Paul - An Apostle?

[YoursTrue]

The blessing of understanding Jesus gives healing sight to a person immediately, it does not blind a person. Paul was blind because he was rejecting what Jesus taught.

Saul, who was given the name Paul, was blinded by the light from Jesus. Temporarily. Jesus knew who he was talking to. Paul regained his sight, Jesus healed him.

 

[Triumph]

You can believe what you want. But the Bible says the following about Paul.

"Go!” said the Lord. “This man is My chosen instrument to carry My name before the Gentiles and their kings, and before the people of Israel. 16I will show him how much he must suffer for My name.”17So Ananias went to the house, and when he arrived, he placed his hands on Saul. “Brother Saul,” he said, “the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here, has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit.”

Ananias, the liar, deceiver and condemned by God church robber that gave Paul the sight that if Paul was crafty enough then he could rob churches and not be called a sinner for it.

 

[Triumph]

This is what the Bible says: Not what you say.
Acts 9:17 So Ananias went to the house, and when he arrived, he placed his hands on Saul. “Brother Saul,” he said, “the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here, has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit.”
Not only did Jesus heal Paul but filled him with holy spirit.

Paul is found in the house of...? JUDAS, the liar that said he loved Jesus but wants him to die, the man eternally despised by God for killing His beloved Son Jesus. Paul in the house of Judas eternally agrees with Judas that Jesus should die and like Judas lies saying he loves Jesus when he does not. Both men desire the death of Jesus and that is why they share the same eternal damnation.
Jesus said if you love Jesus, you will not threaten to kill him. Those that desire Jesus to die are not the people of God and they do not love God or Jesus.

 

[Bree]

Jesus did not select a man to lead people astray from the gospel of Jesus which is exactly what Paul does!

1. Jesus supported equal rights for women and women were to teach men the gospel they learn from Jesus.
Paul taught inequality of women, denied their rights of inheritance and said women are to remain silent and not teach men.
2. Jesus said the Christ is not a son of Abraham. Jesus also said call no man father.
Paul taught the Christ is a son of Abraham, Abraham is the father of us all and also gave the title of father to men in his church if they would not marry and be a father.
3. Jesus taught against the concept of religious circumcision, rejecting the meaning of it, and did not do it, physically or spiritually.
Paul taught everyone must believe in circumcision and if not physical, it was necessary to believe and accept what it means spiritually.
4. Jesus commanded people believe in water baptism for removal of sin, praising John the Baptist for teaching it.
Paul required people to believe in human sacrifice to remove sin. He also attempted to make the act of water baptism as optional and
insignificant.
5. Jesus rejected the concept that righteousness can be bought, purchased, and taught against it even whipping people for not believing him.
Paul taught the concept of a purchased salvation and required people to believe the death of Jesus purchased it.
6. Jesus said feed the poor, widows and orphans included and welcomed children into his church. Jesus made no age requirements.
Paul refused to help or feed young widows and her children and told them to stay out of his church.
There is more but these are all proof Paul never converted and Paul attempts to destroy the religion Jesus had established.

thats an interesting take on Paul.

 

[Triumph]

This is what the Bible says: Not what you say.
Acts 9:17 So Ananias went to the house, and when he arrived, he placed his hands on Saul. “Brother Saul,” he said, “the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here, has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit.”
Not only did Jesus heal Paul but filled him with holy spirit.

Blind Paul is leading the blind that refuse to listen to the words Jesus taught that Paul denies are true. The gospel of Paul and the gospel of Jesus are exact opposites.
Jesus said the Christ is NOT a son of Abraham. Paul said the Christ IS a son of Abraham, but you follow Paul because you cannot hear the words of Jesus. The words of Jesus are not in you, but the words of Paul, a killer of Jesus, are?

 

[Sedim Haba]

It is probable that Jesus and Matthew spoke Greek, Latin, Hebrew and other languages. Rome expected Matthew to do business collecting taxes from all the residents in their district that were a racially diverse people. That required a highly educated man to converse with everyone to discern what taxes are owed from each. Jesus spoke directly with Romans so certainly he understood and spoke Latin. Jesus spoke directly with a Greek woman converting her, so it is evident Jesus spoke Greek. Jesus taught against the concept of separate races as Jesus taught all people are equal and denied God chose only Hebrew/Jews to be His people. God did not select a specific race as superior to all others. Jesus came to save the world not just people that claim Abraham spoke with God. There is only one God but Abraham never worshipped him as Abraham invented his definition of a God and then told people he is selected by that God and they are his people if they believe Abraham. Jesus said Abraham never heard the voice of God. Woe to the scribes that wrote he did.

Well, it's very likely that Matthew spoke Greek, seeing his position. I fail to see why fisherman and
carpenters would bother, seeing that the common folk hated the Roman occupation. Foreigners who
lived in the land would most likely be able to speak the native language of course, so no proof there.

I have no problem with the concept of others being 'grafted onto the tree' but the way you just
insulted Abraham makes it clear to me that is not your desire, reeks of Replacement Theology.

 

[Triumph]

as i said above, Paul wasnt counted in as one of the 12 apostles... but he was chosen by Christ Jesus to teach the nations. He was an apostle, which means, 'sent forth'

He was sent forth by Jesus to the nations. So he was an apostle.

ONLY Paul said he was chosen. Over and over again it is ONLY Paul claiming he is selected by Jesus. The stories of what happened of his being chosen by Jesus all come from Paul no one else. What other man said Paul saw Jesus in the desert? What is that witnesses' name and whom was that testament of witness given to in order verify what Paul is saying is truth?
Jesus taught if a man is his own witness (without anyone else to verify what is said is truth), then that man is lying, his testament is untrue. What Paul is saying is unverifiable, untrue because Paul had no one to testify for him. Paul was lying when he said he had 2 witnesses, Paul had zero witnesses because to BE a witness one must testify to other people, and Paul could produce no one to prove his statements are true. Paul is not just a murderer of innocent people and a thief taking money from the destitute; Paul is also a supreme liar.

 

[Triumph]

Well, it's very likely that Matthew spoke Greek, seeing his position. I fail to see why fisherman and
carpenters would bother, seeing that the common folk hated the Roman occupation. Foreigners who
lived in the land would most likely be able to speak the native language of course, so no proof there.

I have no problem with the concept of others being 'grafted onto the tree' but the way you just
insulted Abraham makes it clear to me that is not your desire, reeks of Replacement Theology.

The temple would have given Jesus an advanced education, expecting him to lead their nation as their military Christ when an adult. Jesus was blessed by God his Father so already had advanced intelligence from childhood that astonished adults in the temple that were amazed by his intelligence.
Peter worked as a fisherman with no need for an advanced education in those days, so I think he did not have one. Peter used disciple Mark as his scribe, so it is possible that Peter never learned how to read.
Abraham had no witness that God chose him, all we have is the word of Abraham and Abraham is proven in scripture to be a deceiver.
Jesus tells us a person must have a witness to testify what happened actually did happen to prove it is truth and not a lie.
Abraham had no witnesses that he is chosen by God. Jesus said WOE to scribes. Scribes will write what they are told to write by their superiors if it is truth or not out of fear of being punished or even killed if they don't. Abraham had scribes write he was chosen and that is true. Jesus said the Christ is not from the bloodline of Abraham. That makes the bloodline covenant Abraham claims to have with God not true.

 

[Bree]

ONLY Paul said he was chosen. Over and over again it is ONLY Paul claiming he is selected by Jesus. The stories of what happened of his being chosen by Jesus all come from Paul no one else. What other man said Paul saw Jesus in the desert? What is that witnesses' name and whom was that testament of witness given to in order verify what Paul is saying is truth?
Jesus taught if a man is his own witness (without anyone else to verify what is said is truth), then that man is lying, his testament is untrue. What Paul is saying is unverifiable, untrue because Paul had no one to testify for him. Paul was lying when he said he had 2 witnesses, Paul had zero witnesses because to BE a witness one must testify to other people, and Paul could produce no one to prove his statements are true. Paul is not just a murderer of innocent people and a thief taking money from the destitute; Paul is also a supreme liar.

no. Ananias, a disciple was also called on by Christ to attend to Paul so now Paul has an eyewitness who testified to the account. Its not just Pauls word. And Paul did not write the account about himself and there is no way Luke would have written the account without getting eyewitness testimony from someone other then Paul.

 

[kaninchen]

there is no way Luke would have written the account without getting eyewitness testimony from someone other then Paul.

We would know this to be the case how, exactly?

 

[2ndpillar]

Here is what is written about that meeting:
"As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?”
5 “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked.
“I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied. 6 “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”
7 The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. 8 Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. 9 For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything."

There are two accounts of the wilderness meeting. The other one disagrees with the one you just cited, in which no one heard any voice. The account was not given by a direct witness, and according to the unknown author, who is often assumed to be Luke, the account would have been provided by Paul, who was supposedly an associate of Paul. There were no witnesses to what was said, and apparently, according to Paul, through the author of Acts, no one saw anyone. According to Yeshua, self-witnessing, "is not true", and you should not believe anyone who says, "He is in the wilderness".

New King James Version 22:9
“And those who were with me indeed saw the light and were afraid, but they did not hear the voice of Him who spoke to me.

 

[Triumph]

no. Ananias, a disciple was also called on by Christ to attend to Paul so now Paul has an eyewitness who testified to the account. Its not just Pauls word. And Paul did not write the account about himself and there is no way Luke would have written the account without getting eyewitness testimony from someone other then Paul.

Understand Ananias is a dead man. He died because God would not tolerate a lying thief that claimed he supported the poor and the words of God when he did not. Ananias wanted to be perceived as righteous when he was a deceiver and that is why his name is used in association with Paul. Ananias can NOT give "sight" only God can give sight and Ananias is not God. Paul was blind to truth and never received spiritual sight.
But the most important thing to understand about conversion is does the person uphold the gospel of Jesus or not. Paul tells people he does but actually teaches the exact opposite to what Jesus taught. Example: Jesus did not want people to be given titles in his church.

Matthew 23: 8 But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren.
9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven."
Jesus wanted complete equality, ALL brethren, none exalted above another. Verse 9 obviously means other than your biological father, CALL no other man father as a religious title.
Paul hands out the title of "father" which requires other people to CALL them father thus causing them not to obey Jesus, as they do obey Paul.

 

[2ndpillar]

no. Ananias, a disciple was also called on by Christ to attend to Paul so now Paul has an eyewitness who testified to the account. Its not just Pauls word. And Paul did not write the account about himself and there is no way Luke would have written the account without getting eyewitness testimony from someone other then Paul.

You seem to be a little presumptive. The whole wilderness account would have had to been from only Paul. As for some guy Ananias, that appears to be a name associated in people being killed by the Holy Spirit for lying, and sentencing Yeshua to death. Besides, if you have some unknown guy possibly associated with the false prophet Paul, providing evidence, well that kind of falls short of what Yeshua required per Matthew 18:16.

 

[Triumph]

There are two accounts of the wilderness meeting. The other one disagrees with the one you just cited, in which no one heard any voice. The account was not given by a direct witness, and according to the unknown author, who is often assumed to be Luke, the account would have been provided by Paul, who was supposedly an associate of Paul. There were no witnesses to what was said, and apparently, according to Paul, through the author of Acts, no one saw anyone. According to Yeshua, self-witnessing, "is not true", and you should not believe anyone who says, "He is in the wilderness".

New King James Version 22:9
“And those who were with me indeed saw the light and were afraid, but they did not hear the voice of Him who spoke to me.

Glad you are pointing people to see that fact. Paul is in the Bible as an example of a false teacher. Jesus said there will be false teachers and since Paul is one, it proves Jesus was not lying when he said people will mislead.
2 Peter 2:1
But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction."
It is heresy to believe God accepts human sacrifices. God never did. God never wanted men to burn a child alive or nail a man to a dead tree.
Paul adheres to the religious blood sacrifice traditions of his Pharisee fathers contrary to the church dogma established by Jesus that
commanded people believe in merciful water baptism to remove sin. People that follow Paul deny the Lords' God given right to life.

 

[Triumph]

You seem to be a little presumptive. The whole wilderness account would have had to been from only Paul. As for some guy Ananias, that appears to be a name associated in people being killed by the Holy Spirit for lying, and sentencing Yeshua to death. Besides, if you have some unknown guy possibly associated with the false prophet Paul, providing evidence, well that kind of falls short of what Yeshua required per Matthew 18:16.

The only other man named Ananias in the Bible was a High Priest that supported Paul because Pharisee Paul was supporting that High Priest and his Jewish laws. They were cohorts believing Jesus should die. But the temple expected Paul to pay them money to have his own temple/church probably as a sin offering, but Paul didn't and that caused Ananias to desire Paul be killed.
In Acts 24, Paul is being accused
5. For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:
6 Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law.
Paul claims this,
Because that thou mayest understand, that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship.
12And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city:
13 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.
14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing ALL things which are written in the law and in the prophets:"

JESUS was leading people away from believing in Jewish law, leading people OUT of the temple not into it. Jesus went into the temple to dispute their laws and raise up the people to leave the temple.
But Paul claims he still supports ALL things written in the law so he supports the temple and the High Priest that runs it. There is a Mosaic law that claims a Jew has a right to own a slave. The laws support animal and human sacrifice to a God. The laws support inequality of gender and that a woman in in a state of sin for having a baby and must pay the temple to be cleansed of that sin to be called righteous for giving birth to a child. One of the laws state a person will die rejected by God for having messy hair. One law states it is a sin to mix different types of fabric in one garment.
Moses created those laws and claimed God revealed them to him when that is not true. Moses made them up out of his own imagination. Moses did set up some good secular laws but mixed them with a large dose of crazy, untrue, and cruel laws that people were forced to obey at threat of being murdered if they didn't.
The problem is Paul formed his own temple/church and people were paying Paul not the Jewish temple priests. That was seen as seditious especially since even though Paul supported the murder of Jesus, Paul also was using the name of Jesus as the Jewish Christ that will return to kill people to support temple beliefs. Paul creates false Jews grafted into the tree that Jesus said bears no fruit.

 

[YoursTrue]

Paul is found in the house of...? JUDAS, the liar that said he loved Jesus but wants him to die, the man eternally despised by God for killing His beloved Son Jesus. Paul in the house of Judas eternally agrees with Judas that Jesus should die and like Judas lies saying he loves

By the time Jesus spoke to Saul, the betrayer Judas killed himself. He was dead. There is more than one man named Judas in the Bible.

 

[YoursTrue]

The only other man named Ananias in the Bible was a High Priest that supported Paul because Pharisee Paul was supporting that High Priest and his Jewish laws. They were cohorts believing Jesus should die.
In Acts 24, Paul is being accused
5. For we have found this man a pestilent fellow, and a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ringleader of the sect of the Nazarenes:
6 Who also hath gone about to profane the temple: whom we took, and would have judged according to our law.
Paul claims this,
Because that thou mayest understand, that there are yet but twelve days since I went up to Jerusalem for to worship.
12And they neither found me in the temple disputing with any man, neither raising up the people, neither in the synagogues, nor in the city:
13 Neither can they prove the things whereof they now accuse me.
14 But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing ALL things which are written in the law and in the prophets:"

JESUS was leading people away from believing in Jewish law, leading people OUT of the temple not into it. Jesus went into the temple to dispute their laws and raise up the people to leave the temple.
But Paul claims he still supports ALL things written in the law so he supports the temple and the High Priest that runs it. There is a Mosaic law that claims a Jew has a right to own a slave. The laws support animal and human sacrifice to a God. The laws support inequality of gender and that a woman in in a state of sin for having a baby and must pay the temple to be cleansed of that sin to be called righteous for giving birth to a child. One of the laws state a person will die rejected by God for having messy hair. One law states it is a sin to mix different types of fabric in one garment.
Moses created those laws and claimed God revealed them to him when that is not true. Moses made them up out of his own imagination. Moses did set up some good secular laws but mixed them with a large dose of crazy, untrue, and cruel laws that people were forced to obey at threat of being murdered if they didn't.

Jesus showed the people he did not agree with all their rabbinic interpretations. He never denied the law of God.

 

[metis]

Jesus showed the people he did not agree with all their rabbinic interpretations. He never denied the law of God.

Here is "God's Law" as found in Torah, including the verses: The 613 Commandments (Mitzvot) - Mitzvahs & Traditions (chabad.org)

 

[YoursTrue]

Glad you are pointing people to see that fact. Paul is in the Bible as an example of a false teacher...

Have you asked Metis here about that?

 

[YoursTrue]

Here is "God's Law" as found in Torah, including the verses: The 613 Commandments (Mitzvot) - Mitzvahs & Traditions (chabad.org)

Jesus spoke against perversions of scripture. Not against God's law