Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"If anyone causes one of these little ones--those who believe in me--to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea.
- Mark 9:42
Beware of conceited cleverness and wisdom opposing the Word of God. It is written that terrible judgment shall befall those that cause the children of the Most High to stumble.
You risk bringing the wrath of heaven itself against you. Do not be so foolish any more.
Repent and be saved in the name of Jesus.
and that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...
Oh, go on.
Choir, why don't you try addressing the issues instead of pulling these childish scare tactics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wade345
so you think that the masochistic paul lied concerning his encounter with Jesus in order to live a life of hell on earth. I can't believe that. what other motive would he have? surely not fame or fortune.
No, that's not what I said.
I implied that Paul had a problem with his ego, possibly even a martyr complex. This is well-documented: his treatment of the genuine apostles and in-fighting with them when they disagreed with his heretical ideas; his constant references to himself in his epistles and the suffering he had to endure (there's that martyr complex at work) for his gospel which he cleverly labeled "the gospel of Christ" instead of focusing all his writings on Jesus; his complete twisting of Jesus gospel into what scholars call the "Pauline gospel"; the evidence I laid out earlier that some-to-much of his writing appears to have been influenced moderately-to-heavily by pagan, possibly even mystic philosophies--among other things.
These are not my isolated opinions. They can be fully documented if a person just takes the time to investigate by researching on the Internet. I didn't think all this up myself; I'm not that intelligent or brainy. I got here by simply asking questions like, "Did Paul get his teachings from eastern religions?" Goggle it. See the wealth of info you'll pull up from scholars on both sides of the argument. Read both sides and then weigh the evidence, as I have.
When you put everything together and then step back and take a good, hard look at Paul an entirely different man emerges apart from the venerated saint the Corporate Church Hierarchy has made him out to be---for their own selfish and politically-motivated reasons, naturally. They've built his teachings into an alternative gospel to Jesus' own not because they have the slightest interest in your salvation, they don't. All they care about is your money and your Tea Party Republican vote to help get them into positions of power and influence where they can better spread their pernicious poison.
Last edited by thrillobyte; 02-11-2014 at 12:14 AM..
I'm a firm believer that action defines genuineness more than words, so in that respect paul was truly an evangelist for Jesus. and as for words try 1 Corinthians 2:2 for I determined not to know anything among
you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified. this you should like.
you profess to be a follower of Jesus and I can understand your zeal to get it right, but if you want to eliminate paul's writings you are reducing the new testament by approximately 30 per cent. this would really accommodate a lot of the people of the jewish faith who try to undermine his writings by calling him the false apostle. you've probably read articles on line to this effect.
as for the truth, I believe the apostles accepted paul as one of their own and I feel the God would have given them the discernment to detect a false teacher among them. and if not for paul, who would you and the rest of us gentiles be worshiping today?
That's not a very extensive list on that website. From what is said, I thought we were going to have a situation of full page plagiarism with Paul, in which case we would have to expel him. We do know Paul traveled around the Roman world, so he was probably learned on many different cultures and religions. Now a good bit of the ancient religions have truth in them, considering the theory that they came about through differences of oral tradition. Originally with Noah, men had the truth of God's existence. Yet with the different languages and spreading out on the earth, that truth became muddled. The religions of the world is the result of that muddling. So it's possible that Paul took what was true from other religions, to better explain the Gospel. Remember, Paul said he would become like an individual, in hopes that individual would come to faith in Christ. To the poor man, Paul would be like a poor man. To the rich, as though he was rich. Whatever made it easier for people to understand.
I never meant to imply 100% of Paul's writing are pagan--some is brilliant and certainly faithful to Jesus; nor is everything he said worthless and of the devil.
But I do detect in the last few posts, as I somewhat predicted earlier, that even the fundamentalists are starting to ease into the idea that the Bible is not the 100% pure "droppings of the minds of God and Jesus". If even a fraction of eastern Mysticism has crept into the scriptures by any means, Paul or someone else, then it is not the pure Word of God anymore, is it, unless ancient writings from earlier philosophers were also inspired by God.
Quote:
but if you want to eliminate Paul's writings you are reducing the new testament by approximately 30 per cent.
What I personally would like to see is Paul's writings gone over by a team of scholars who know the message gospel of Jesus and have them lined up and those things Paul wrote that conflicts (and there's plenty) cut out of his writings like the cancer it is and the rest, the things he said that are faithful to Jesus gospel of faith and good works and obedience to the tenants of the law, which form the foundation of our own legal system, by the way, preserved. Jesus' gospel must be paramount. Paul cannot come in claiming to have divine revelation from Jesus and write his own gospel. And according to some of the best scholars, ethical ministers, and Biblical philosophers, that's exactly what Paul did.
Quote:
In Christ or Paul?, by Rev. V.A. Holmes-Gore: "Let the reader contrast the true Christian standard with that of Paul and he will see the terrible betrayal of all that the Master taught. . . . For the surest way to betray a great Teacher is to misrepresent his message. . . . That is what Paul and his followers did, and because the Church has followed Paul in his error it has failed lamentably to redeem the world. . . . The teachings given by the blessed Master Christ, which the disciples John and Peter and James, the brother of the Master, tried in vain to defend and preserve intact were as utterly opposed to the Pauline Gospel as the light is opposed to the darkness."
If only one person were saying that I'd have a weak accusation of Paul, But hundreds of brilliant scholars say the exact same thing. I've listed no less than ten on different posts. Are they ALL wrong about Paul?
You really have to read every single word in that quote to get the full weight and seriousness of what Holmes-Gore says:
Paul misrepresented Jesus' message; in doing so he betrayed his Master, Jesus; because the Church followed Paul instead of Jesus it has failed to redeem the world; the true apostles John, Peter and James tried in vain to preserve Jesus' original message and failed because the Pauline gospel, filled with the powers of darkness, proved too formidable to overcome.
That's a heavy millstone around the neck of Christians struggling to decide which gospel they should follow: Paul's or Jesus'. Sadly, Paul's gospel has buried Jesus'. Satan has succeeded in his mission.
so you think that the masochistic paul lied concerning his encounter with Jesus in order to live a life of hell on earth. I can't believe that. what other motive would he have? surely not fame or fortune.
Dear wade, What reason does our narcissistic dictator in chief, Hussein Obama, have for lying and embracing immorality? Maybe he is here to fulfill a role in the destruction of our nation and to help fulfill the prophey of Joel 3:2, and help the nations come against Jerusalem, and get wrath of God rained on the U.S.(Ze 14:12) Maybe Paul, of the tribe of Benjamin, is a "ravenous wolf" (Mt 7:15) to fulfill the prophecy of Gen 49:27. Maybe he is just fulfilling the prophecy of Ze 11, whereas he is the "staff Favor" who is to "break my covenant" and pasture the "flock doomed to slaughter". Maybe Paul is so boisterous and overbearing, because of his self doubts. Maybe Paul is one of the tares to be left among the good wheat until the "end of the age" (Mt 13:29) so that the good wheat isn't damaged when he is plucked out. Maybe we are at the "end" (Mt 24:14)and Joel 2:28 - Joel 3-2 is all set for the "moon turned to blood" which is to happen this April on the Feast of Passover, the anniversary of the angel of death passing over. Maybe the nations are camped around Jerusalem waiting to "wipe them out" (Israel). (Ps 83:4) Maybe, one should heed the testimony of Yeshua, instead of nailing his testimony to the Cross. (Mt 7:25) Did Paul get his fame? Is he known throughout the world? Did Paul use his power over people and curse whoever defied him? Did he lord over Peter, and call him a hypocrite in public? You tell me. What were the reasons behind Stalin, Hitler, Mao? Did they lead sublime lives or did they live in turmoil and strife? Does that make them self professed apostles? Certainly they were the shepherds of the sheep they led to slaughter, and therefore apostles in their own minds.
Galatians 1:8 NAS But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be accursed !
(Jerwade voice) The delicious nougat center without the fru fru wrapping.
A private hot tub and secluded outdoor shower has its privileges: "Let us not waste time reading the menu, when we can enjoy the banquet; it’s to die for!"
This is not news. Even though he was a very devoute Pharisee, Paul was also a VERY well educated Roman citizen, who was very well read in the literature and histories of his day. Paul actually quotes "pagan" authors several places in the Bible (Acts 17:28, 1 Corinthians 15:33, Titus 1:12). The phrase to "kick against the goads" was a common proverb of the day. It's very doubtful Euripides "invented" it any more than than Bob Dylan invnted "blowin' in the wind."
People 2,000 years ago weren't cave men. They read a lot and were generally just as smart as we are today. Given that many of them (like Paul) could speak, read, and write in several languages, I might even consider them smarter.
Our priests often quote from Abraham Lincoln, Washington, Martin Luther King, Bob Dylan, or even Mick Jagger to make a point in the homily. It doesn't mean they are making stuff up based upon the ancient wisdom of the Rolling Stones. It means they are men of their era and use the tools given to them to get the point across.
One thing no one of any of mankind knew that only Paul was given were the secrets he writes about in his epistles.
Paul met Jesus Christ on the road to Damascus and other occasions.
It was Christ who gave to Paul the secrets no one else knew.
Tell me thrillobyte, who of any of mankind was given the secret that believers of the nations would reign with Christ among the celestials?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
paul using paganism
We do know Paul traveled around the Roman world, so he was probably learned on many different cultures and religions. Now a good bit of the ancient religions have truth in them, considering the theory that they came about through differences of oral tradition. Originally with Noah, men had the truth of God's existence. Yet with the different languages and spreading out on the earth, that truth became muddled. The religions of the world is the result of that muddling. So it's possible that Paul took what was true from other religions, to better explain the Gospel. Remember, Paul said he would become like an individual, in hopes that individual would come to faith in Christ. To the poor man, Paul would be like a poor man. To the rich, as though he was rich. Whatever made it easier for people to understand.
