Was Paul worthy to be an Apostle?

[Redemptionsong]

Erasmus did not even have enough Greek texts to translate the whole NT so he used some of the Latin vulgate for the rest. Also many of the oldest most complete NT texts were not known in his day, such as Sinaiticus, and many other older texts discovered after his time.

"Erasmus had been studying Greek New Testament manuscripts for many years, in the Netherlands, France, England and Switzerland, noting their many variants, but had only six Greek manuscripts immediately accessible to him in Basel. They all dated from the 12th Century or later, and only one came from outside the mainstream Byzantine tradition. Consequently, most modern scholars consider his text to be of dubious quality." WIKI

"Erasmus used several Greek manuscript sources because he did not have access to a single complete manuscript. Most of the manuscripts were, however, late Greek manuscripts of the Byzantine textual family and Erasmus used the oldest manuscript the least because he was afraid of its supposedly erratic text. He also ignored much older and better manuscripts that were at his disposal. WIKI

And all the other sects of Christians that used other books not included in the NT? Why persecute them into extinction and destroy their books? It's called jealousy, and the quest for power, not God's wish. If it had not been for Nag Hammadi we would not have many of these ancient texts. Augustine only converted to save himself from being persecuted by the CC.

1 Corinthians 4:15New Living Translation (NLT)

"For even if you had ten thousand others to teach you about Christ, you have only one spiritual father. For I became your father in Christ Jesus when I preached the Good News to you."

Paul The Self Proclaimed

What divides your understanding from mine has nothing to do with Erasmus' translation, or with any other translation from Greek. You are using Erasmus as a screen to avoid facing up to some uncomfortable truths; most significantly, that the scriptures (even in an English translation like the KJV) are able to convey the truth of God's Word.

Let's take, as an example, the passage you quote above. If you had read the whole passage in context, you would also have read these words: (Verse 9) 'For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men. We are fools for Christ's sake, but ye are wise in Christ: we are weak, but ye are strong: ye are honourable, but we are despised.'

Paul is not a self-proclaimer; he is a Christ-proclaimer. His only boast is that he is obedient, and therefore rightfully an apostle. As he says,'For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in the church.' (1 Cor.4:17)

 

[blue taylor]

What divides your understanding from mine has nothing to do with Erasmus' translation, or with any other translation from Greek. You are using Erasmus as a screen to avoid facing up to some uncomfortable truths; most significantly, that the scriptures (even in an English translation like the KJV) are able to convey the truth of God's Word.

Let's take, as an example, the passage you quote above. If you had read the whole passage in context, you would also have read these words: (Verse 9) 'For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men. We are fools for Christ's sake, but ye are wise in Christ: we are weak, but ye are strong: ye are honourable, but we are despised.'

Paul is not a self-proclaimer; he is a Christ-proclaimer. His only boast is that he is obedient, and therefore rightfully an apostle. As he says,'For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in the church.' (1 Cor.4:17)

We agree to disagree.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Didn't Paul remain humble

Paul is as humble as Donald Trump.

Paul was the one appointed to take the lead in the gentile nations.

If you don't like a guy, send him out to the boonies.

Wasn't Paul well qualified to deal with the issue ?

If he is humble, why does he use derogatory terms for the ACTUAL apostles (ex."reputed")? What were his qualifications other than staring into the sun and going blind for a few days?

Did you know that Jesus' disciples were known for having little formal education too?

The apostles NEEDED stupid people because anyone who knew facts disagreed with their outlooks.

Really, you can't think of one little reason?

Yeah, but they are hardly the only denomination within Christianity to care more about two murderers/religious terrorists (Moses and Paul) than Jesus.

The Truth is revealed through the Word

I would say God reveals the Truth. Men can lie, and men wrote the bible, so ...

Unless a person is born-again of God's spirit, he/she cannot enter the kingdom of God.

Do you have to be Christian, though? Is that not similar to "you have to be enlightened to attain nirvana"?

Lots of religions/philosophies have some sort of "if you want to be epic, let go of your preconceptions" kind of talk.

Do you therefore reject the Gospel of Luke because it was written by the same author as the book of Acts? And the book of Acts tells us that Jesus called Paul as his apostle.

I'm more of a Mark and James fan, myself. Paul and John, IMO, turned the Way into a personality cult that focused on getting gold stars by your name and not actually doing anything related to the Way. Whether you are saved or not won't make the earth spin any differently, but how you treat others will affect the future.

It says in 2 Timothy 3:16, 'All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:'

I'm usually loathe to link to message boards, but oh well.

God himself defends the scriptures against intentional corruption

And yet it happened anyway. Lots of ancients had the equivalents of "FBI Copyright Warnings", but the only reason you'd NEED such a thing is if it were POSSIBLE.

Paul was not a 'commentator', he was chosen by Jesus to deliver the Gospel to the Gentiles.

Per Paul, anyway.

A warning of punishment acts as a deterrent.

Youtube is filled with video clips and music clips the posters didn't create, so ... yeah ... no ...

If you don't believe it's a reliable source of information, how can you be so sure that your faith is founded on the truth?

Objective truth would be verifiable in history, archeology, biology, etc ...

Not true. Jesus sent out apostles and disciples from the very beginning.

But if God can write in our hearts, what need have we of people or books?

It is clear from the context that Paul was called by God to perform a task - which he fulfilled obediently.

Saul, prior to becoming the Hellenized Paul, once thought God wanted him to bludgeon Christians with big rocks, too.

 

[savagewind]

I agree that it is important to highlight error; but not all error is intentional. Much has come about as the result of paraphrasing the Bible and translating it in a way that appeals to lay readership.
.

Do I hear you admitting there is error? Do you mean there is error, but it wasn't intentional and that makes it to be believed?

 

[savagewind]

I would say God reveals the Truth. Men can lie, and men wrote the bible, so ...

Does it make sense that Jehovah made holy every person ever to write in God's name and copy and translate?

I'm usually loathe to link to message boards, but oh well.

Oh no!

And yet it happened anyway. Lots of ancients had the equivalents of "FBI Copyright Warnings", but the only reason you'd NEED such a thing is if it were POSSIBLE.

Good logic. I like it.

But if God can write in our hearts, what need have we of people or books?

They are for shaking awake the sleeping people.
People and books are also good for revealing what isn't true. Then, if someone is teaching what isn't true, you know he or she can't be trusted. 1 Corinthians 3:2 John 16:12

 

[Deeje]

Did you know that Jesus' disciples were known for having little formal education too?

The apostles NEEDED stupid people because anyone who knew facts disagreed with their outlooks.

You think?

The apostles were not formerly educated at the Rabbinical Schools and therefor looked down upon as serious students of the scriptures. Jesus deliberately chose them because they were not indoctrinated with false beliefs. They were mostly humble fishermen who were raised to love their God.
But please don't mistake "uneducated" (in men's estimations) with "stupid". The apostles had the son of God as an instructor, not the corrupt Pharisees who had "made the word of God invalid because of their tradition." The apostles were in a better position as teachers than the Pharisees ever knew how to be.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Do I hear you admitting there is error? Do you mean there is error, but it wasn't intentional and that makes it to be believed?

I accept that error has occurred in the translation and in the copying of texts, but I do not believe these errors existed in the original versions. If's the job of textual critics to get us back, as close as is possible, to the original word.

 

[savagewind]

I accept that error has occurred in the translation and in the copying of texts, but I do not believe these errors existed in the original versions. If's the job of textual critics to get us back, as close as is possible, to the original word.

Is that not what I have been saying? I agree with you! That is Earth shaking. Is it not?

But I think you are saying someone else should do it. Not you, not me, not the thief.......

Who? Who do you think should do it?

I am pretty sure that Jehovah will allow each person to hear what the Spirit says to the congregation.

So then, why don't people hear?

 

[savagewind]

You think?

The apostles were not formerly educated at the Rabbinical Schools and therefor looked down upon as serious students of the scriptures. Jesus deliberately chose them because they were not indoctrinated with false beliefs. They were mostly humble fishermen who were raised to love their God.
But please don't mistake "uneducated" (in men's estimations) with "stupid". The apostles had the son of God as an instructor, not the corrupt Pharisees who had "made the word of God invalid because of their tradition." The apostles were in a better position as teachers than the Pharisees ever knew how to be.

I hate to burst your bubble, but WHO chose the twelve? Jesus says, "I do NOTHING of my own initiative". Why does Jesus not tell them the truth that Jehovah chose them?
John 5:30
John 6:38

 

[Deeje]

Luke 6:12-16:
"On one of those days he went out to the mountain to pray, and he spent the whole night in prayer to God. 13 And when it became day, he called his disciples to him and chose from among them 12, whom he also named apostles: 14 Simon, whom he also named Peter, Andrew his brother, James, John, Philip, Bar·tholʹo·mew, 15 Matthew, Thomas, James the son of Al·phaeʹus, Simon who is called “the zealous one,” 16 Judas the son of James, and Judas Is·carʹi·ot, who turned traitor".

God helped Jesus to choose his apostles. I think this is not rocket science.

 

[Thanda]

I think that anyone who says, "I know" is lying. 1 Timothy 6:16 John 1:18 Job 37:23 Exodus 33:20

This is odd considering you've just mentioned Peter who said "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God." of which testimony Jesus said Peter received it from God - is there a greater witness than a witness from God?

 

[savagewind]

Luke 6:12-16:
"On one of those days he went out to the mountain to pray, and he spent the whole night in prayer to God. 13 And when it became day, he called his disciples to him and chose from among them 12, whom he also named apostles: 14 Simon, whom he also named Peter, Andrew his brother, James, John, Philip, Bar·tholʹo·mew, 15 Matthew, Thomas, James the son of Al·phaeʹus, Simon who is called “the zealous one,” 16 Judas the son of James, and Judas Is·carʹi·ot, who turned traitor".

God helped Jesus to choose his apostles. I think this is not rocket science.

Oh, but it is rocket Science it would seem. It was not possible for Jesus to choose OTHER than who Jehovah chose. Whoever did the choosing was the one who chose. WHO chose them? See the thread
The Cult of Ignorance in the United States

Jehovah chose them and Jesus admitted they were chosen.

 

[savagewind]

This is odd considering you've just mentioned Peter who said "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the Living God." of which testimony Jesus said Peter received it from God - is there a greater witness than a witness from God?

How was Peter not telling the truth? I do not believe the Trinity.

 

[Thanda]

How was Peter not telling the truth? I do not believe the Trinity.

I was questioning your assertion that if someone says they know they are lying. Peter knew Jesus was the Christ.

 

[savagewind]

I was questioning your assertion that if someone says they know they are lying. Peter knew Jesus was the Christ.

When asked a question he answered it. Who do you say I am? Nobody? LOL Did he say, "I know you are the Christ, son of the living God?" I do not think so.

Is there even scripture which says people will ever know?

Psalms 83:18

acknowledge, acquainted with, advise, answer, appoint, assuredly, be aware

A primitive root; to know (properly, to ascertain by seeing); used in a great variety of senses, figuratively, literally, euphemistically and inferentially (including observation, care, recognition; and causatively, instruction, designation, punishment, etc.) (as follow) -- acknowledge, acquaintance(-ted with), advise, answer, appoint, assuredly, be aware, (un-)awares, can(-not), certainly, comprehend, consider, X could they, cunning, declare, be diligent, (can, cause to) discern, discover, endued with, familiar friend, famous, feel, can have, be (ig-)norant, instruct, kinsfolk, kinsman, (cause to let, make) know, (come to give, have, take) knowledge, have (knowledge), (be, make, make to be, make self) known, + be learned, + lie by man, mark, perceive, privy to, X prognosticator, regard, have respect, skilful, shew, can (man of) skill, be sure, of a surety, teach, (can) tell, understand, have (understanding), X will be, wist, wit, wot.

http://biblehub.com/hebrew/3045.htm

The only one in scripture who appears certain for real is "Christ, son of the living God". Anyone else? That is a question.

I am aware of The Most Holy but I do not KNOW The Most Holy. Do you?

 

[Thanda]

When asked a question he answered it. Who do you say I am? Nobody? LOL Did he say, "I know you are the Christ, son of the living God?" I do not think so.

Is there even scripture which says people will ever know?

John 6:69 - And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.

As to your question: John 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.

Which agrees with John 8: 31-32
31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;

32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Furthermore Exodus 33:11 has Moses seeing and speaking to God face to face.

And Jesus made this promise: John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Great is the faith the Lord expects of those who wish to follow him (he expects them to keep his commandments) but with that expectation is a mighty reward that their faith will be rewarded with knowledge and their diligence with the presence of God.

 

[savagewind]

John 6:69 - And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.

As to your question: John 7:17 If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself.

Which agrees with John 8: 31-32
31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;

32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Furthermore Exodus 33:11 has Moses seeing and speaking to God face to face.

And Jesus made this promise: John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Great is the faith the Lord expects of those who wish to follow him (he expects them to keep his commandments) but with that expectation is a mighty reward that their faith will be rewarded with knowledge and their diligence with the presence of God.

I agree.

To know God - have developed a relationship with (someone) through meeting and spending time with them; be familiar or friendly with.

I think nobody can be certain that what they know IS GOD. I can be certain that I know Christ because I am being taught by him. It is why I can't share knowing with anyone because it is personal, he teaching me. It is not possible to know the truth for someone else, but that is what most religion is about.

To say that I know God for you is me lying.

 

[savagewind]

The one called Jesus knows God's will for him. Paul might have known God's will for himself. I do not know God's will for anyone. Each day it is what I know I should aim for myself. I am hardly ever successful, I suppose. I think I will never know. Do YOU know about whether you meet God's will for yourself? Is it not an on-going occupation?

 

[Thanda]

The one called Jesus knows God's will for him. Paul might have known God's will for himself. I do not know God's will for anyone. Each day it is what I know I should aim for myself. I am hardly ever successful, I suppose. I think I will never know. Do YOU know about whether you meet God's will for yourself? Is it not an on-going occupation?

I most certainly am not meeting God's will for me. One of the central keys to following God is letting go and trusting completely (like a little child) - I have not yet succeeded.

 

[savagewind]

In all the many hours I have spent learning what the Bible teaches, I never once questioned Paul's willingness and skill teaching God's will. I don't think that he wrote what he thought we should all obey. He was just talking. You know, like we do!