What do you think of Paul the Apostle?

[Eli G]

If (...) anything against Moses then I have to put those words (...) on hold. ...

So, that's your problem with Paul. Thanks for your honesty.

Interestingly, that's one of Jews' pretext to reject Jesus.

Do you also reject Jesus like you reject Paul?

 

[paarsurrey]

IsraelMoses said:
"Honor the Apostles, Follow Jesus." is what I was given, concerning the Apostle Paul and as God said, at another time, "He gave his life."
Many derogatory things said about the man who did many things to promote the Gospel of Jesus.

When Paul spoke of the "gospel" aka good news of Jesus, that is not the same thing as a book. I realize that "gospel" also refers to books written about the life of Jesus. But you have look at the context of the remark to know which meaning of "gospel" is being used.

It's like the word bat. It can be a flying mammal, or it can be a stick you hit a ball with. You know from CONTEXT which meaning is being used.

So, understanding that "gospel" means "good news," take care to understand WHICH of the two usages are being employed by the poster.

While I appreciate one's response; mustn't in that case the word "gospel" would have been used without capitalization, please, right?
Israel Moses wrote "Gospel of Jesus" not " gospel of Jesus", right, please?

Regards

 

[IndigoChild5559]

He gave his life."
Many derogatory things

Saying that Jesus "gave his life" is hardly derogatory.

While I appreciate one's response; mustn't in that case the word "gospel" would have been used without capitalization, please, right?
Israel Moses wrote "Gospel of Jesus" not " gospel of Jesus", right, please?

Regards

I think arguments whether it is a part of a proper noun can be made both ways. I would tend to use gospel of Jesus when talking about the message, and Gospel of X when talking about a book. Indeed, it was from the capitalization that I assumed he was referring to a book.

 

[RabbiO]

So, that's your problem with Paul. Thanks for your honesty.

Interestingly, that's one of Jews' pretext to reject Jesus.

Do you also reject Jesus like you reject Paul?

I assume you will now provide a complete list of what you believe are such pretexts as well as a complete list of what you perceive to be the real reason(s) that Jews do not accept Jesus.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Interestingly, that's one of Jews' pretext to reject Jesus.

The word pretext means a fake reason that is given in order to hide the real reason.

Can you explain to me why you think that Jews are essentially lying when we say that one of the reasons we reject Christianity is because it contradicts Moses?

And what is it that you imagine are our real reasons?

 

[Brickjectivity]

So, that's your problem with Paul. Thanks for your honesty.

Interestingly, that's one of Jews' pretext to reject Jesus.

Do you also reject Jesus like you reject Paul?

You claim that I reject Paul who is has an anointing, but what I say isn't a rejection.

Let me give you an example of a prophet of the LORD both telling truth and also lying in a scripture story. Its the story in I Kings chapter 13. Also let me point out that prophets of the LORD can lie even after having given true prophecies with signs. We always have to check every part of what they say. Paul is no exception. Neither is Jesus who is famous for his double talk, saying one thing and meaning something else. If you don't understand something Jesus says its always your own fault, not his.

Interestingly, that's one of Jews' pretext to reject Jesus.

Jews:
Jews are required to test anyone claiming to be prophets, so they cannot accept Jesus until all of his works are complete. Since Jesus works are not visibly complete, the Jews have no choice but to not accept him as a prophet. There is nothing conspiratorial in it, as its what they are expected to be doing. Rather than blame we should simply acknowledge that circumcision requires this. Notice here that Deuteronomy 13 almost guarantees there will by lying prophets, and it is the Jew's responsibility to test not just their miracles but their words.

[Deu 13:1-2 NIV] 1 If a prophet, or one who foretells by dreams, appears among you and announces to you a sign or wonder, 2 and if the sign or wonder spoken of takes place, and the prophet says...​

Christians, on the other hand, see Jesus through eyes of faith seeing his finished work though it is not yet here.

****
So we can be deceived by a prophet who has said true things in the past and who has given good signs in the past. They can lie, and you can be tested with a lie from a prophet. They are not permitted to lie in court, but they can lie to you otherwise. The prophet can lie to you to test you. Look at the testing of Abraham who was told he'd be sacrificing Isaac.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I don't think so, because Paul's letters were written by multiple authors is a doctrine that needs real evidence and not just some opinions.

As opposed to the claim that Paul authored the Pastoral epistles? How convenient.

See, for example, Udo Schnell's The History and Theology of New Testament Writings.

 

[Eli G]

People tend to read and appropriate what suits their own position.

Evidently, anti-Christians will seek out any doctrine that suits their own lack of faith in the Christian Scriptures.

The so-called theological scholarship of the world is more a worldly machinery to destroy the faith of Christians than an institution to strengthen it. All kinds of false teachings have come from among them, such as disqualifying Paul as a true follower of Jesus Christ, making people believe that Adam and Eve are myths, that the Flood never happened, that Moses was not a historical figure, etc.

It is impossible to be a real Christian and accept everything that the "scholarship" of this world preaches about matters related to the Bible and the Christian faith. It is a trap of the enemy of God who controls the forces of this world. Truth searchers need to be aware where they learn what they need to know about God and the truth.

 

[Eli G]

I assume you will now provide a complete list of what you believe are such pretexts as well as a complete list of what you perceive to be the real reason(s) that Jews do not accept Jesus.

Why would I do that?

Everyone knows why the Jews despised Jesus.

 

[paarsurrey]

As opposed to the claim that Paul authored the Pastoral epistles? How convenient.

See, for example, Udo Schnell's The History and Theology of New Testament Writings.

One means :
" After providing an overview of the development of the New Testament canon, Schnelle then takes up, in turn, the letters of Paul, the Synoptic Gospels* (including Q), Acts, the Deutero-Paulines, the Catholic letters, the Gospel of John, and Revelation. With extensive anglicized bibliographies. ", right, please?

Amazon.com

it must be seen, as explained, together with:
"Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called *“Synoptic Gospels” because they can be “seen together.” What that actually means is that these gospels contain many of the same stories, and that those stories are sometimes even presented in the same sequence within each of the three different synoptic gospels. ", please, right?

The Synoptics: Mark, Matthew, and Luke – Reading the Bible as Literature: a Journey

minnstate.pressbooks.pub

Regards

 

[IndigoChild5559]

People tend to read and appropriate what suits their own position.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

Evidently, anti-Christians will seek out any doctrine that suits their own lack of faith in the Christian Scriptures.

It's not that I'm anti-Christian. It's that I'm pro-Judaism, pro-truth, and pro-rational thinking.

The so-called theological scholarship of the world is more a worldly machinery to destroy the faith of Christians than an institution to strengthen

Oh puhleeze. The goal of scholars is to figure out the truth. They don't have an anti-Chrsitain agenda. They go wherever the evidence takes them. Your paranoia comes from a deep seeded arrogance -- you can't believe that it's not all about you.

it. All kinds of false teachings have come from among them, such as disqualifying Paul as a true follower of Jesus Christ

That's what the evidence supports.

, making people believe that Adam and Eve are myths,

That's what the evidence supports.

that the Flood never happened,

That's what the evidence supports.

that Moses was not a historical figure, etc.

Far less clear, but certainly a possibility. There basically is no outside evidence confirming his existence and religious texts are highly unreliable.

It is impossible to be a real Christian and accept everything that the "scholarship" of this world preaches about matters related to the Bible and the Christian faith.

I don't know about that. I've met plenty of Christians who value scholarship and yet manage to be true believers. Some are right here in this forum.

It is a trap of the enemy of God who controls the forces of this world. Truth searchers need to be aware where they learn what they need to know about God and the truth.

Truth searchers follow the evidence.

 

[paarsurrey]

Eli G said:
So, that's your problem with Paul. Thanks for your honesty.

Interestingly, that's one of Jews' pretext to reject Jesus.

Do you also reject Jesus like you reject Paul?

I assume you will now provide a complete list of what you believe are such pretexts as well as a complete list of what you perceive to be the real reason(s) that Jews do not accept Jesus.

It is a good question from our @Eli G , from our @RabbiO , please, right?
I however accept (Jesus)Yeshua- the truthful Israelite Messiah ( who was neither a Zealot, nor he belonged to the Zionism people nor to the Judaism people), please, right?
Pauline-Christendom (as seen in NT Bible,) I understand, does not present Yeshua's truthful Israelite deeds and teachings, right, please?

Best regards

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Interestingly, that's one of Jews' pretext to reject Jesus.

It is not clear if this is your thought, or if you are quoting Eli. It would help a LOT if in the future you would use the reply feature so that it is clear.

This is the second time someone in here has mentioned the "pretext" of Jews. A pretext is basically a fake reason meant to hide your true reason.
1. Please state clearly what you think the pretext is.
2. Share WHY you think Jews are lying in this regard.
3. Tell us what you think Jews "real" reasons are.

If you were trying to quote Eli, just ignore the above.

Zionism people nor to the Judaism people

Horrible English. Fix it. please right?

 

[paarsurrey]

So, that's your problem with Paul. Thanks for your honesty.

Interestingly, that's one of Jews' pretext to reject Jesus.

Do you also reject Jesus like you reject Paul?

" one of Jews' pretext to reject Jesus. "

Judaism people at the time of Yeshua got deviant from the truthful Israelite teachings and deeds of Moses, so they rejected Yeshua; it is for this that Yeshua migrated from Judea and went to land/s where " Lost Tribes of Israel" resided with his Mother (she later joined him), and they did accept Yeshua truthfully in teachings and deeds, please, right?
The above becomes clear even from Pauline-NT Bible, if seen in correct prospect, right, please?

Best regards

 

[paarsurrey]

It is not clear if this is your thought, or if you are quoting Eli. It would help a LOT if in the future you would use the reply feature so that it is clear.

This is the second time someone in here has mentioned the "pretext" of Jews. A pretext is basically a fake reason meant to hide your true reason.
1. Please state clearly what you think the pretext is.
2. Share WHY you think Jews are lying in this regard.
3. Tell us what you think Jews "real" reasons are.

If you were trying to quote Eli, just ignore the above.

Horrible English. Fix it. please right?

Happy birthday our @IndigoChild5559 , please, right?

Regards

 

[Brickjectivity]

I hold the use of the term 'True Christian' to be a very poisonous term, useless for anything but smearing.

 

[Spice]

Happy birthday our @IndigoChild5559 , please, right?

Regards

Happy Birthday, @IndigoChild5559

 

[IndigoChild5559]

" one of Jews' pretext to reject Jesus. "

Judaism people

Horrible English. Fix it. please yes?

at the time of Yeshua got deviant from the truthful Israelite teachings and deeds of Moses, so they rejected Yeshua;

Not at all. Do you know how many false messiahs there have been? There is only one way to know the messiah, and that is if he fulfills the things the messiah will do. Jesus simply didn't. This is not a pretext, its just a fact.

it is for this that Yeshua migrated from Judea and went to land/s where " Lost Tribes of Israel" resided with his Mother (she later joined him),

NEVER happened. He never left the Judea/Samaria/Galilee area.

and they did accept Yeshua truthfully in teachings and deeds, please, right?

Please wrong?

The above becomes clear even from Pauline-NT Bible, if seen in correct prospect, right, please?

Nope. There is NOTHING in Paul's writings that supports Jesus traveling outside of Judea/Samaria/Galilee, please right?

Happy birthday our @IndigoChild5559 , please, right?

Regards

Thank you

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I hold the use of the term 'True Christian' to be a very poisonous term, useless for anything but smearing.

I agree. I'm sure it's already been pointed out that any such appeal to purity aka the No True Scotsman fallacy, is simply very bad reasoning. The motivation is to delegitimize the Christian in order not to have to deal with what that Christian has done.

 

[Ajax]

By the same premise you would then deny Peter, John and any other inspired Christian writer.

Inspired? I would definitely deny the writer of Matthew for being extremely dishonest in altering prophecies in order to fool Jews and present Jesus as the long awaited Messiah. And the editors of the Gospels who added numerous verses to them during the first centuries.

The so-called theological scholarship of the world is more a worldly machinery to destroy the faith of Christians than an institution to strengthen it. All kinds of false teachings have come from among them, such as disqualifying Paul as a true follower of Jesus Christ, making people believe that Adam and Eve are myths, that the Flood never happened, that Moses was not a historical figure, etc.

This is ludicrous.. Most theological scholars are Christians who base their interpretations on critical readings of biblical texts within their historical contexts, after years of examination. They are not interested in either destroying or defending Christianity. They are simply unbiased, looking for the truth, which you obviously hate.
Of course there were no Adam and Eve, nor the Flood as stipulated in Genesis, neither talking snakes and donkeys.
We will not alter the historical knowledge we gained, simply because you don't like this view. And it's typical for fanatics and some JW to slander people who disagree with their views.
And is also typical that you don't know your Bible enough.. It seems to me that you just preach what you have been told, without having any counter arguments to our assertions.