saint paul

[esmith]

im not sure why some hold such a view of Paul. From the writings of Paul we can see him to be a devout christian who worked tirelessly to establish the early church. The early christians loved him dearly and he was used by the Jerusalem Apostles to establish gentile congregations. He was chosen by God to be an apostle to the nations, he was guided by angels, he saw supernatural visions, he was given powers of healing and the power to speak numerous foreign languages/tongues. God was using Paul to help establish christianity...and he did a damn fine job of it too.

If Paul was not being used by God, how could he have accomplished so much? I really think that the opposition he received from the above groups simply add further evidence to Paul being a true apostle

And from where do you get this information, Paul? If so how can you justify using a persons own writings to validate the writings?

 

[Pegg]

And from where do you get this information, Paul? If so how can you justify using a persons own writings to validate the writings?

Other christian writings paint Paul in a very good light which indicates that Paul was a loved member of the congregations.

The book of Acts (written by Luke) is full of Pauls missionary journeys and his teachings and speeches and powerful works...even his conversion. We read in Acts how Paul worked along with the Apostles of the Jerusalem congregation and was sent on special errands by them. So there is no reason to reject Paul if the 12 apostles were closely associating with him.

 

[alishan]

So there is no reason to reject Paul if the 12 apostles were closely associating with him

but what do you think about the problem between james the just and paul in the council of jerusalem?

 

[Pegg]

but what do you think about the problem between james the just and paul in the council of jerusalem?

i really dont think there is a problem between the two

Obviously the introduction of gentiles into a jewish community was going to be rocky, they were a newly founded group who were still coming to terms with the breakaway from their much loved Judaism. Even Paul expressed how difficult it was for him to be parted from his jewish roots, so its no wonder that the introduction of gentiles would cause upheaval.

But if you read through the account in Acts 15 you'll see that the apostles including James came to a unanimous decision regarding the gentiles and mosaic law. They accepted the testimony of Paul and came to their own decision about the matter.

The result:

22 Then the apostles and the older men together with the whole congregation favored sending chosen men from among them to Antioch along with Paul and Bar′na‧bas, namely, Judas who was called Bar′sab‧bas and Silas, leading men among the brothers; 23 and by their hand they wrote: “The apostles and the older men, brothers, to those brothers in Antioch and Syria and Ci‧li′cia who are from the nations: Greetings! 24 Since we have heard that some from among us have caused YOU trouble with speeches, trying to subvert YOUR souls, although we did not give them any instructions, 25 we have come to a unanimous accord and have favored choosing men to send to YOU together with our loved ones, Bar′na‧bas and Paul, 26 men that have delivered up their souls for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 We are therefore dispatching Judas and Silas, that they also may report the same things by word. 28 For the holy spirit and we ourselves have favored adding no further burden to YOU, except these necessary things, 29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper.


The Apostles supported Pauls view that the mosaic law was not a requirement for the gentiles. They loved Paul and they commissioned him to advocate their newfound position even sending along extra witnesses from that meeting to ensure everyone accepted that the decision had come from Jerusalem and not Paul himself.

 

[alishan]

james daid

29 to keep abstaining from things sacrificed to idols and from blood and from things strangled and from fornication. If YOU carefully keep yourselves from these things, YOU will prosper.

but it s part of jew law isn't it?

and do christian of nowadays obey to this forbidden things?

 

[Pegg]

james daid

but it s part of jew law isn't it?

and do christian of nowadays obey to this forbidden things?

yes, these were the laws that the apostles, including Paul, recognized as applying to everyone. James stated:
Acts 15:19 Hence my decision is not to trouble those from the nations who are turning to God, 20 but to write them to abstain from things polluted by idols and from fornication and from what is strangled and from blood

Paul was in agreeance with that...he didnt dispute it with James. He conveyed the same laws to the congregations stressing their importance in his letters as the following examples show:

1 Corinthians 6:9 What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators...will inherit God’s kingdom

1 Cor 8 4-8 Now concerning the eating of foods offered to idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, ...7 Nevertheless, there is not this knowledge in all persons; but some, being accustomed until now to the idol, eat food as something sacrificed to an idol, and their conscience, being weak, is defiled. 8 But food will not commend us to God; if we do not eat, we do not fall short, and, if we eat, we have no credit to ourselves
And it should be noted that those laws were around before the Mosaic law was introduced. for instance, Noah was given instructions not to eat the blood of animals. So we can say that mankind has known what Gods standards on certain issues are since the beginning of mankinds history. Cain knew it was wrong to murder his brother long before the mosaic law put it in writing.

 

[alishan]

so do the christian of nowadays are real christian by not aplying this ?

 

[alishan]

so what are the rules that all the apostles agreed not to apply for the new christians?

circuncision? and?

 

[Pegg]

so do the christian of nowadays are real christian by not aplying this ?

christians are told they must be found approved by God. Just calling oneself a christian does not make one approved. Christians must 'apply' the word of God in their lives and try as hard as they can to live by that word. Mistakes are to be expected because we are imperfect, but God requires repentance before he grants forgiveness. So if a christian willfully practices sin, they may call themselves a christian, but in the end God will be their judge.

so what are the rules that all the apostles agreed not to apply for the new christians?

circuncision? and?

circumcision, sabbath keeping, animal sacrifices, ritual washing, observing of the festivals.... all the formalistic requirements of the mosaic law were no longer necessary.

What was necessary for christians was to show love to their neighbours and live by the law of love. To be forgiving, kind, humble like Jesus was. And importantly christians were expected to carry on the work that Jesus began...that is preaching the goodnews of the kingdom of God.

 

[alishan]

thanks you very much

but what would say Jesus, James and paul by seeing the christian going to the mass and at the same time changing girl friend every month or every year?

and did the jew have precise pray in one day like the muslim for example? precise number of pray a day?

 

[Pegg]

thanks you very much

but what would say Jesus, James and paul by seeing the christian going to the mass and at the same time changing girl friend every month or every year?

Jesus would say the same to those christians as he told to his followers in his day:
Matthew 7:21 "not everyone saying to me Lord Lord will enter into the kingdom of the heavens, but the one doing the will of my Father, who is in the heavens, will"

Paul would say the same as he told the christians in the Corinthian congregation:
1Corinthians 6:9 What! Do YOU not know that unrighteous persons will not inherit God’s kingdom? Do not be misled. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men kept for unnatural purposes, nor men who lie with men, 10 nor thieves, nor greedy persons, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit God’s kingdom"

James would remind christians that they must be chaste to stand approved.
James 3:13 Who is wise and understanding among YOU? Let him show out of his fine conduct his works with a mildness that belongs to wisdom. ...17 But the wisdom from above is first of all chaste, then peaceable, reasonable, ready to obey, full of mercy and good fruits, not making partial distinctions, not hypocritical


A christian must live the life of a christian. Anyone can call themselves a christian, but only those living in harmony with what it 'means' to be a christian will stand approved. A lot of the problem comes from religious teachers who do not really teach people HOW to be a christian. But we must make it our personal responsibility to read the bible ourselves so as to be sure of what God requires of us.

and did the jew have precise pray in one day like the muslim for example? precise number of pray a day?

the scriptures indicate that there was a set time in the temple for prayers, similar to the muslims

But christians are encouraged to pray 'continuously' and 'on every occasion'. What that means is that we should pray to God at any time, we dont need to wait for a specific time to pray...it should be a natural process of communicating with God.

 

[alishan]

THANKS you very much for this information , very objective and precise

 

[alishan]

1. but why did apostle change the law as Jesus said that law should not be change even one iota.

see Matthew 5
17 ¶ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Lk. 16.17
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

 

[Pegg]

1. but why did apostle change the law as Jesus said that law should not be change even one iota.

see Matthew 5
17 ¶ Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Lk. 16.17
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

Paul didnt change the law. Something new began to happen that had never previously happened. Gentiles were receiving Gods holy spirit. They were beginning to perform the powerful works that Jesus himself had performed. When this began happening after Pentecost of 33ce, the apostles all agreed that God had turned his attention to people of the nations. The people who God was choosing were not followers of the mosaic law so the only conclusion the apostles could draw was that performing the 'works of law' were not necessary to gain Gods favor.

Paul actually told jewish christians that if they wanted to follow the law they could do that.... but he explained that it was not necessary to do it to gain Gods approval.

If we could all apply the mosaic law, all 600 odd laws, then we should certainly try to do that, but the fact is that we will fail just as the jews failed to live by them. This is why the diciple James (Jesus fleshly brother) said : James 2:10 For whoever observes all the Law but makes a false step in one point, he has become an offender against them all

If God does not expect us to fulfill the mosaic law, then we would be silly to try and stick to following it and failing it over and over again. Better that we live by faith in Christ and receive of Gods mercy, then live by mosaic law and burden ourselves with failure.

 

[alishan]

So it means that jesus didn't expect what would hapen in the futur, how is it possible if he s God or his son?

 

[Pegg]

So it means that jesus didn't expect what would hapen in the futur, how is it possible if he s God or his son?

actually Jesus did know that it would happen in the future. He even preached to a samaritan woman and told her at John 4:21 Jesus said to her: “Believe me, woman, The hour is coming when neither in this mountain nor in Jerusalem will YOU people worship the Father. 22 YOU worship what YOU do not know; we worship what we know, because salvation originates with the Jews. 23 Nevertheless, the hour is coming, and it is now, when the true worshipers will worship the Father with spirit and truth
His words show his belief that ethnicity would not separate true worshipers as it did in his day.

Some of the prophets also wrote about the opportunity that would eventually open up to the gentiles:
Isaiah 65: “I have let myself be searched for by those who had not asked [for me]. I have let myself be found by those who had not looked for me. I have said, ‘Here I am, here I am!’ to a nation that was not calling upon my name"

And this was always a part of Gods plan. he promised to unite ALL nations by means of his messiah...his promise to Abraham was:
Genesis 22:18 And by means of your seed all nations of the earth will certainly bless themselves due to the fact that you have listened to my voice.’

 

[alishan]

i was talking about the fact that Jesus said don t change the jew law , follow it until the end of the time

if he knew that the gentle would enter and that God want to make the law lighter for them , why did he say not to change the law?

 

[alishan]

can you answer this critic of paul point by point? thanks

Argument 4: "They gave me nothing"

The mutual animosity between the apostles & Paul is evident in numerous verses of scripture: from Acts 9:26 we see that many did not trust or believe in Paul from the beginning. He had this to say about the apostles in Galatians 2:6

"As for those who were considered important in the church, their reputation doesn't concern me. God isn't impressed with mere appearances, and neither am I. And of course these leaders were able to add nothing to the message I had been preaching."

Let's brush aside the air of arrogance and jealousy in this verse (which we will see again in 2 Corinthians 11:5) and look at what he is saying. Other translations say 'they gave me nothing'. The Spanish versions say they 'taught me nothing'. Now, in those days the only way to learn the good news was hearing it from those who had heard it from Jesus because the Gospels had not been written. We know that Paul never met Jesus. This explains why Paul does not, ever, not even once mention one single teaching, one parable, or one event from the life of Jesus.

If the disciples and apostles 'gave him nothing', then this can only mean that he basically made up his own gospel.

Argument 5: The vision on the road to Damascus

The claim that he had a vision on his way to Damascus has 3 different versions which all contradict each other in Acts 9:7, 22:9 and 26:14. In one version he falls to the floor, but in 26:14 they all fall to the floor, not just Paul. In one version the others hear a voice and see a light, in another they see nothing. One would think they would remember exactly what they saw and heard. It does not sound like a believable account. Furthermore, this is Christ's veredict in the Gospels:

"... if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it." - Matthew 24:23

Argument 6: Paul's confession

"Yet, crafty fellow that I am, I caught you by trickery!" - Paul, in 2 Corinthians 12:16

Argument 7: The church in Ephesus

... I know that you ... have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false. - Revelation 2:2

Here we see that at least one of the authors of the Bible mentions that there were false APOSTLES. Notice that it is not false 'prophets' but specifically 'false apostles' that are mentioned here. We should then ask ourselves: who claimed to be an apostle without being one?

Revelation 2:2 mentions that at least one church will speak openly about this false apostle: the Church of Ephesus. In 2 Timoteo 1:15, Paul himself admits that he had been rejected Asia ... and he concludes this verse specifically mentioning that this chapter concerned the Church of Ephesus.

The fact that Revelation 2 praises those who rejected Paul (I can't think of who else they may have been refering to) is even more important and shocking if we consider the fact that this chapter concerns the final judgement. In other words, whoever wrote this was hoping that these verses would be diluscidated in the last days.

"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious WOLVES." - Matthew 7:15

"BENJAMIN is a ravenous WOLF; in the morning he devours the prey, in the evening he divides the plunder."- Genesis 49:27

"... I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of BENJAMIN." - Romans 11:1

 

[Pegg]

i was talking about the fact that Jesus said don t change the jew law , follow it until the end of the time

if he knew that the gentle would enter and that God want to make the law lighter for them , why did he say not to change the law?

ah i see

well this is something that many people cant seem to understand....Gods standards will never change and the mosaic law is a reflection of how some of his perfect standards would apply in certain situations

so these laws given to the jews are expressions of his thoughts.... thats why Jesus said they can never be changed. Gods laws and standards are still the same and always will be and no one will ever be able to change them. But here is the part the people dont get....he doesnt expect us to be perfect and apply them perfectly because he knows that is impossible for us to do.

Rather, he requires that we put faith in his son and try as best we can to live in accord with love. If we are doing the best we can, then he is happy with us and we will be approved. But he does not expect us to keep a law that is impossible for us to keep. Remember James words:
'he who makes a false step in just one part of the law has transgressed them all'

And remember also that he had many imperfect people whom he veiwed as righteous even though they did not live by the mosaic law...thats because God does not demand perfection from imperfect mankind.

 

[Pegg]

can you answer this critic of paul point by point? thanks

Argument 4: "They gave me nothing"

The mutual animosity between the apostles & Paul is evident in numerous verses of scripture: from Acts 9:26 we see that many did not trust or believe in Paul from the beginning. He had this to say about the apostles in Galatians 2:6

"As for those who were considered important in the church, their reputation doesn't concern me. God isn't impressed with mere appearances, and neither am I. And of course these leaders were able to add nothing to the message I had been preaching."

Let's brush aside the air of arrogance and jealousy in this verse (which we will see again in 2 Corinthians 11:5) and look at what he is saying. Other translations say 'they gave me nothing'. The Spanish versions say they 'taught me nothing'. Now, in those days the only way to learn the good news was hearing it from those who had heard it from Jesus because the Gospels had not been written. We know that Paul never met Jesus. This explains why Paul does not, ever, not even once mention one single teaching, one parable, or one event from the life of Jesus.

If the disciples and apostles 'gave him nothing', then this can only mean that he basically made up his own gospel.

the book of acts clearly shows that Paul was taught by the Apostle Peter. So this argument really does not hold any weight. It seems that the writer has taken Galatians out of context. In Galatians, Paul is defending his apostleship because some galatian christians were accusing paul of being a false apostle... but these were not the 12 apostles who were claiming that, it was some galatian christians who accused him of that. Paul was showing that his apostleship was given him directly by Christ and that he had the backing of the 12 apostles.

Argument 5: The vision on the road to Damascus

The claim that he had a vision on his way to Damascus has 3 different versions which all contradict each other in Acts 9:7, 22:9 and 26:14. In one version he falls to the floor, but in 26:14 they all fall to the floor, not just Paul. In one version the others hear a voice and see a light, in another they see nothing. One would think they would remember exactly what they saw and heard. It does not sound like a believable account. Furthermore, this is Christ's veredict in the Gospels:

"... if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe it." - Matthew 24:23

The apostle Peter was given direction to go to Paul who was staying in a disciples home. It was Jesus who gave Peter the instruction to go to Paul and recover his sight. That is why the 12 Apostles had no doubt that Paul had seen a vision of Christ. They sent Paul out under their own guidance because Peter knew about Pauls conversion through his vision.

The varying accounts merely provide additional details...they are not really all that different.

Argument 6: Paul's confession

"Yet, crafty fellow that I am, I caught you by trickery!" - Paul, in 2 Corinthians 12:16

that verse is not quite right. In context, Paul is saying that some accuse him of trickery even though he never asked anything from anyone.

15 For my part I will most gladly spend and be completely spent for YOUR souls. If I love YOU the more abundantly, am I to be loved the less? 16 But be that as it may, I did not burden YOU down. Nevertheless, YOU say, I was “crafty” and I caught YOU “by trickery.” 17 As for any one of those I have dispatched to YOU, I did not take advantage of YOU through him, did I?

Argument 7: The church in Ephesus

... I know that you ... have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false. - Revelation 2:2

Here we see that at least one of the authors of the Bible mentions that there were false APOSTLES. Notice that it is not false 'prophets' but specifically 'false apostles' that are mentioned here. We should then ask ourselves: who claimed to be an apostle without being one?

Revelation 2:2 mentions that at least one church will speak openly about this false apostle: the Church of Ephesus. In 2 Timoteo 1:15, Paul himself admits that he had been rejected Asia ... and he concludes this verse specifically mentioning that this chapter concerned the Church of Ephesus.

The fact that Revelation 2 praises those who rejected Paul (I can't think of who else they may have been refering to) is even more important and shocking if we consider the fact that this chapter concerns the final judgement. In other words, whoever wrote this was hoping that these verses would be diluscidated in the last days.

"Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious WOLVES." - Matthew 7:15

"BENJAMIN is a ravenous WOLF; in the morning he devours the prey, in the evening he divides the plunder."- Genesis 49:27

"... I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of BENJAMIN." - Romans 11:1

Paul also spoke about false teachers and apostles. What revelation is speaking about is false christians who were slowly infiltrating the congregations and teaching non-christian doctrines. This was prophesied by Jesus and John and James and Paul
Much we see in Pauls letters are actually refuting some of the teachings of these false christians. Some of these men are mentioned by name.

Pauls parting words to the ephesians were recorded in Acts:
20:29 I know that after my going away oppressive wolves will enter in among YOU and will not treat the flock with tenderness, 30 and from among YOU yourselves men will rise and speak twisted things to draw away the disciples after themselves


John wrote a letter to a christian named Gaius and mentioned one such christian by name:
3John 9 I wrote something to the congregation, but Di‧ot′re‧phes, who likes to have the first place among them, does not receive anything from us with respect. 10 That is why, if I come, I will call to remembrance his works which he goes on doing, chattering about us with wicked words. Also, not being content with these things, neither does he himself receive the brothers with respect, and those who are wanting to receive them he tries to hinder and to throw out of the congregation.
If Paul was one of these bad apostles, then surely John could have mentioned him by name especially considering how many of Pauls writings were being circulated among the congregations.

If Paul was really one of these bad christians, then there is no way his writings would have been accepted by the congregations where the apostles resided and if the writings were not accepted by the 12 apostles, they were discarded. The fact is that the writings approved by the jerusalem congregation included all of Pauls letters...so there is no reason to view Paul as a false teacher.