If Paul's books are wrong than so are

[Just_me_Mike]

all the other books in the OT. Thus making the whole bible suspect!

Paul changed the apparent direction of what many thought would be God's direction in the OT. Is this the only reason people bash on him and his books?

As the story goes he got his revelation just as many of the people did in the OT. So what is it? Is it the message the turns "OT only" students off?

Thanks.

 

[Zephyr]

Yup, they are indeed all wrong. Hope that helps.

 

[Storm]

If Paul's books are wrong than so are all the other books in the OT. Thus making the whole bible suspect!

How do you figure? Paul's not even in the OT!

Paul changed the apparent direction of what many thought would be God's direction in the OT. Is this the only reason people bash on him and his books?

Personally, I dislike him because he usurped Christ's authority to promote his own agenda.

 

[Riverwolf]

all the other books in the OT. Thus making the whole bible suspect!

Except that Paul is really the only Biblical author who proudly announces his name at the beginning of most of his letters.

Now... I don't believe Paul's books are "wrong," as they are expressions of his opinion, and opinions of this nature cannot be wrong, unless they are proven factually incorrect. I simply disagree with him.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Yup, they are indeed all wrong. Hope that helps.

Hardcore Zephyr, as always.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

How do you figure? Paul's not even in the OT!

Oh but the bible as a whole was never a complete book. So if we are open mindedly look at books that speak about this particular God, his books are very much a candidate to consider. The problem is the apparent direction of the older books changed and some did not want to accept it.
I am sure there are other reason, but I think that is the biggy

Personally, I dislike him because he usurped Christ's authority to promote his own agenda.

Hmmm, well it is either his agenda or God's agenda.
I suppose I am interested in your rationale, if you want to expand.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Except that Paul is really the only Biblical author who proudly announces his name at the beginning of most of his letters.

Now... I don't believe Paul's books are "wrong," as they are expressions of his opinion, and opinions of this nature cannot be wrong, unless they are proven factually incorrect. I simply disagree with him.

So why not disagree with say, Ruth, or Psalms, or Judges?
Maybe you do, but I thought I would ask! Thanks...

 

[Storm]

Oh but the bible as a whole was never a complete book. So if we are open mindedly look at books that speak about this particular God, his books are very much a candidate to consider. The problem is the apparent direction of the older books changed and some did not want to accept it.
I am sure there are other reason, but I think that is the biggy

That made absolutely no sense to me, sorry. How does Paul being wrong invalidate the OT?

Hmmm, well it is either his agenda or God's agenda.
I suppose I am interested in your rationale, if you want to expand.

Not right now.

 

[Zephyr]

Hardcore Zephyr, as always.

Not hardcore, just honest. If I was hardcore I'd probably be doing like a backflip or something when I wrote that.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

That made absolutely no sense to me, sorry. How does Paul being wrong invalidate the OT?

Well using the popular logic used against Paul, we can say that the collection that was eventually put together for the OT were just individual writings at one point, but chosen to make this OT.
The logic used against Paul's book are just as valid for each book of the OT.

ALL the books talk about the same God, just some choose to pick and choose which ones they like or don't like.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Not hardcore, just honest. If I was hardcore I'd probably be doing like a backflip or something when I wrote that.

Or a stage dive ey?

 

[TheKnight]

all the other books in the OT. Thus making the whole bible suspect!

Paul changed the apparent direction of what many thought would be God's direction in the OT. Is this the only reason people bash on him and his books?

As the story goes he got his revelation just as many of the people did in the OT. So what is it? Is it the message the turns "OT only" students off?

Thanks.

I don't understand how the OT is wrong is Paul is wrong...As one who trusts in the truth of Tanakh while rejecting the truth of Paul's writings, I don't see the connection. If anything, Paul is wrong because of the fact that a lot of what he says is contrary to "OT" ideas.

 

[Storm]

Well using the popular logic used against Paul, we can say that the collection that was eventually put together for the OT were just individual writings at one point, but chosen to make this OT.
The logic used against Paul's book are just as valid for each book of the OT.

ALL the books talk about the same God, just some choose to pick and choose which ones they like or don't like.

OK, but that doesn't bolster your argument. If the books were written individually and collected later (which they were), that makes Paul completely disconnected from the OT.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

I don't understand how the OT is wrong is Paul is wrong...As one who trusts in the truth of Tanakh while rejecting the truth of Paul's writings, I don't see the connection. If anything, Paul is wrong because of the fact that a lot of what he says is contrary to "OT" ideas.

Exactly my point, it is only wrong from an interpretation stand point. Otherwise there would be no Christianity.

You accept the OT and that Jesus didn't fit the requirements for Christ.

From my point of view God spoke to Paul just like he did to any other prophet or person. Unfortunately, it is what we want from God that determines what we believe to be God's words.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

OK, but that doesn't bolster your argument. If the books were written individually and collected later (which they were), that makes Paul completely disconnected from the OT.

Why, he is just another person like Amos or Isaiah or anyone else in the stream of people God has spoken too.
We chose to call things OT and NT, we humans broke the stream of God's message into this divide right?

 

[dogsgod]

Paul wrote letters, not books.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Paul wrote letters, not books.

writing is writing
sometimes less is much more

Psalms?

 

[Storm]

Why, he is just another person like Amos or Isaiah or anyone else in the stream of people God has spoken too.

Because they're not connected! It's like saying that if I stub my toe, you get a bruise. It just doesn't make sense.

We chose to call things OT and NT, we humans broke the stream of God's message into this divide right?

I get what you're saying here at least, but it's a point of faith.

 

[TheKnight]

Exactly my point, it is only wrong from an interpretation stand point. Otherwise there would be no Christianity.

You accept the OT and that Jesus didn't fit the requirements for Christ.

From my point of view God spoke to Paul just like he did to any other prophet or person. Unfortunately, it is what we want from God that determines what we believe to be God's words.

It has nothing to do with what is wanted. Paul says things that are obviously contradictory to certain Tanakh concepts.

Jesus doesn't fit the requirements for Messiah because of what I want, but because he just doesn't fit the requirements. It's not a matter of who wants what, but a matter of what is.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Because they're not connected! It's like saying that if I stub my toe, you get a bruise. It just doesn't make sense.

Does not God connect them? I am not understanding your point, sorry