What's with all the hate for Paul?

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Guess you can see it as such, no need to differ between gods, ants, men or mice when speaking of life in general I suppose. BTW I witnessed what initially looked like the prelude to a mouse murder tonight. One of the cats came in with a live mouse in his mouth and started playing around with it on the floor. By accepting nature but setting a limit to what I can accept in this my humble residence, I threw them both out. And the mouse can be dead for all we know, and it may even rise in three days-- or it is out there rocking it in the free world for having outsmarted a mean cat and it's huge human. I bet it's alive and well. A Schrödinger's mouse existing in a quantum state. So what should we believe?

However, as not to derail this thread any further, I could add that Paul's views on women are very similar to how the Koran treats the subject. Had it been up to Paul, Western women would all wear hijabs and burkas and fulfil their "obligations" in "silence and dignity" while accepting their place as subordinate men and being servants or even slaves of their husbands.

originally posted by: deadeyedick
Again i will thank you all to vent your demons elsewhere. I have learned much here and the belittling of others has not much basis here.

You brought the subject up or did I miss it was meant to read INSTEAD in the OP "Breaking news: Strawberry Shortcake Marries SpongeBob Squarepants" in a Christian ceremony on May 25th 2014 (one of Paul's dodgy shills presided). This isn't about venting its just sharing a combined truth you will not acknowledge.

a reply to: vethumanbeing Are you saying paul was a demon? So far it seems kinda split down the middle on the subject. I'm thinking he had a job to do after his meeting with Jesus and took it very serious. I think that what he had to do was for the benefit of GOD'S incarnation into this place but detremental to salvation of all. It may be that without paul we would all be more accepting of manlove. However i also know that without paul there would be no spiritual gain in the subject. No true christian wants to hear someone say that jesus may have found some magic in the backdoor and just the thought sounds like satan. It seems to come down to sex and suffering and without paul there would be no suffering and no growth. There is an amount to everything and we are not meant to screw ourselves to death. there is much benefit to refraining from sex but most have not the power to find out. GOD was very ashamed that the curses in the ot were put on his creation but what is he to do just erease it all and start over? He used paul to try and put some of what was originally intended for us to be back into the system and that meant certain people had to suffer more but get to grow more. Over all my view is to give it away now but keep it indoors and unseen but apparently that is too much to ask for.

The evidence is all there.

Jesus is crucified by Romans... like lol.

Alexandria ---
en.wikipedia.org...
---*Alexandria (اسكندرية, pronounced [eskendeˈrejjæ] in Egyptian Arabic)[see other names] is the second largest city and the second largest metropolitan area in Egypt after Greater Cairo by size and population, extending about 32 km (20 mi) along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea in the north central part of the country. It is also the largest city lying directly on the Mediterranean coast. Alexandria is Egypt's largest seaport, serving approximately 80% of Egypt's imports and exports. It is an important industrial center because of its natural gas and oil pipelines from Suez. Alexandria is also an important tourist resort.

Alexandria was founded around a small Ancient Egyptian town c. 331 BC by Alexander the Great. It became an important centre of the Hellenistic civilization and remained the capital of Hellenistic and Roman & Byzantine Egypt for almost one thousand years until the Muslim conquest of Egypt in AD 641, when a new capital was founded at Fustat (later absorbed into Cairo). Hellenistic Alexandria was best known for the Lighthouse of Alexandria (Pharos), one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World; its Great Library (the largest in the ancient world; now replaced by a modern one); and the Necropolis, one of the Seven Wonders of the Middle Ages. Ongoing maritime archaeology in the harbor of Alexandria, which began in 1994, is revealing details of Alexandria both before the arrival of Alexander, when a city named Rhacotis existed there, and during the Ptolemaic dynasty.

From the late 19th century, Alexandria became a major center of the international shipping industry and one of the most important trading centers in the world, both because it profited from the easy overland connection between the Mediterranean Sea and the Red Sea, and the lucrative trade in Egyptian cotton. Alexandria was the second most powerful city of the ancient world after Rome*.-------------------


Rome had all the ambition to destroy this city.

A wealth of knowledge collected.

*-------------------Alexandria was not only a center of Hellenism, but was also home to the largest urban Jewish community in the world. The Septuagint, a Greek version of the Tanakh, was produced there. The early Ptolemies kept it in order and fostered the development of its museum into the leading Hellenistic center of learning (Library of Alexandria), but were careful to maintain the distinction of its population's three largest ethnicities: Greek, Jewish, and Egyptian.[3] From this division arose much of the later turbulence, which began to manifest itself under Ptolemy Philopater who reigned from 221–204 BC. The reign of Ptolemy VIII Physcon from 144–116 BC was marked by purges and civil warfare.[citation needed]

The city passed formally under Roman jurisdiction in 80 BC, according to the will of Ptolemy Alexander, but only after it had been under Roman influence for more than a hundred years. It was besieged by the Ptolemies in 47 BC during Julius Caesar intervention in the civil war between king Ptolemy XIII and his advisers, and the fabled queen Cleopatra VII. It was finally captured by Octavian, future emperor Augustus on 1 August 30 BC, with the name of the month later being changed to August to commemorate his victory.[citation needed]

In AD 115, large parts of Alexandria were destroyed during the Kitos War, which gave Hadrian and his architect, Decriannus, an opportunity to rebuild it. In 215, the emperor Caracalla visited the city and, because of some insulting satires that the inhabitants had directed at him, abruptly commanded his troops to put to death all youths capable of bearing arms. On 21 July 365, Alexandria was devastated by a tsunami (365 Crete earthquake),[4] an event annually commemorated years later as a "day of horror."[5] In the late 4th century, persecution of pagans by newly Christian Romans had reached new levels of intensity. In 391, the Patriarch Theophilus destroyed all pagan temples in Alexandria under orders from Emperor Theodosius I. The Brucheum and Jewish quarters were desolate in the 5th century. On the mainland, life seemed to have centered in the vicinity of the Serapeum and Caesareum, both of which became Christian churches. The Pharos and Heptastadium quarters, however, remained populous and were left intact.[citation needed]
Alexandria: bombardment by British naval forces.

In 619, Alexandria fell to the Sassanid Persians. Although the Byzantine Emperor Heraclius recovered it in 629, in 641 the Arabs under the general Amr Ibn Al-As captured it during the Muslim conquest of Egypt, after a siege that lasted 14 months. After the Battle of Ridaniya in 1517, the city was conquered by the Ottoman Turks and remained under Ottoman rule until 1798. Alexandria lost much of its former importance to Rosetta during the 9th to 18th centuries, and only regained its former prominence with the contsruction of the Mahmoudiyah Canal in 1807.*----------------

When almost the trace of all the knowledge was burned back then, All that left was Jeruselem.




*A city called Rušalim in the Execration texts of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt (c. 19th century BCE) is widely, but not universally, identified as Jerusalem.[24][25] Jerusalem is called Urušalim in the Amarna letters of Abdi-Heba (1330s BCE).[26]

The name “Jerusalem” is variously etymologized to mean "foundation (Sumerian yeru, ‘settlement’/Semitic yry, ‘to found, to lay a cornerstone’) of the god Shalem",[27][28] the god Shalem was thus the original tutelary deity of the Bronze Age city.[29]

The form Yerushalem or Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) first appears in the Bible, in the book of Joshua. According to a Midrash, the name is a combination of Yhwh Yir'eh ("God will see to it", the name given by Abraham to the place where he began to sacrifice his son) and the town "Shalem".[30]

The earliest extra-biblical Hebrew writing of the word Jerusalem is dated to the sixth or seventh century BCE[31][32] and was discovered in Khirbet Beit Lei near Beit Guvrin in 1961. The inscription states: I am Yahweh thy God, I will accept the cities of Judah and I will redeem Jerusalem"[33][34][35] or as other scholars suggest: "Yahweh is the God of the whole earth. The mountains of Judah belong to him, to the God of Jerusalem".[**


It's safe to say that Alexandra probably held a lot of fanatically beliefs...

Alexiandria is up on the coast, easily acessiable.



That whole region is very close together.
Isreal is literally just on the border of all these important ancient populated areas.

I'm sure someone else could come here and fill in a whole historical essay on all the events that developed and fueled the religion into what we have today.

But point being is, The new testament was forged by diobolical hands, Where as the old testament were made by sage fanatics that melded their culture and myths with the egyptian ones spread more in formation to the corners of the known planet.

Rome was developing and needed more power, They came traveled to egypt. Learned their customs and religions and developed their own that was counter productive to the semetic jewish people, their most hated enemies.

Jews today will not agree that Jesus is or ever was Yeshuah/Yahweh.

I'm not a jew btw.

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: veteranhumanbeing Are you saying paul was a demon? So far it seems kinda split down the middle on the subject. I'm thinking he had a job to do after his meeting with Jesus and took it very serious.

,
Thankyou for your reply. How did he meet Jesus in the flesh and bone 300 years after the crucifixion at "Golgatha/the Calgary event " 300 years later in Pauls hometown (or you could call it base of operations in the area of Greece)?

[I]deadeyedick[/I] I think that what he had to do was for the benefit of GOD'S incarnation into this place but detremental to salvation of all.

Jesus never spoke the pertainant truths he just hinted around. It is not gods program to just give you the information the whole point is for you to ferret those truths for yourself. Its you vs god it you as Gods expression. No one gets a step up as to how to attain enlightenment (not even master Jesus) he actually had to work for the attainment.

[I]deadeyedick[/I] It may be that without paul we would all be more accepting of manlove. However i also know that without paul there would be no spiritual gain in the subject. No true christian wants to hear someone say that jesus may have found some magic in the backdoor and just the thought sounds like satan. It seems to come down to sex and suffering and without paul there would be no suffering and no growth. There is an amount to everything and we are not meant to screw ourselves to death. there is much benefit to refraining from sex but most have not the power to find out. GOD was very ashamed that the curses in the ot were put on his creation but what is he to do just erease it all and start over? He used paul to try and put some of what was originally intended for us to be back into the system and that meant certain people had to suffer more but get to grow more. Over all my view is to give it away now but keep it indoors and unseen but apparently that is too much to ask for.

I disagree; Paul is an abomination. There is no such thing as back door majick, this is the Egyptian school at its best if you try to steal it you are only getting part of the information (MOSES tried this) . Paul is clueless, HE WAS NOT A GNOSTIC as someone else proclaimed. Paul was not used he was a willing participant in that particular Roman political system he lived within and was manipulated by. What's with dragging God into the shame-game- blame (ITS just a passive/aggressive observer).

a reply to: vethumanbeing Anything is possibly with GOD. Can you show me where any of the curses in the bible were broken or fulfilled? The way i see it they were handed down to us through the bloodlines. I get visions and have met Jesus. Perhaps you may find me crazy but it is from this that i draw my knowledge from. btw usa is an obamanation lol

a reply to: AnuTyr thanks a million

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: veteranhumanbeing Anything is possibly with GOD. Can you show me where any of the curses in the bible were broken or fulfilled? The way i see it they were handed down to us through the bloodlines. I get visions and have met Jesus. Perhaps you may find me crazy but it is from this that i draw my knowledge from. btw usa is an obamanation lol

Yes, its in the bloodlines. Biblespeak is beyond me; good scary poetry meant to guide I suppose. I am not a scripture reader as it does not ring with any vibration of truth (fairy stories for those born in darkness 1700 years ago). Why would I show you curses; this paradigm is trying to succeed not recede (law of nature at its best at work; negative never does anything but destroy, or at best hinder to cause the positive to OUTSMART It). You are blessed to have met Jesus (paid attention YOU? cool). Forget what you think is real here in the 3d as its not real just a mirror for the dimensions above reflecting (your, my stay here is short term) you will laugh about this experience later (I thought it was real). You were convinced the heavy Malkuth third dimension was in fact true reality; that would be wrong as it is just the first jumpoff point to where you soul progresses from. You incarnate as a heavy being in this first enlightenment then you go through stages of higher and higher awareness to finally combine with yourself as God; Eternity/forever is a long time to reach this goal (just think of it as a joke played upon you because you will never run out of time to reach/combine with your creator).

I've seen lots of broad statements against Paul, I'd like to see from those that aren't big on the little guy (Paul means small), specific problems with Paul.

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Sremmos80 well many do not adhere to either but still find cause to disagree with the teachings of paul. So yes i meant christians but it seems that many have knowledge of the subject so i'm just trying to get all the angles.

Has anyone ever thought how Saul the Pharisee, persecutor of the christian faith all of a sudden becomes "Apostle Paul" follower of the christian faith?

No one ever called Paul an apostle. Paul himself calls himself an apostle! Its in the bible.

Paul never met Jesus (his story concerning his travel to Damascus is all we have concerning Saul's conversion to Christianity)

The other were hand picked and none of them were openly against Christ or his teachings like Paul was.

**wait**

Somone hates my Uncle Paul?!?? NAAAAW, say it ain't so!

originally posted by: Jesuslives4u

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Sremmos80 well many do not adhere to either but still find cause to disagree with the teachings of paul. So yes i meant christians but it seems that many have knowledge of the subject so i'm just trying to get all the angles.

Has anyone ever thought how Saul the Pharisee, persecutor of the christian faith all of a sudden becomes "Apostle Paul" follower of the christian faith?

Well, apparently Paul invented the word Apostle, so who really knows what really happened. There were a few new words to surface in the first few centuries that snook into the bibles as if they had been there for ages. Words like Apostle (Paul) and Kyriakos (the Church). Kyriakos is a Greek word reflecting the highest authority in the Roman empire, the Curia, where the Emperor lead his senators doing the most important business in the Empire, which nowdays is just the same Curia only it's the Pope and his cardinals who meet to sort out doctrinal questions and important political subjects. Makes you think when they sing their kyrie eleison. Curious....

a reply to: Utnapisjtim

The church is the word ecclesia in Greek. It's ek-klessia out-called. A gathering. It was a common term for any community gathering whether city or religious. Kyriakos doesn't appear in the Greek scriptures unless I'm mistaken. That term is a later term that reflects the imperialization of the body. This hierarchical organization is the manifestation of the beast kingdom on earth. Or earthly Jerusalem compared to our mother heavenly Jerusalem. The original intent of Paul's writings never advocated an organization which is why the pastorals are suspect to me. The mystical body with the christed head was the ecclesia Paul preached. This is one new man out of all nations.

originally posted by: zardust
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

The church is the word ecclesia in Greek.

Ah, one of me favorites!

-- Not church I'm afraid. The concept of churches wasn't even invented at the time the word church shows up in scripture. Church has a different etymology and can't really be used to translate Ecclesia. Ecclesia translates congregation. Kyriakos translates Church. I know most translaters mix this up, like the seven ecclesiae in Revelation is often translated as seven churches, not seven congregations. Do a search for kyriakos, and note how the word church or the concept of what a church was wasn't even around when it shows up in NT translations. It's politics of course. By using their own word, church, they manage to make all christians believe that the Church is what Jesus refers to when he says he will build his church on Peters' rock in Matt 16. But Church is Kyriakos and wasn't around as a concept of a church until early 300's, Ecclesia should be translated Congregation.

Kyriakos Strongs number 2960. It is used twice in the NT, once in Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, and secondly in Revelation. Kyriakos translates "the Lord's":

1 Corinthians 11:20: "this is not to eat the Lord's supper."
Revelation 1:10: "the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind"

church (n.)
Old English cirice, circe "church, public place of worship; Christians collectively," from Proto-Germanic *kirika (cognates: Old Saxon kirika, Old Norse kirkja, Old Frisian zerke, Middle Dutch kerke, Dutch kerk, Old High German kirihha, German Kirche), probably [see note in OED] from Greek kyriake (oikia), kyriakon doma "Lord's (house)," from kyrios "ruler, lord," from PIE root *keue- "to swell" ("swollen," hence "strong, powerful"); see cumulus. Phonetic spelling from c.1200, established by 16c. For vowel evolution, see bury. As an adjective from 1570s.

Greek kyriakon (adj.) "of the Lord" was used of houses of Christian worship since c.300, especially in the East, though it was less common in this sense than ekklesia or basilike. An example of the direct Greek-to-Germanic progress of many Christian words, via the Goths; it probably was used by West Germanic people in their pre-Christian period.

Etymonline source

Also note how the word for Church, Kyriakos, derives from Kyros (same as Cyrus, the Persian OT "messiah") which means 'supreme authority' or 'controller' or 'sir'. King Kyros (Cyrus) is the only non-Hebrew person to be refered to as a meshiach in OT.



ETA: Think about it. Translating ecclesia with church would be the same as translating like this:

ESV: Luke 2:7 [...] and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.
ESV with anachronism: Luke 2:7 [...] and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them at the Ritz.

a reply to: Jesuslives4u

Text Has anyone ever thought how Saul the Pharisee, persecutor of the christian faith all of a sudden becomes "Apostle Paul" follower of the christian faith?

The name Shaul (Saul)was the Hebrew name which he was given at birth. His Roman (Gentile) name was Paulos or Paul. Being that he was free born means that he had dual citizenship and therefore his identification was interchangeable by both Jews and Greeks alike. In the book of Acts he is mentioned by Jesus as Paul but for the most part he never had a name change except by those who wished to call him by their own definition.

No one ever called Paul an apostle. Paul himself calls himself an apostle! Its in the bible. Paul never met Jesus (his story concerning his travel to Damascus is all we have concerning Saul's conversion to Christianity)

To criticize is not wise unless there is validation. To denigrate Paul would be to also denigrate Luke and Peter. Luke wrote of Paul 129 time in the book of Acts and Peter confessed love for Apostle Paul in the book of 2nd Peter. Also most all who dislike the Apostle Paul do not consider that Jesus Himself Choose Paul to serve His purpose to the Gentiles. Paul revealed many things which are not revealed by the other Apostles and at times pricked the souls of those who would seek to change the Gospel of Christ.

Are not the scriptures thoroughly inspected and agreed to be worthy of Christ Jesus by the hundreds of great scholars and critics down through these thousands of years? If you read scripture which contradicts your understanding is that to imply that your understanding is not flawed but the translators and interpreters understanding is flawed? Where then are your credentials to prove this?

Text The other were hand picked and none of them were openly against Christ or his teachings like Paul was.

I have read that from a great many people but have yet to see a comparative study that Paul was openly against the Jesus doctrine. Can you give me references on that accusation? If Paul was against Jesus then he was not of Jesus and there fore could not be filled with the Holy Spirit of the same God as was Jesus. Then did Paul rebuked demons by the power of Satan and Satan cast out his very own? Is this your premise? There are also some who declare there are many gods and that Paul's God was not that of the Christ Jesus. Could that be your premise? Give some information on this.

originally posted by: Seede
To denigrate Paul would be to also denigrate Luke and Peter.

I believe you have exposed the real source of all of the Paul bashing we see...

This isn't an attack on Paul, this is an attack on the very words of God Himself.

The Bible is GOD'S WORD and the Illuminati have invested billions of dollars in their anti-Bible campaign.

The Word of God has always been their primary target for good reason.

The "elite" despise God's Word because they worship the enemy of God.

Paul also used to be one of them as well and actually turned his back on them.

He used to be a part of the Illuminati of Jesus' day and he turned against them and exposed them for what they really are.

Remember, these are the SAME people who actually demanded that the Lord Jesus Christ be executed.

But Saul began to destroy the church. Going from house to house, he dragged off both men and women and put them in prison. ~ Acts 8:3

"For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it" ~ Galatians 1:13-17

For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. ~ 1 Corinthians 15:9

…"But it happened that as I was on my way, approaching Damascus about noontime, a very bright light suddenly flashed from heaven all around me, and I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, 'Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?' "And I answered, 'Who are You, Lord?' And He said to me, 'I am Jesus the Nazarene, whom you are persecuting.'… ~ Acts 22:7

Jews don’t like the apostle Paul. Jesus they can live with; he was a good-hearted rebbe whose words were twisted to say things he didn’t mean. But Paul was the twister, and can’t be forgiven. “Jesus, yes; Paul, never!” as one Jewish biographer of Paul puts it. As a zealous convert who equated the Torah with death, Paul is deemed the father of anti-Judaism (the theological critique of Judaism as a religion), the grandfather of anti-Semitism (the hatred of Jews as people), and the inventor of the theology of the Cross (an excuse for many massacres of Jews). Was Paul a Jew?

"Please be aware of the anti-Paul movement, it was set up by the foe (today's Edomites) to fordo (destroy) the Israel Insight.

This movement twists what Paul says in order to make him look like a huckster but who are the hucksters in this world? The Jewish Encyclopedia and other Jewish writings makes makes it clear that one of the greatest of the foes for Judaism is Paul. The jews spew hatred upon Paul.

“Needless to say, observant Jews objected to Paul, ... whom they saw as the worst kind of heretic. Indeed, because of Jewish complaints against him, Paul was arrested by the Roman authorities, held for a time under house arrest, and finally executed in or around 67 CE (the year of the start of the Great Revolt against Rome in Israel.)” ~ Rabbi Ken Spiro

• To be Anti-Paul is to tear the living heart out of the New Testament.

• To be Anti Paul opens up a Pandora’s Box among people as to what is inspired in the Bible and what is not. The Canon is a sacred Ark, man’s unsanctified hands are not to touch it. Will this foolishness never end? QUESTIONING GOD’S WORD DENOTES UNBELIEF!

• To be Anti-Paul lays that person open to the full force of Rationalism, Modernism, and “doubt” far worse than any NEO-ORTHODOXY ever dreamed of!

• To be Anti-Paul is an outright denial of the Providence of God in settling and arranging the Canon of Scripture as we know it. Of this Scripture the God of Israel is most jealous! The whole question is: MAN’S MOUTH versus GOD’S WORD!

The Anti-Paul Movement is Jewish

originally posted by: BlackboxInquiry
**wait**



Somone hates my Uncle Paul?!?? NAAAAW, say it ain't so!

I believe that the first few posters to this thread are named paul too and was wondering who was hatin on them.

a reply to: Seede

Bollocks. Saul Paulus was the son of a Syrian Benjaminite who was also a Roman official. Saul is his Jewish name, Paulus is his Latin family name. He was a scribe belonging to the Pharicee party and worked as judge and executioner on behalf of the Sanhedrin. Because of his father he enjoyed "freemanship" throughout the Roman Empire, meaning noone could touch him other than Roman officials superiour to him in rank. And as for Peter expressing love to this trojan worm; didn't Jesus order us to "Love thy enemy?" So, not only is your bootlicking Paul full of factual errors and mistakes, you are robbing Peter to Pay Paul here and show a display in misconceptions and arrogance towards Jesus' own words, which I assume should be superiour to Paul's cut and paste babble.

Paul singlehandedly managed to marginalise the complete corpus of early Christendom and relieve the early congregations of all integrity and influence, in Judea, in Greece, in Rome, well, thanks to him, thousands upon thousands Christians were fed to the lions, burnt alive, crucified, you name it. Paul himself? Well, nobody knows what happened to him. Some say he ended his life together with Peter in Rome, while others say he ran off to Spain where he lived to be an old man and be one of the few who managed to sneak out of Rome, probably via his Roman connections.

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
Bollocks.

It never ceases to amaze me whenever I see someone claim that his intellect is superior to God’s inspired word...

The apostle Paul wrote about this as well:

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools ~ Romans 1:22

How ironic that man, in all his arrogance and intellectual pride, rejects the true wisdom revealed in God’s word.

a reply to: Murgatroid

I know it's written "Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you be like him yourself" but I just can't leave it:

What is it with the Christians in this place and their constant namesaying and petty ad homine vomit they spew at anyone able to expose their lies and doctrinal misconceptions?

How can you tell whether something is God's inspired word or not? That has always puzzled me. Humour me!