these, too, are transient. The third heaven is viewed by the apostle John in Revelation (Rev.21:1). John, however, does not enter the new heaven, but confines himself to a description of the new earth. Paul entered the third heaven and there saw (what he afterward revealed in his Perfection Epistles) the universal supremacy of Christ and the supernal dignity and bliss conferred on the ecclesia which is Christ's body. He also enters the new earth and its park, which John describes (Rev.22:2) . All of this he had seen, but he was not allowed to disclose it until the time was ripe. This came when Israel's apostasy was full blown, as recorded at the close of the book of Acts. Till then he does not even claim to be the man who had seen and heard such transcendent revelations. Who would not be elated beyond measure at such revelations as had been confided to him? But Paul had good reason to refrain from boasting. A painful physical infirmity was given him to keep him humble. A thorn in the flesh is hardly adequate, a splinter is nearer, but still too weak an expression, for Paul would not entreat thrice for the removal of some minor distress. But it was not removed. Instead, he received grace and the assurance that God's power finds infirmity its fittest tool..."
I humbly suggest that we go back and look at God's dealing and purposes in Paul's life. Perhaps he is the most pivotal character beside
Jesus Christ.
Kat:
Hi Astrapho,
Either you believe the Bible is God's word or you do not. As Paul has 13 Epistles that take up a large portion of the New Testament, you would have to discredit quite a bit. Here is what Peter thought of Paul.
2Pe 3:14 Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless;
v. 15 and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation--as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you,
v. 16 as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures.
Now at the Jerusalem Council we see that Paul is among those there as a prominent member/Apostle and it is obvious that he is considered by the rest to be equal with them in the work.
Act 15:6 Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter.
Act 15:12 Then all the multitude kept silent and listened to Barnabas and Paul declaring how many miracles and wonders God had worked through them among the Gentiles.
Act 15:22 Then it pleased the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas, namely, Judas who was also named Barsabas, and Silas, leading men among the brethren.
Act 15:25 it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, v. 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
So why would we doubt Paul if the rest of the Apostles did not?
--- Quote ---after all Jesus founded the rock of his church on Peter, not Paul (Matt 16:18)
--- End quote ---
Mat 16:18 And1161 I say also2504, 3004 unto thee,4671 That3754 thou4771 art1488 Peter,4074 and2532 upon1909 this5026 rock4073 I will build3618 my3450 church;1577 and2532 the gates4439 of hell86 shall not3756 prevail against2729 it.846
G4074
Πέτρος
Petros; a noun akin to G4073, used as a proper name; “a stone” or “a boulder,” Peter, one of the twelve apostles.
G4073
πέτρα
petra; a prim. word; a (large mass of) rock.
As you can see these are two different words used for rock in that verse, the first is referring to Peter, but the second is referring to Christ Himself. It is Jesus Christ that is the "Cornerstone."
Eph 2:20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone,
There is a Bible study that goes into a lot of detail about 'Do James And Paul Contradict?' This will give you much information on the validity of the work that Paul did as an Apostle.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,9742.0.html
mercy, peace and love
Kat
meee:
The Bible is the inspired word of God, Holy Spirit breathed. It speaks of Paul being taught by Jesus. How can Paul be compared to Joseph Smith? I don't think he can or should be.
just my thoughts.PS:Thanks Kat, I was looking for what you posted about Paul. I'm soooo slow, but had remembered this and wanted to post it.
hugs,meee
--- Quote from: Kat on May 11, 2009, 11:02:09 AM ---
So why would we doubt Paul if the rest of the Apostles did not?
--- Quote ---after all Jesus founded the rock of his church on Peter, not Paul (Matt 16:18)
--- End quote ---
Mat 16:18 And1161 I say also2504, 3004 unto thee,4671 That3754 thou4771 art1488 Peter,4074 and2532 upon1909 this5026 rock4073 I will build3618 my3450 church;1577 and2532 the gates4439 of hell86 shall not3756 prevail against2729 it.846
G4074
Πέτρος
Petros; a noun akin to G4073, used as a proper name; “a stone” or “a boulder,” Peter, one of the twelve apostles.
G4073
πέτρα
petra; a prim. word; a (large mass of) rock.
As you can see these are two different words used for rock in that verse, the first is referring to Peter, but the second is referring to Christ Himself. It is Jesus Christ that is the "Cornerstone."
Eph 2:20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone,
There is a Bible study that goes into a lot of detail about 'Do James And Paul Contradict?' This will give you much information on the validity of the work that Paul did as an Apostle.
http://forums.bible-truths.com/index.php/topic,9742.0.html
mercy, peace and love
Kat
--- End quote ---
just my thoughts,
hugs,meee
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version