Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
The church had exclusive rights to the Bible along with any fragments that needed to be filled in between the spaces by their scribes.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Paul a.k.a. Saul of Tarsus
- Thread starter justaguy313
- Start date
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Paul a.k.a. Saul of Tarsus
Sorry, wasn't Paul a Hellenist and a spy of the Romans and he got admission with the Pharisees as they couldn't deny him as such? Moreover the Judaism people don't acknowledge that, right?:
"Not a Hebrew Scholar; a Hellenist.
Saul (whose Roman cognomen was Paul; see Acts xiii. 9) was born of Jewish parents in the first decade of the common era at Tarsus in Cilicia (Acts ix. 11, xxi. 39, xxii. 3). The claim in Rom. xi. 1 and Phil. iii. 5 that he was of the tribe of Benjamin, suggested by the similarity of his name with that of the first Israelitish king, is, if the passages are genuine, a false one, no tribal lists or pedigrees of this kind having been in existence at that time (see Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl." i. 7, 5; Pes. 62b; M. Sachs, "Beiträge zur Sprach- und Alterthumsforschung," 1852, ii. 157). Nor is there any indication in Paul's writings or arguments that he had received the rabbinical training ascribed to him by Christian writers, ancient and modern; least of all could he have acted or written as he did had he been, as is alleged (Acts xxii. 3), the disciple of Gamaliel I., the mild Hillelite. His quotations from Scripture, which are all taken, directly or from memory, from the Greek version, betray no familiarity with the original Hebrew text. "
SAUL OF TARSUS - JewishEncyclopedia.com
Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.
Regards
justaguy313
Active Member
Paul a.k.a. Saul of Tarsus
Sorry, wasn't Paul a Hellenist and a spy of the Romans and he got admission with the Pharisees as they couldn't deny him as such? Moreover the Judaism people don't acknowledge that, right?:
"Not a Hebrew Scholar; a Hellenist.
Saul (whose Roman cognomen was Paul; see Acts xiii. 9) was born of Jewish parents in the first decade of the common era at Tarsus in Cilicia (Acts ix. 11, xxi. 39, xxii. 3). The claim in Rom. xi. 1 and Phil. iii. 5 that he was of the tribe of Benjamin, suggested by the similarity of his name with that of the first Israelitish king, is, if the passages are genuine, a false one, no tribal lists or pedigrees of this kind having been in existence at that time (see Eusebius, "Hist. Eccl." i. 7, 5; Pes. 62b; M. Sachs, "Beiträge zur Sprach- und Alterthumsforschung," 1852, ii. 157). Nor is there any indication in Paul's writings or arguments that he had received the rabbinical training ascribed to him by Christian writers, ancient and modern; least of all could he have acted or written as he did had he been, as is alleged (Acts xxii. 3), the disciple of Gamaliel I., the mild Hillelite. His quotations from Scripture, which are all taken, directly or from memory, from the Greek version, betray no familiarity with the original Hebrew text. "
Right?SAUL OF TARSUS - JewishEncyclopedia.com
Complete contents the 1906 Jewish Encyclopedia.jewishencyclopedia.com
Regards
Paul wanted to bring Christianity to the gentiles, mostly Greeks, that's why Jewish encyclopedia says that he was a Hellenist.
Saul of Tarsus was a member of Synagogue of Freedmen. As a Cilician(See Acts 22:3) his ancestors were among freed slaves granted Roman citizenship, which explains his intense zeal for his Jewish heritage. He was a very notable Pharisee even among the people. He was also very well versed in Old Testament and rabbinic traditions.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Because the church teaches that Jesus is God.
The Gospel clarified Jesus is God. Explicitly in the first chapter of John.
So it's not Paul who claimed Jesus was God.
justaguy313
Active Member
Nowhere in the New Testament does Jesus claim that he is God Allmighty
Who is God, in your vision?
justaguy313
Active Member
Who is God, in your vision?
There has always been One God in all religions. Jews call Him El Elyon, Christians Adonay, Egyptians Atum or Ptah, Hindus Atman and Muslims Allah.
The message has always been the same, it's the scholars and religious authorities who corrupted religion.
All Religions Are One – The Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light
Imam Ahmed Al-Hassan (pbuh) has revealed that all religions are united and are considered to be all parts of one giant family of faith.
theahmadireligion.org
Interesting.There has always been One God in all religions. Jews call Him El Elyon, Christians Adonay, Egyptians Atum or Ptah, Hindus Atman and Muslims Allah.
The message has always been the same, it's the scholars and religious authorities who corrupted religion.
All Religions Are One – The Ahmadi Religion of Peace and Light
Imam Ahmed Al-Hassan (pbuh) has revealed that all religions are united and are considered to be all parts of one giant family of faith.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
With all due respect, the first chapter of John does not say that Jesus is God.
That chapter is subject to different interpretations by different people.
According to my interpretation Jesus is not God incarnate, Jesus is a Manifestation of God who revealed God and showed us what God is like.
If no one has ever seen God, then Jesus cannot be God, since we know from the Bible that many people saw Jesus.
The following translations of john 1:18 have been altered in order to make Jesus into God.
John 1:18
John 1:18 - Bible Gateway
CSB No one has ever seen God. The one and only Son, who is himself God and is at the Father’s side—he has revealed him.
ERV No one has ever seen God. The only Son is the one who has shown us what God is like. He is himself God and is very close to the Father.
CEV No one has ever seen God. The only Son, who is truly God and is closest to the Father, has shown us what God is like.
NET No one has ever seen God. The only one, himself God, who is in closest fellowship with the Father, has made God known.
NIV No one has ever seen God, but the one and only Son, who is himself God and is in closest relationship with the Father, has made him known.
NLT No one has ever seen God. But the unique One, who is himself God, is near to the Father’s heart. He has revealed God to us.
By altering the translations, the verse ends up making no logical sense at all.
Jesus was either the Son of God or He was the Father (God). Jesus cannot be both the Son and the Father. That is logically contradictory.
The following translations of John 1:18 are correct.
In short, no one has ever seen God, but Jesus, who was the Son of God, has declared God and made God known. Jesus has shown is what God is like.
John 1:18
John 1:18 - Bible Gateway
CEB No one has ever seen God. God the only Son, who is at the Father’s side, has made God known.
KJV No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.
NASB No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.
NCV No one has ever seen God. But God the only Son is very close to the Father, and he has shown us what God is like.
NKJV No one has seen God at any time. The only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has declared Him.
NLV The much-loved Son is beside the Father. No man has ever seen God. But Christ has made God known to us.
RSV No one has ever seen God; the only Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has made him known.
WE No one has ever seen God. But his only Son is very near to his Father's heart. He has told us plainly about God.
justaguy313
Active Member
Christianity as we know it today has followed in the footsteps of Paul rather than Jesus. Religion has become a billion-dollar industry complete with mega churches and celebrity preachers whereas Jesus taught to have nothing and own nothing. Pastors like Joel Osteen, Kenneth Copeland and many others traverse the globe on private jets, live in mansions and hoard hundreds of millions of dollars for themselves. Isn’t this exactly the kind of corruption that Jesus warned against when he commanded his followers to freely give. So why then did Paul teach the opposite. It is impossible to mention extravagant wealth and religion without mentioning the Roman Catholic Church well known for its opulent costumes and décor. The Vatican sits atop billions of dollars in assets. The Pope exemplifies the word of Paul rather than Jesus and what’s more the Pope’s hands are dirty from shaking hands with the tyrants of this world. Jesus taught that the nations of the world are under the rule of the devil, in the Gospel of Matthew, Satan offers Jesus authority to rule the kingdoms of the world but Jesus refuses saying:
Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’
~ Matthew 4:10 ~
Jesus was a revolutionary who taught that submission should only be given unto God. So why did Paul preach submission unto tyranny? He wrote in his epistle to the Romans:
“ Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted…”
~ Romans 13:1-2 ~
And this is the very verse that the United States uses their government-funded preachers to go out into neighborhoods and times of Martial Law to get them to submit to the tyrannical measures of the US government but wait a minute did Moses ever bow to Pharaoh? Did Abraham ever submit to Nimrod? Did Jesus pledge allegiance to Caesar? Or was it Paul who led his followers down a dangerous road teaching them to love the very same tyrants who put Jesus to death.
Paul sympathy towards the tyrants makes more sense perhaps given that the Ahlul Bayt listed him in the same category as some of the worst tyrants of all time. Imam Musa Al-Kazim said in a long narration about Hellfire:
Imam Musa Al-Kazim (PBUH) said:
“…And in the abdomen of that viper there are boxes in which five of the previous nations and two of this nation reside…As for the five, they are Cain who killed Abel, and Nimrod who argued with Abraham about his Lord, and said “I give life and cause death.” And Pharaoh who said, “I am your most exalted Lord,” and Yahoud who brought forth a new Judaism for the Jews, and Paul who Christianized the Christians anew…”
~ Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol.8, P.310-311
And isn’t it clear that Paul’s doctrine was a brand new version of Christianity. He altered the very core of the religion with his innovative concept of atonement. It was prophesied in the Torah that the blood of Jesus the Messiah would be poured out as a ransom for many.
Isaiah said:
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned-every one- to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
~Isaiah 53:6 ~
If you take a look at Paul’s overarching message, he made salvation effortless. He abolished the covenant, the agreement between God and mankind and basically told people to follow their own desires as long as they believe in Jesus. Isn’t this exactly what Jesus warned about when he said:
Enter through the narrow gate, for wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
~ Matthew 7:13-14 ~
So here we have two distinct camps, Jesus Christ and someone who comes along after Jesus pretending to speak on his behalf while leading people astray, the opposite of Christ, what can only be described as history’s very first Antichrist and he is responsible for repeating a pattern which has plagued God’s religion throughout time. Oftentimes after a prophet is gone someone comes along and corrupts their message to the core. Imam Al-Sadiq the sixth Imam from the family of Muhammad said:
Imam Al-Sadiq (PBUH) said:
“ God did not send a prophet except that there be in his nation two devils who harm him and mislead the people after him… As for the two companions of Jesus, they are Paul and Meriton…”
~ Tafsir Alqummi, Vol.1, P.214 ~
Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’
~ Matthew 4:10 ~
Jesus was a revolutionary who taught that submission should only be given unto God. So why did Paul preach submission unto tyranny? He wrote in his epistle to the Romans:
“ Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted…”
~ Romans 13:1-2 ~
And this is the very verse that the United States uses their government-funded preachers to go out into neighborhoods and times of Martial Law to get them to submit to the tyrannical measures of the US government but wait a minute did Moses ever bow to Pharaoh? Did Abraham ever submit to Nimrod? Did Jesus pledge allegiance to Caesar? Or was it Paul who led his followers down a dangerous road teaching them to love the very same tyrants who put Jesus to death.
Paul sympathy towards the tyrants makes more sense perhaps given that the Ahlul Bayt listed him in the same category as some of the worst tyrants of all time. Imam Musa Al-Kazim said in a long narration about Hellfire:
Imam Musa Al-Kazim (PBUH) said:
“…And in the abdomen of that viper there are boxes in which five of the previous nations and two of this nation reside…As for the five, they are Cain who killed Abel, and Nimrod who argued with Abraham about his Lord, and said “I give life and cause death.” And Pharaoh who said, “I am your most exalted Lord,” and Yahoud who brought forth a new Judaism for the Jews, and Paul who Christianized the Christians anew…”
~ Bihar Al-Anwar, Vol.8, P.310-311
And isn’t it clear that Paul’s doctrine was a brand new version of Christianity. He altered the very core of the religion with his innovative concept of atonement. It was prophesied in the Torah that the blood of Jesus the Messiah would be poured out as a ransom for many.
Isaiah said:
All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned-every one- to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
~Isaiah 53:6 ~
If you take a look at Paul’s overarching message, he made salvation effortless. He abolished the covenant, the agreement between God and mankind and basically told people to follow their own desires as long as they believe in Jesus. Isn’t this exactly what Jesus warned about when he said:
Enter through the narrow gate, for wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
~ Matthew 7:13-14 ~
So here we have two distinct camps, Jesus Christ and someone who comes along after Jesus pretending to speak on his behalf while leading people astray, the opposite of Christ, what can only be described as history’s very first Antichrist and he is responsible for repeating a pattern which has plagued God’s religion throughout time. Oftentimes after a prophet is gone someone comes along and corrupts their message to the core. Imam Al-Sadiq the sixth Imam from the family of Muhammad said:
Imam Al-Sadiq (PBUH) said:
“ God did not send a prophet except that there be in his nation two devils who harm him and mislead the people after him… As for the two companions of Jesus, they are Paul and Meriton…”
~ Tafsir Alqummi, Vol.1, P.214 ~
If we are accurate, Paul doesn't have 3 different contradictory versions of the event. Those scriptures are not in contradiction. That the people didn't see Jesus, is not the same that they didn't see the light. It is possible, and by the context probably, that they saw the light, why else would they react to something. And hearing the voice is true in both of them, even if only the other says they didn't understand it.
It is common that people don't repeat things exactly the same way every time. Not mentioning something, doesn't mean it didn't happen as told in other case.
But he is recognized for example here:
And think of the long-suffering of our Lord as salvation, as also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you, according to the wisdom given to him; as also in all his epistles, speaking in them concerning these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the unlearned and unsettled pervert, as also they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.
2 Pet. 3:15
By what I know, the word apostle can be used for anyone testifying for Jesus. That doesn't mean that the 12 are the special ones, selected for the special purpose.
I don't think Paul says the law is dead. If you know he says so, please show the scripture.
But, the Biblical truth is that people broke the old covenant. And that is why God set the new one. And Jesus gave for his disciples the right to forgive sins. So, disciples of Jesus can forgive sins. They could do that even without demanding believing. However, forgiveness is not useful, if person doesn't become righteous, because eternal life is promised only for righteous.
If you forgive anyone’s sins, they have been forgiven them. If you retain anyone’s sins, they have been retained.”
John 20:23
These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.
Matt. 25:46
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23
justaguy313
Active Member
Paul’s claimed to Apostleship directly contradicts what Jesus taught.
For when I tried to keep the law, it condemned me. So I died to the law—I stopped trying to meet all its requirements—so that I might live for God.
-Galatians 2:19
Who wrote Peter's gospel can be debated. I believe Paul had a hidden hand in all gospels included in the New Testament
Gospel of Peter - Wikipedia
Aren't we talking about supposed apostle of Jesus?
Nope. Apostles are only those who do miracles. It's proposterous that you even claim something like that
12 Bible verses about Apostles, Given Miraculous Power
A topical Bible which shows the most relevant Bible verse for each topic
The Israelites never had another prophet sent to them since the time of Jesus till now. They waited for 2000 years and nobody has been sent to them and if they wait for the rest of Eternity nobody will ever be sent to them because of what they did to Jesus the Messiah
-Aba Sadiq from him is peace
justaguy313
Active Member
Jesus appointed the 12 for the specific positions, doesn't necessary mean that no one else could be an apostle.
That is interesting translation. For example World English Bible has it like this:
For I, through the law, died to the law, that I might live to God.
Gal. 2:19
I think the point is not that the law is not valid, only that the law brought death to him. And he lives now through Jesus, which I think means he will live by God's will.
And by what the Bible tells, all disciples of Jesus ("Christians") have the potential for that.
Correct, it is generally agreed (with little disagreement) that 1&2 Timothy and Titus were not written by Paul, and in fact were probably written at least 10 years after his death.
Textual criticism, context, content. Most people have a "style" of writing that, if you have enough of it, lets you differentiate what they actually wrote from other stuff written and been attributed to them. This includes typical word choices and phrasing. Context and content allow scholars to see where there are differences of place and, more importantly, actual beliefs.
So, biblical critics read the text looking for clues in:
- Internal evidence (does the text actually say, "I Paul, write this")
- External evidence (are there contemporary references to the text that say "Paul wrote this")
- Historical setting (does the author appear to know much about the time/place he was writing?)
- Language and style (every author shows evidence of their own vocabulary and quirks of language use)
- Contents and theology (do 1&2 Timothy, Titus or Hebrews reflect the same theology and understanding of the law as letters like Romans and 1&2 Corinthians?)
Ok, so in other words they don't know, they guess on basis of certain assumptions that can be wrong. Not good enough for me. If someone would compare my new writings to old ones, he could claim as well that they are from some other person.
Well, then, we'll just have to name you the greatest scholar in history. And how many ancient languages are you fluent in?
Kelly of the Phoenix
Well-Known Member
If Jesus is so revolutionary when it comes to women, how are there rich women for him to exploit, I mean, get support?