Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 3,054 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,518,807
Pageviews Today: 1,979,317Threads Today: 479Posts Today: 7,554
11:46 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?

 
Raymantheheretic

User ID: 39558743
United States
05/16/2013 06:16 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
Saul who became Paul was never one of the apostles, he was a servant to God, a disciple, not a apostle. He was chosen, for a lot of reasons, one is that he was a zealot in his belief and after he was confronted and blinded by Christ, he was a zealot for Yahshua, or Emmanuel the Messiah, an that is the why it was.
 Quoting: Daughter



The demonization of "the Jews", Christian anti-Semitism and the Holocaust are either the consequence of the Teaching of Jesus or the consequence of the teaching of Paul.

The choice is inescapable.

Michael
 Quoting: 4Q529


I understand your bitterness with the pauline exaltation and it is a resentmant I express myself against those who uphold Pauls reengineered epistles to create this new christianity. In Pauls defense I must say his writngs are very hard for the average person to understand and has been compromised by the churches and given to the congregation as the rock of christian belief..They changed little words here and there.There were times paul was addressing a specific law but when they translated made it look like all of the law.Just like they did with the word jew in the bible.

Paul never contradicted what jesus established,its the twisted doctrines of the CATHOLIC Seminaries that engineered this scheme to carry on with lawless type of JESUS.This curriculum was passed on the the daughters of the harlot

Here is what peter wrote

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
 Quoting: Neim-Ya'shar


THIS^^^
 Quoting: Neim-Ya'shar


My rebuttal of the second Peter defense combined;

1. It is the only instance where one of the original 12 apostles almost seems to acknowledge Paul's writings as valid.

"By the accounts of two or three witnesses shall a matter be settled" Deut 19:15 & Matt 18:16


For the sake of irony I'll throw in Paul using this same biblical axiom

"This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established" Cor 13:1

Clever fellow using himself as a witness three times. No?

2. Read objectively this is an ambiguous endorsement of Paul's letters at best. In fact Martin Luther founder of the Protestant movement, decidedly pro Paul and devoutly antisemitic, argued second Peter should be left out altogether from the Bible translation/compilation he worked on, partially on the grounds it was too critical of Paul's writings.

a) "in which are some things hard to be understood"
(hard if not impossible in some instances imo)

b) "which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest"
(the very people the Gospel was meant to reach, the unlearned being 99.8% of the population including Peter)

3."as they do also the other scriptures"

While this portion has been used to establish Paul's letters as being scripture in the 'Holy' meaning of the term when you apply some common sense you should realize the idea Peter would consider Paul's letters as Holy scripture is absolutely ludicrous. Please don't even go there, it's just silly. Especially while having zero corroboration from the other Apostles.

4."even as our beloved brother Paul " & "As also in all his epistles"

If Peter knows about most if not all of Paul's letters why does he refer to him as merely "our beloved brother" and not establish Paul's authority and writings as an Apostle or a messenger of Jesus Christ and God as Paul claimed himself to be at the beginning of so many of his letters? You have to wonder...

Anyway, on to my last point about second Peter (I think tounge)

5."Here is what peter wrote"

Are you sure? Lot 'o' evil scribe high jinx could have gone down in the last 2000 years...

I'm not quite 100% certain about the earliest date but according to my research and understanding second Peter has been suspected of being a forgery since before the 5th century and has been agreed upon to be such by almost all present day biblical scholars. Not only is the writing style nothing like first Peter but second Peter contains language/words not in use until 150 years after his execution. A very strong point from my perspective but to be completely honest and fair, of no real consequence to those that hold the present day Bible in their hands and believe it to be the Word of God (if not more accurately- Words from God).

I will therefore concede the Bible is what it is, regardless of which translation one studies from or its origins. That being the case please explain for me the entire meaning of this next quote as best as you are able.

Jesus speaking to Peter:
"Very truly I tell you, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go" John 21:18

If it is a foretelling of his coming crucifixion why not say so plainly. Why is Peter the only one he gives this message to (as most of the other Apostles suffered the same fate)? What is the meaning of dressing yourself (different versions use girded or belted) vs. others doing it for him?

[added: "stretch out your hands" refers to what? Over time perhaps?]
Raymantheheretic

User ID: 39558743
United States
05/16/2013 08:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
I understand your bitterness with the pauline exaltation and it is a resentmant I express myself against those who uphold Pauls reengineered epistles to create this new christianity. In Pauls defense I must say his writngs are very hard for the average person to understand and has been compromised by the churches and given to the congregation as the rock of christian belief..They changed little words here and there.There were times paul was addressing a specific law but when they translated made it look like all of the law.Just like they did with the word jew in the bible.

Paul never contradicted what jesus established,its the twisted doctrines of the CATHOLIC Seminaries that engineered this scheme to carry on with lawless type of JESUS.This curriculum was passed on the the daughters of the harlot
 Quoting: Neim-Ya'shar
Jesus established that whatever the Apostles got together and agreed upon would be decreed so in heaven and on earth. When Barnabas and Paul came to the Apostles with the question about adult male circumcision they issued a written edict about that decision along with a short list of other concerns newly converted gentiles need to abide by. One of them happened to be to not eat meat that had been sacrificed to idols. Paul is on the record having stated no less than three times how it was perfectly okay to eat meat sacrificed to idols (although he declared he would not for sake of the conscious of his weaker minded brothers).
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 39992956
Croatia
05/17/2013 11:50 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
I have been pondering the issue of Saul/Paul for quite some time. I think the evidence is overwhelmingly against Paul being a genuine "apostle."


To just scratch the surface of the evidence against Saul, consider the following:

1. Saul/Paul was NOT one of the original 12 Apostles, and was not the replacement for Judas. The Gospels and Book of Revelation makes clear that there are only 12 apostles. Yet Saul/Paul over and over in his epistles claims to be an "apostle."

2. Saul/Paul's own writings clearly demonstrate that he taught a completely different doctrine than that of Yahshua. Saul taught against keeping the commandments (a doctrine of "salvation by faith and not works"), while Yahshua taught that one must "do the will of the Father" and obey His commandments in order to obtain eternal life.

3. Saul of Tarsus was a top Pharisee in the Sanhedrin who lead the persecution of Yahshua and his followers. Remember what Yahshua said about the "leaven" (doctrine) of the Pharisees? Perhaps Saul's agenda of claiming to be an "apostle" was to infiltrate and destroy Yahshua's teaching from within.

4. Remember that even Yahshua himself warned repeatedly against false prohphets.

Matthew 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

Matthew 24:24 "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect."

Matthew 24:4-5 "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many."



Note that Yahshua says that MANY will be deceived...not just a few.


5. One the most damning evidences against Saul comes from passages in Paul's epistle "2 Timothy" and the book of Revelation.

"This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me." 2Timothy 1:15

This would include the Church at Ephesus, which was in "Asia."

Now, turn to Revelation which includes Yahshua speaking to the Church at Ephesus:

Revelation 2;1: "Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;

2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:"



Stop and think about the significance of that. Saul has admitted that all those in Asia, including Ephesus, had rejected him. And then Yahshua praises the Ephesians for rejecting false apostles! Doesn't that include the false apostle Paul?
 Quoting: SoldierofYah


judas refused to be an apostle

he left the plug

So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
luke14:33

the spirit gives life

Paul was grafted onto the tree
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 39992956
Croatia
05/17/2013 11:51 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
I understand your bitterness with the pauline exaltation and it is a resentmant I express myself against those who uphold Pauls reengineered epistles to create this new christianity. In Pauls defense I must say his writngs are very hard for the average person to understand and has been compromised by the churches and given to the congregation as the rock of christian belief..They changed little words here and there.There were times paul was addressing a specific law but when they translated made it look like all of the law.Just like they did with the word jew in the bible.

Paul never contradicted what jesus established,its the twisted doctrines of the CATHOLIC Seminaries that engineered this scheme to carry on with lawless type of JESUS.This curriculum was passed on the the daughters of the harlot
 Quoting: Neim-Ya'shar
Jesus established that whatever the Apostles got together and agreed upon would be decreed so in heaven and on earth. When Barnabas and Paul came to the Apostles with the question about adult male circumcision they issued a written edict about that decision along with a short list of other concerns newly converted gentiles need to abide by. One of them happened to be to not eat meat that had been sacrificed to idols. Paul is on the record having stated no less than three times how it was perfectly okay to eat meat sacrificed to idols (although he declared he would not for sake of the conscious of his weaker minded brothers).
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


what are you talking about

where can you sacrifice meat to God when there is no temple?
Raymantheheretic

User ID: 39558743
United States
05/17/2013 12:36 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
I understand your bitterness with the pauline exaltation and it is a resentmant I express myself against those who uphold Pauls reengineered epistles to create this new christianity. In Pauls defense I must say his writngs are very hard for the average person to understand and has been compromised by the churches and given to the congregation as the rock of christian belief..They changed little words here and there.There were times paul was addressing a specific law but when they translated made it look like all of the law.Just like they did with the word jew in the bible.

Paul never contradicted what jesus established,its the twisted doctrines of the CATHOLIC Seminaries that engineered this scheme to carry on with lawless type of JESUS.This curriculum was passed on the the daughters of the harlot
 Quoting: Neim-Ya'shar
Jesus established that whatever the Apostles got together and agreed upon would be decreed so in heaven and on earth. When Barnabas and Paul came to the Apostles with the question about adult male circumcision they issued a written edict about that decision along with a short list of other concerns newly converted gentiles need to abide by. One of them happened to be to not eat meat that had been sacrificed to idols. Paul is on the record having stated no less than three times how it was perfectly okay to eat meat sacrificed to idols (although he declared he would not for sake of the conscious of his weaker minded brothers).
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


what are you talking about

where can you sacrifice meat to God when there is no temple?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


I'm most certainly not talking about sacrificing meat to God. It is the eating of meat sacrificed to idols that was established as forbidden by the Apostles. A very common widely used commodity among gentiles of the period.

Need more?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 39992956
Croatia
05/17/2013 12:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
I understand your bitterness with the pauline exaltation and it is a resentmant I express myself against those who uphold Pauls reengineered epistles to create this new christianity. In Pauls defense I must say his writngs are very hard for the average person to understand and has been compromised by the churches and given to the congregation as the rock of christian belief..They changed little words here and there.There were times paul was addressing a specific law but when they translated made it look like all of the law.Just like they did with the word jew in the bible.

Paul never contradicted what jesus established,its the twisted doctrines of the CATHOLIC Seminaries that engineered this scheme to carry on with lawless type of JESUS.This curriculum was passed on the the daughters of the harlot
 Quoting: Neim-Ya'shar
Jesus established that whatever the Apostles got together and agreed upon would be decreed so in heaven and on earth. When Barnabas and Paul came to the Apostles with the question about adult male circumcision they issued a written edict about that decision along with a short list of other concerns newly converted gentiles need to abide by. One of them happened to be to not eat meat that had been sacrificed to idols. Paul is on the record having stated no less than three times how it was perfectly okay to eat meat sacrificed to idols (although he declared he would not for sake of the conscious of his weaker minded brothers).
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


what are you talking about

where can you sacrifice meat to God when there is no temple?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


I'm most certainly not talking about sacrificing meat to God. It is the eating of meat sacrificed to idols that was established as forbidden by the Apostles. A very common widely used commodity among gentiles of the period.

Need more?
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


but if you dont even know it

what is the difference

you are the temple

you are the one doing the sacrifice,i assume Paul understood this very well

people are weak and God knows this better than everyone

but it is wrong for us if we want to satisfy our lust/apettite,for the wrong reason

for example you are hungry and you want to eat,and go willingly eat the animal sacrificed to idol

you have basically abandoned the spirit to dwell in flesh
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 39992956
Croatia
05/17/2013 12:49 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
...



The demonization of "the Jews", Christian anti-Semitism and the Holocaust are either the consequence of the Teaching of Jesus or the consequence of the teaching of Paul.

The choice is inescapable.

Michael
 Quoting: 4Q529


I understand your bitterness with the pauline exaltation and it is a resentmant I express myself against those who uphold Pauls reengineered epistles to create this new christianity. In Pauls defense I must say his writngs are very hard for the average person to understand and has been compromised by the churches and given to the congregation as the rock of christian belief..They changed little words here and there.There were times paul was addressing a specific law but when they translated made it look like all of the law.Just like they did with the word jew in the bible.

Paul never contradicted what jesus established,its the twisted doctrines of the CATHOLIC Seminaries that engineered this scheme to carry on with lawless type of JESUS.This curriculum was passed on the the daughters of the harlot

Here is what peter wrote

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
 Quoting: Neim-Ya'shar


THIS^^^
 Quoting: Neim-Ya'shar


My rebuttal of the second Peter defense combined;

1. It is the only instance where one of the original 12 apostles almost seems to acknowledge Paul's writings as valid.

"By the accounts of two or three witnesses shall a matter be settled" Deut 19:15 & Matt 18:16


For the sake of irony I'll throw in Paul using this same biblical axiom

"This is the third time I am coming to you. In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established" Cor 13:1

Clever fellow using himself as a witness three times. No?

2. Read objectively this is an ambiguous endorsement of Paul's letters at best. In fact Martin Luther founder of the Protestant movement, decidedly pro Paul and devoutly antisemitic, argued second Peter should be left out altogether from the Bible translation/compilation he worked on, partially on the grounds it was too critical of Paul's writings.

a) "in which are some things hard to be understood"
(hard if not impossible in some instances imo)

b) "which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest"
(the very people the Gospel was meant to reach, the unlearned being 99.8% of the population including Peter)

3."as they do also the other scriptures"

While this portion has been used to establish Paul's letters as being scripture in the 'Holy' meaning of the term when you apply some common sense you should realize the idea Peter would consider Paul's letters as Holy scripture is absolutely ludicrous. Please don't even go there, it's just silly. Especially while having zero corroboration from the other Apostles.

4."even as our beloved brother Paul " & "As also in all his epistles"

If Peter knows about most if not all of Paul's letters why does he refer to him as merely "our beloved brother" and not establish Paul's authority and writings as an Apostle or a messenger of Jesus Christ and God as Paul claimed himself to be at the beginning of so many of his letters? You have to wonder...

Anyway, on to my last point about second Peter (I think tounge)

5."Here is what peter wrote"

Are you sure? Lot 'o' evil scribe high jinx could have gone down in the last 2000 years...

I'm not quite 100% certain about the earliest date but according to my research and understanding second Peter has been suspected of being a forgery since before the 5th century and has been agreed upon to be such by almost all present day biblical scholars. Not only is the writing style nothing like first Peter but second Peter contains language/words not in use until 150 years after his execution. A very strong point from my perspective but to be completely honest and fair, of no real consequence to those that hold the present day Bible in their hands and believe it to be the Word of God (if not more accurately- Words from God).

I will therefore concede the Bible is what it is, regardless of which translation one studies from or its origins. That being the case please explain for me the entire meaning of this next quote as best as you are able.

Jesus speaking to Peter:
"Very truly I tell you, when you were younger you dressed yourself and went where you wanted; but when you are old you will stretch out your hands, and someone else will dress you and lead you where you do not want to go" John 21:18

If it is a foretelling of his coming crucifixion why not say so plainly. Why is Peter the only one he gives this message to (as most of the other Apostles suffered the same fate)? What is the meaning of dressing yourself (different versions use girded or belted) vs. others doing it for him?

[added: "stretch out your hands" refers to what? Over time perhaps?]
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


Neim was very critical of Paul,i remeber this plainly

do you think Neim and rest do not love God?
or that we are deceived?

only God can explain you what Paul wrote,so do not break your mind over it

but i think the mighty words of Peter should touch your heart and lead you

dont you think God has enough love for all of us?

Paul was a mighty plant from God
God brought much fruit through him
Raymantheheretic

User ID: 39558743
United States
05/17/2013 12:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
I have been pondering the issue of Saul/Paul for quite some time. I think the evidence is overwhelmingly against Paul being a genuine "apostle."


To just scratch the surface of the evidence against Saul, consider the following:

1. Saul/Paul was NOT one of the original 12 Apostles, and was not the replacement for Judas. The Gospels and Book of Revelation makes clear that there are only 12 apostles. Yet Saul/Paul over and over in his epistles claims to be an "apostle."

2. Saul/Paul's own writings clearly demonstrate that he taught a completely different doctrine than that of Yahshua. Saul taught against keeping the commandments (a doctrine of "salvation by faith and not works"), while Yahshua taught that one must "do the will of the Father" and obey His commandments in order to obtain eternal life.

3. Saul of Tarsus was a top Pharisee in the Sanhedrin who lead the persecution of Yahshua and his followers. Remember what Yahshua said about the "leaven" (doctrine) of the Pharisees? Perhaps Saul's agenda of claiming to be an "apostle" was to infiltrate and destroy Yahshua's teaching from within.

4. Remember that even Yahshua himself warned repeatedly against false prohphets.

Matthew 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

Matthew 24:24 "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect."

Matthew 24:4-5 "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many."



Note that Yahshua says that MANY will be deceived...not just a few.


5. One the most damning evidences against Saul comes from passages in Paul's epistle "2 Timothy" and the book of Revelation.

"This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me." 2Timothy 1:15

This would include the Church at Ephesus, which was in "Asia."

Now, turn to Revelation which includes Yahshua speaking to the Church at Ephesus:

Revelation 2;1: "Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;

2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:"



Stop and think about the significance of that. Saul has admitted that all those in Asia, including Ephesus, had rejected him. And then Yahshua praises the Ephesians for rejecting false apostles! Doesn't that include the false apostle Paul?
 Quoting: SoldierofYah


judas refused to be an apostle

he left the plug

So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
luke14:33

the spirit gives life

Paul was grafted onto the tree
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


Matthias was chosen by the Apostles to replace Judas. The role required specific conditions none of which Paul met even if he hadn't been busy at the time rounding up followers of The Way in order for them to be stoned to death.

Paul grafted himself onto the tree and there is no evidence in the Bible that says otherwise. Yes, he was a chosen vessel to carry Jesus name before Kings gentiles etc. Beyond that we have nothing other than Paul's word for his being a true Apostle and considerable evidence that he is false.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 39992956
Croatia
05/17/2013 12:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
I have been pondering the issue of Saul/Paul for quite some time. I think the evidence is overwhelmingly against Paul being a genuine "apostle."


To just scratch the surface of the evidence against Saul, consider the following:

1. Saul/Paul was NOT one of the original 12 Apostles, and was not the replacement for Judas. The Gospels and Book of Revelation makes clear that there are only 12 apostles. Yet Saul/Paul over and over in his epistles claims to be an "apostle."

2. Saul/Paul's own writings clearly demonstrate that he taught a completely different doctrine than that of Yahshua. Saul taught against keeping the commandments (a doctrine of "salvation by faith and not works"), while Yahshua taught that one must "do the will of the Father" and obey His commandments in order to obtain eternal life.

3. Saul of Tarsus was a top Pharisee in the Sanhedrin who lead the persecution of Yahshua and his followers. Remember what Yahshua said about the "leaven" (doctrine) of the Pharisees? Perhaps Saul's agenda of claiming to be an "apostle" was to infiltrate and destroy Yahshua's teaching from within.

4. Remember that even Yahshua himself warned repeatedly against false prohphets.

Matthew 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

Matthew 24:24 "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect."

Matthew 24:4-5 "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many."



Note that Yahshua says that MANY will be deceived...not just a few.


5. One the most damning evidences against Saul comes from passages in Paul's epistle "2 Timothy" and the book of Revelation.

"This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me." 2Timothy 1:15

This would include the Church at Ephesus, which was in "Asia."

Now, turn to Revelation which includes Yahshua speaking to the Church at Ephesus:

Revelation 2;1: "Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;

2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:"



Stop and think about the significance of that. Saul has admitted that all those in Asia, including Ephesus, had rejected him. And then Yahshua praises the Ephesians for rejecting false apostles! Doesn't that include the false apostle Paul?
 Quoting: SoldierofYah


judas refused to be an apostle

he left the plug

So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
luke14:33

the spirit gives life

Paul was grafted onto the tree
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


bump
Judas left the treasure of God,for the treasures of this world

and with God there is no void,God is filling the void

always did
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

i think the word for this is "filled"

not sure,however

God creates,and in Paul,Jesus Christ created a knew man

Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled.
2 Corinthians 10:5-6

Paul is talking about the us inside!

dont worry,God understands our struggles and learning and understanding/foolishness

thats why we are here brohf
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 39992956
Croatia
05/17/2013 01:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
I have been pondering the issue of Saul/Paul for quite some time. I think the evidence is overwhelmingly against Paul being a genuine "apostle."


To just scratch the surface of the evidence against Saul, consider the following:

1. Saul/Paul was NOT one of the original 12 Apostles, and was not the replacement for Judas. The Gospels and Book of Revelation makes clear that there are only 12 apostles. Yet Saul/Paul over and over in his epistles claims to be an "apostle."

2. Saul/Paul's own writings clearly demonstrate that he taught a completely different doctrine than that of Yahshua. Saul taught against keeping the commandments (a doctrine of "salvation by faith and not works"), while Yahshua taught that one must "do the will of the Father" and obey His commandments in order to obtain eternal life.

3. Saul of Tarsus was a top Pharisee in the Sanhedrin who lead the persecution of Yahshua and his followers. Remember what Yahshua said about the "leaven" (doctrine) of the Pharisees? Perhaps Saul's agenda of claiming to be an "apostle" was to infiltrate and destroy Yahshua's teaching from within.

4. Remember that even Yahshua himself warned repeatedly against false prohphets.

Matthew 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

Matthew 24:24 "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect."

Matthew 24:4-5 "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many."



Note that Yahshua says that MANY will be deceived...not just a few.


5. One the most damning evidences against Saul comes from passages in Paul's epistle "2 Timothy" and the book of Revelation.

"This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me." 2Timothy 1:15

This would include the Church at Ephesus, which was in "Asia."

Now, turn to Revelation which includes Yahshua speaking to the Church at Ephesus:

Revelation 2;1: "Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;

2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:"



Stop and think about the significance of that. Saul has admitted that all those in Asia, including Ephesus, had rejected him. And then Yahshua praises the Ephesians for rejecting false apostles! Doesn't that include the false apostle Paul?
 Quoting: SoldierofYah


judas refused to be an apostle

he left the plug

So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
luke14:33

the spirit gives life

Paul was grafted onto the tree
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


Matthias was chosen by the Apostles to replace Judas. The role required specific conditions none of which Paul met even if he hadn't been busy at the time rounding up followers of The Way in order for them to be stoned to death.

Paul grafted himself onto the tree and there is no evidence in the Bible that says otherwise. Yes, he was a chosen vessel to carry Jesus name before Kings gentiles etc. Beyond that we have nothing other than Paul's word for his being a true Apostle and considerable evidence that he is false.
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


i see where you are coming from

but i think the motive is important

i think he sincerely loved Jesus


however he did establish the churches and loved the brethren and teach them to love

Paul was more carnal,yes

but how are we today?

are you less false than he was?

nice talking to you again,im the guy who corrected you in that thread about Todd White

love you man

keep loving and understanding in Jesus

be less carnal and more spirit
Raymantheheretic

User ID: 39558743
United States
05/17/2013 01:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
I have been pondering the issue of Saul/Paul for quite some time. I think the evidence is overwhelmingly against Paul being a genuine "apostle."


To just scratch the surface of the evidence against Saul, consider the following:

1. Saul/Paul was NOT one of the original 12 Apostles, and was not the replacement for Judas. The Gospels and Book of Revelation makes clear that there are only 12 apostles. Yet Saul/Paul over and over in his epistles claims to be an "apostle."

2. Saul/Paul's own writings clearly demonstrate that he taught a completely different doctrine than that of Yahshua. Saul taught against keeping the commandments (a doctrine of "salvation by faith and not works"), while Yahshua taught that one must "do the will of the Father" and obey His commandments in order to obtain eternal life.

3. Saul of Tarsus was a top Pharisee in the Sanhedrin who lead the persecution of Yahshua and his followers. Remember what Yahshua said about the "leaven" (doctrine) of the Pharisees? Perhaps Saul's agenda of claiming to be an "apostle" was to infiltrate and destroy Yahshua's teaching from within.

4. Remember that even Yahshua himself warned repeatedly against false prohphets.

Matthew 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

Matthew 24:24 "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect."

Matthew 24:4-5 "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many."



Note that Yahshua says that MANY will be deceived...not just a few.


5. One the most damning evidences against Saul comes from passages in Paul's epistle "2 Timothy" and the book of Revelation.

"This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me." 2Timothy 1:15

This would include the Church at Ephesus, which was in "Asia."

Now, turn to Revelation which includes Yahshua speaking to the Church at Ephesus:

Revelation 2;1: "Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;

2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:"



Stop and think about the significance of that. Saul has admitted that all those in Asia, including Ephesus, had rejected him. And then Yahshua praises the Ephesians for rejecting false apostles! Doesn't that include the false apostle Paul?
 Quoting: SoldierofYah


judas refused to be an apostle

he left the plug

So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
luke14:33

the spirit gives life

Paul was grafted onto the tree
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


Matthias was chosen by the Apostles to replace Judas. The role required specific conditions none of which Paul met even if he hadn't been busy at the time rounding up followers of The Way in order for them to be stoned to death.

Paul grafted himself onto the tree and there is no evidence in the Bible that says otherwise. Yes, he was a chosen vessel to carry Jesus name before Kings gentiles etc. Beyond that we have nothing other than Paul's word for his being a true Apostle and considerable evidence that he is false.
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


i see where you are coming from

but i think the motive is important

i think he sincerely loved Jesus


however he did establish the churches and loved the brethren and teach them to love

Paul was more carnal,yes

but how are we today?

are you less false than he was?

nice talking to you again,im the guy who corrected you in that thread about Todd White

love you man

keep loving and understanding in Jesus

be less carnal and more spirit
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


Yes, I noticed who you were from the Todd White thread and I am grateful for your correction.

I understand how it can be very difficult to see Paul as anything other than a sincere follower of Jesus and once his true identity is revealed it really drives home the point that no matter how much we desire to be in tune with the Father's message sent thru Jesus we are always at risk of failure. As I so apply proved in that other thread following His Way requires constant tending. By one another at times (thanks again) but more importantly of oneself. Which is one of the ways in which people tend to get carried away with Paul's words. Thinking their main job is to fix others since we know our salvation is assured, too often neglecting our own major faults.

Have to go for now, will be sure to catch up with you later.

Last Edited by Raymantheheretic on 05/17/2013 01:53 PM
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 39992956
Croatia
05/17/2013 02:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
...


judas refused to be an apostle

he left the plug

So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
luke14:33

the spirit gives life

Paul was grafted onto the tree
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


Matthias was chosen by the Apostles to replace Judas. The role required specific conditions none of which Paul met even if he hadn't been busy at the time rounding up followers of The Way in order for them to be stoned to death.

Paul grafted himself onto the tree and there is no evidence in the Bible that says otherwise. Yes, he was a chosen vessel to carry Jesus name before Kings gentiles etc. Beyond that we have nothing other than Paul's word for his being a true Apostle and considerable evidence that he is false.
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


i see where you are coming from

but i think the motive is important

i think he sincerely loved Jesus


however he did establish the churches and loved the brethren and teach them to love

Paul was more carnal,yes

but how are we today?

are you less false than he was?

nice talking to you again,im the guy who corrected you in that thread about Todd White

love you man

keep loving and understanding in Jesus

be less carnal and more spirit
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


Yes, I noticed who you were from the Todd White thread and I am grateful for your correction.

I understand how it can be very difficult to see Paul as anything other than a sincere follower of Jesus and once his true identity is revealed it really drives home the point that no matter how much we desire to be in tune with the Father's message sent thru Jesus we are always at risk of failure. As I so apply proved in that other thread following His Way requires constant tending. By one another at times (thanks again) but more importantly of oneself. Which is one of the ways in which people tend to get carried away with Paul's words. Thinking their main job is to fix others since we know our salvation is assured, too often neglecting our own major faults.

Have to go for now, will be sure to catch up with you later.
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


That is why we have Jesus Christ our King and he is showing us love throuh correction and healing

i wont be there, but he is

yes we fall,but when Lord makes new heaven and new earth we will be like him

may God bless you in the name of Jesus Christ
most holy name
Pyractomena borealis

User ID: 20793638
United States
05/17/2013 02:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
I have been pondering the issue of Saul/Paul for quite some time. I think the evidence is overwhelmingly against Paul being a genuine "apostle."


To just scratch the surface of the evidence against Saul, consider the following:

1. Saul/Paul was NOT one of the original 12 Apostles, and was not the replacement for Judas. The Gospels and Book of Revelation makes clear that there are only 12 apostles. Yet Saul/Paul over and over in his epistles claims to be an "apostle."

2. Saul/Paul's own writings clearly demonstrate that he taught a completely different doctrine than that of Yahshua. Saul taught against keeping the commandments (a doctrine of "salvation by faith and not works"), while Yahshua taught that one must "do the will of the Father" and obey His commandments in order to obtain eternal life.

3. Saul of Tarsus was a top Pharisee in the Sanhedrin who lead the persecution of Yahshua and his followers. Remember what Yahshua said about the "leaven" (doctrine) of the Pharisees? Perhaps Saul's agenda of claiming to be an "apostle" was to infiltrate and destroy Yahshua's teaching from within.

4. Remember that even Yahshua himself warned repeatedly against false prohphets.

Matthew 7:15 "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves."

Matthew 24:24 "For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect."

Matthew 24:4-5 "And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you. For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many."



Note that Yahshua says that MANY will be deceived...not just a few.


5. One the most damning evidences against Saul comes from passages in Paul's epistle "2 Timothy" and the book of Revelation.

"This you know, that all those in Asia have turned away from me." 2Timothy 1:15

This would include the Church at Ephesus, which was in "Asia."

Now, turn to Revelation which includes Yahshua speaking to the Church at Ephesus:

Revelation 2;1: "Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;

2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:"



Stop and think about the significance of that. Saul has admitted that all those in Asia, including Ephesus, had rejected him. And then Yahshua praises the Ephesians for rejecting false apostles! Doesn't that include the false apostle Paul?
 Quoting: SoldierofYah


judas refused to be an apostle

he left the plug

So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
luke14:33

the spirit gives life

Paul was grafted onto the tree
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


Matthias was chosen by the Apostles to replace Judas. The role required specific conditions none of which Paul met even if he hadn't been busy at the time rounding up followers of The Way in order for them to be stoned to death.

Paul grafted himself onto the tree and there is no evidence in the Bible that says otherwise. Yes, he was a chosen vessel to carry Jesus name before Kings gentiles etc. Beyond that we have nothing other than Paul's word for his being a true Apostle and considerable evidence that he is false.
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


i see where you are coming from

but i think the motive is important

i think he sincerely loved Jesus


however he did establish the churches and loved the brethren and teach them to love

Paul was more carnal,yes

but how are we today?


are you less false than he was?

nice talking to you again,im the guy who corrected you in that thread about Todd White

love you man

keep loving and understanding in Jesus

be less carnal and more spirit
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


It is because of Paul's carnality that we are the way we are today. He basically turned wives into whores. MHO

This is my problem with Paul, this ONE thing.
There is nothing so powerful as truth, and often nothing so strange ~ Daniel Webster

Omnia Vincit Amor ~ Virgil

The more you learn, the less you know ~ Socrates

That writer does the most, who gives his reader the most knowledge, and takes from him the least time. ~ Charles Caleb Colton
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 39992956
Croatia
05/17/2013 03:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
...


Matthias was chosen by the Apostles to replace Judas. The role required specific conditions none of which Paul met even if he hadn't been busy at the time rounding up followers of The Way in order for them to be stoned to death.

Paul grafted himself onto the tree and there is no evidence in the Bible that says otherwise. Yes, he was a chosen vessel to carry Jesus name before Kings gentiles etc. Beyond that we have nothing other than Paul's word for his being a true Apostle and considerable evidence that he is false.
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


i see where you are coming from

but i think the motive is important

i think he sincerely loved Jesus


however he did establish the churches and loved the brethren and teach them to love

Paul was more carnal,yes

but how are we today?

are you less false than he was?

nice talking to you again,im the guy who corrected you in that thread about Todd White

love you man

keep loving and understanding in Jesus

be less carnal and more spirit
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


Yes, I noticed who you were from the Todd White thread and I am grateful for your correction.

I understand how it can be very difficult to see Paul as anything other than a sincere follower of Jesus and once his true identity is revealed it really drives home the point that no matter how much we desire to be in tune with the Father's message sent thru Jesus we are always at risk of failure. As I so apply proved in that other thread following His Way requires constant tending. By one another at times (thanks again) but more importantly of oneself. Which is one of the ways in which people tend to get carried away with Paul's words. Thinking their main job is to fix others since we know our salvation is assured, too often neglecting our own major faults.

Have to go for now, will be sure to catch up with you later.
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


That is why we have Jesus Christ our King and he is showing us love throuh correction and healing

i wont be there, but he is

yes we fall,but when Lord makes new heaven and new earth we will be like him

may God bless you in the name of Jesus Christ
most holy name
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


But unto you that fear my name shall the Sun of righteousness arise with healing in his wings; and ye shall go forth, and grow up as calves of the stall.
malachi4:2

Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of hosts.
isaiah6:5

see the King in everything around you,in you :)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 39992956
Croatia
05/17/2013 03:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
...


judas refused to be an apostle

he left the plug

So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
luke14:33

the spirit gives life

Paul was grafted onto the tree
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


Matthias was chosen by the Apostles to replace Judas. The role required specific conditions none of which Paul met even if he hadn't been busy at the time rounding up followers of The Way in order for them to be stoned to death.

Paul grafted himself onto the tree and there is no evidence in the Bible that says otherwise. Yes, he was a chosen vessel to carry Jesus name before Kings gentiles etc. Beyond that we have nothing other than Paul's word for his being a true Apostle and considerable evidence that he is false.
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


i see where you are coming from

but i think the motive is important

i think he sincerely loved Jesus


however he did establish the churches and loved the brethren and teach them to love

Paul was more carnal,yes

but how are we today?


are you less false than he was?

nice talking to you again,im the guy who corrected you in that thread about Todd White

love you man

keep loving and understanding in Jesus

be less carnal and more spirit
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956


It is because of Paul's carnality that we are the way we are today. He basically turned wives into whores. MHO

This is my problem with Paul, this ONE thing.
 Quoting: Pyractomena borealis


he did not do such thing

understand what is God trying to say through Paul
Raymantheheretic

User ID: 39558743
United States
05/17/2013 05:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
It is because of Paul's carnality that we are the way we are today. He basically turned wives into whores. MHO

This is my problem with Paul, this ONE thing.
 Quoting: Pyractomena borealis


he did not do such thing

understand what is God trying to say through Paul
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956
There can be no question that thru Paul the subservience of woman to men, of wives to husbands was firmly established. While Paul may have a little OT backing on the subject it is very clear Jesus' behavior shows he meant to elevate the then deplorable status of women where as Paul cemented and increased it tenfold.

I don't see how anyone could argue otherwise though of course they are welcome to try. Marriage is a union of two becoming one. A Holy partnership not President & vice presidential bitch, not master & slave/baby maker which for centuries was the norm.

Yet it is important we not lay the blame on Paul for following his patriarchal and at times misogynistic role model. It is we the people who choose to allow a mere man to speak for God. That is what it comes down to on the subject of Paul. Finding inspiration in his words is all well and good but they need always, always, ALWAYS be filtered thoroughly through all of Jesus' teachings to ever be considered completely trust worthy.

understand what is God trying to say through Paul
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956
My understanding of what God is trying to say through Paul is that if we allow men to speak for God we are in for a world of hurt.
Pyractomena borealis

User ID: 20793638
United States
05/17/2013 07:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
It is because of Paul's carnality that we are the way we are today. He basically turned wives into whores. MHO

This is my problem with Paul, this ONE thing.
 Quoting: Pyractomena borealis


he did not do such thing

understand what is God trying to say through Paul
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956
There can be no question that thru Paul the subservience of woman to men, of wives to husbands was firmly established. While Paul may have a little OT backing on the subject it is very clear Jesus' behavior shows he meant to elevate the then deplorable status of women where as Paul cemented and increased it tenfold.

I don't see how anyone could argue otherwise though of course they are welcome to try. Marriage is a union of two becoming one. A Holy partnership not President & vice presidential bitch, not master & slave/baby maker which for centuries was the norm.

Yet it is important we not lay the blame on Paul for following his patriarchal and at times misogynistic role model. It is we the people who choose to allow a mere man to speak for God. That is what it comes down to on the subject of Paul. Finding inspiration in his words is all well and good but they need always, always, ALWAYS be filtered thoroughly through all of Jesus' teachings to ever be considered completely trust worthy.

understand what is God trying to say through Paul
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 39992956
My understanding of what God is trying to say through Paul is that if we allow men to speak for God we are in for a world of hurt.
 Quoting: Raymantheheretic


Perfectly stated.

Thank you, a fellow heretic.

hf

Last Edited by Pyractomena borealis on 05/17/2013 07:27 PM
There is nothing so powerful as truth, and often nothing so strange ~ Daniel Webster

Omnia Vincit Amor ~ Virgil

The more you learn, the less you know ~ Socrates

That writer does the most, who gives his reader the most knowledge, and takes from him the least time. ~ Charles Caleb Colton
Raymantheheretic

User ID: 40308889
United States
05/23/2013 01:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
Perfectly stated.

Thank you, a fellow heretic.

hf
 Quoting: Pyractomena borealis
Writing does not come easy for me and I really appreciate the complement. You are very welcome and please excuse my not having the decency to say so sooner.

I was rather at odds with saying anything more at that time even though I felt I had important content to add because there seemed a chance of alienating a recently found kindred spirit. You being one of the few people I've run into who had identified well with what I was trying to convey.

Be that as it may here is more regardless. In the same sense Paul has subjugated womankind, he has done even greater damage by enslaving almost all of Christianity to their egos, at least to their charismatic leader's if not simply their own. To my mind it is completely counter to and the root cause of the undoing of Jesus' basic teachings. The key source to conflict throughout man's entire recorded history, thinking we're better than others. I'll get into some specifics of how if anyone asks but for now it is enough to say Paul's example acts as a kind of undertow and one of the ways it masks itself so well is that not all are taken in by it. Neim-Ya'shar and my here newly discovered Croatian friend seem to me to be fine examples of those that have received Jesus teachings unscathed by Paul's potential negative effects. Unfortunately it is far too often those very much inspired in a negative way by Paul that land the roles of leadership supported by plenty of followers. Things in that regard are getting better. I look forward to seeing it change more and more in the future.
VarianceX77

User ID: 40361728
United States
05/23/2013 01:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
Either his words are misinterpreted way to often, or he is indeed a false apostle.

It can go both ways. I have accused him of being a false teacher, but after letting it swirl around in my head, it's how you interpret it.
VarianceX77
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 34458366
United States
09/16/2013 06:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
Its funny how the false prophets and teachers or believers just love to rail against the written Word of God, the Bible.

How do you decide what is the "Word Of God"?

ie, how do you decide which books to include as "canon" Scripture, and part of the Bible?

Those decisions were made by men -- such as at the council at Nicea...when pagan "convert" to Chritianity and founder of the Catholic Church and his cronies decided which books to include.

For instance, Catholics include the Apocrypha and other books, while Protestant do not.
 Quoting: SoldierofYah



It comes down to 1 question and 1 question only.

DO YOU BELIEVE IN JESUS CHRIST AS THE SON OF GOD?

IF you do, then you know that Jesus Christ is supreme and He holds ALL POWER as The Father gave unto HIM ALL POWER, for Jesus Christ IS God and Creator.

IF you believe this and it is clear from scripture that Jesus Christ is the one that established and created the Church, you know that Jesus Christ is the FINAL AUTHORITY behind the Church.

Do you really think that the book, the Bible, came about because of what MAN made it to be?

No, The Bible is what it is today because Christ in HIS SUPREME DOMINION AND POWER WILLED IT TO BE WHAT IT IS.

If you think an all-power, all-knowing God cannot do this very simple and easy thing, I have to question your FAITH?

Why is it do you think that Jesus Christ is not the one that willed the Bible to be as it is now?

Why do you think it is a work of Man?

Where have YOU placed your FAITH?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 882450


Actually, there are numerous occasions where God lets our faith be tested, and one of those instances are with the false prophets.... Paul infiltrated the early Christian religion to break it. He was a pharisee who only pretended to be a convert. He changes his conversion story to fit the audience, especially with King Agrippa. Paul is a liar and he is the one mentioned in Revelation 2:2. While fasting over the day of atonement on Saturday, I prayed before reading the bible that God would reveal what I needed to learn, and I realized that Paul led so many Gentiles astray with his teaching to disregard the law.
Bogan Bread
User ID: 54050027
Australia
02/08/2014 02:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Was Paul - aka Saul of Tarsus - a False Apostle?
bump

News








We're dropping truth bombs like it's the end of days!