It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Saul of Tarsus: False prophet

page: 22
7
<< 19  20  21   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 01:27 AM
link   
The religious elders must finally recognize that MUCH EVIL has been introduced under the name of religion. Be it in the Tora, in its interpretation by scribes, or be it in endless re-writtings of the Gospel books, and their later reinterpretations of people who invented one of the most cruel political system the world has ever known, "in the name of a merciful God who died to save your souls from sins" etc wording.

The religions especially the Christianity but also Abrahamic religions, and all the rest, must re-create an image of acceptable good God to be followed. What is now exposed as image of God is a cruel master who punishes the smallest "sin". And what is sin it is they who determine it. Thus we have the phenomena of jihadists who kill in order to enter better part of their own understood heaven. Christians now are passive, but they weren't such during the Crusaders and Conquistas.

The holy books give enough space of interpretation, even if they are re-tailored from their beginning, probably by their first authors who are NOT Moses, Jesus, etc, let alone God. Their authors are sinful humans.

Whether Paul wrote what is said to be Paul's writings, more in volume than the 4 canonical gospels, it is not I to answer. Paul was further reinterpreted by scholars.

Indeed the modern Christianity is not so evil as it were before, but still it needs to go back to the roots and erase forever the inherited evil tendencies that are there since the time of 100 AD. May be because of the original sin that acted equally forceful on the re-writers of the Gospel, despite of the blood sacrifice of Jesus Christ the son of God...

If the current hierarchy will not change anything, new hierarchy is needed to rise. Because the world is not going to end anytime soon. Part of it, may be. And the survivors don't have to live the current ill-conceived version of "Christianity" let alone of warring Islam, the next 200-3000 or more years. It is just absurd. Instead of taking pope for every word, let he has freedom to make the change. Or they all fail and their failure will be quite big, as Fatima Neues Europa version predicted.
edit on 2-3-2016 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)

edit on 2-3-2016 by 2012newstart because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 01:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Seede

What doesn't make sense is peoples willingness to accept Sauls false teachings over those of Jesus and the 12.



posted on Mar, 2 2016 @ 02:26 PM
link   
Well, this thread soon descended into religious dogma, shoutiness, and general weirdness. Amusing.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 02:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Bezelel

first we have to determine what were the teachings of Jesus and the 12. We have dozens of gospels that were either banned in Nicea or surfaced only recently. We have 4 canonical gospels 3 of which sound as written by one man or better say, one group of men who quoted each other. ALL manuscripts, and that should be understood by everyone who honestly researches that, ALL papirii found were dated 2 or even 3rd century. Not even ONE manuscript is found dated around the middle of 1t century when Jesus was there or when his immediate disciples were there. That is valid ALSO for the writings of Paul.

Going from such baseline, it is easy to assume how every next generation elders (the only ones who could write and read) were pushed to change something, under tremendous pressure from Rome. Pressure that killed entire villages and regions, even after Constantine's edict in early 4th century for christian liberty. (hundreds of thousands killed in today's Turkey then Asia Minor years before the edict when Constantine was already emperor in Rome). In such circumstances, to speak of what was right, authentic written text, when there was willingness to kill entire populated areas for keeping certain text, is not historically correct.

ALl we could do now is to start from scratch and try to figure out, very carefully and without any presumptions, what it were back then between 33 AD and 70 AD (when the followers of Christ left in advance Jerusalem that was destroyed at that time).

ALl ideologues how this is heretic and that one is not, should be set aside.

Dead Sea Scrolls should be released ASAP (only about 30% of them were released, the rest are kept by Israeli authority or scientists, don't know but they are kept in Israel). The published part already said of Melchizedek to be coming again before the end of the world. Consider it revolution in religion, but it doesn't happen! Because those on the top don't want to remove the status quo that is outdated or centuries and that is NOT BASED on the basic facts. (The Melchisedek scroll is published online and I posted it in this forum, sorry you have to google it or to browse my own posts, but it is there onine, 100% proof).

So to say Paul was agent of Rome, against Jesus, is equal to say of the gospel of Thomas or any other text that was banned at that time. Paul's texts are much later work in first place, even if the real historical Paul wrote them originally. The way we have them today, are composed a century or more after Paul. To claim anything is premature. May be Jesus said completely other things that were not mentioned in any gospel or letter. May be Paul himself said other things. How he talks in 2 Thessalonians of the man of perdition to come, for whom he said he already talked to the faithful? It is assumed there were more texts not only words. Because being literate, Paul would have known the written texts would remain after him, not the said words.

All of them wrote books, including Peter, and it is strange how the church in 4th century picked up arbitrarily only those papers who fit the agenda. Those who said Jesus was married, r those who said he didn't really die but only partially on the cross, were all banned as heretic. Soon after the religion took the place of the banned pagan religion of Rome, it started persecution of heretics with the same force or more than it was persecuted itself by the pagan emperors. Pity! The word of God does not speak to persecute those who have a different view. That different view might be actually the real view of the word of God, that is not only one gospel or set of books to appear centuries later.

In that way, the topic is one of the many who question the real picture at the time of Paul, and it is good such questions appear more and more online. For everyone who prefers to think with his own head based on hard proven data. Let also say, all of that is NOT A DOGMA. I.e. the Christians won't go to hell if they question when the books of Paul were written, or whether there are other books written about Jesus Christ that are not included in their versions of Bible. No, the portals of hell are not going to open for that, Jesus never said that even in the so much scrutinized canonical books. Instead, the doors of heaven may open soon to much greater number of believers thanks to release of new information of our Lord and God Jesus Christ.



posted on Mar, 3 2016 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Bezelel
a reply to: Seede


What doesn't make sense is peoples willingness to accept Sauls false teachings over those of Jesus and the 12.

Would you please give me your favored comparison of Jesus' teaching compared to Paul's teaching which is contradiction?
You insist that Paul contradicts Jesus and have heard this quite a few times. Give me the best that shows this and we can take them one at a time. Not interested in a a spiel but only one at a time.



posted on Mar, 10 2016 @ 01:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Seede

You should read the whole thread, it has plenty of documentation for what you're asking the op. But I will give you an example.

It's called the doctrine of Balaam, Paul says it's OK to eat meat sacrificed to Idols, Jesus says that this is the doctrine of Balaam and rebukes those who teach that eating meat sacrificed to Idols is OK. Contradiction. I doubt I will be receiving a reply from you as It's obvious that you don't know this simple damning fact and will be too embarrassed to reply.



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 03:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Barzini

Barzini, or whomever you are, I don't think it's that cut and dry.

How Many Apostles Were There?

&

Apostles Who Weren't Part of the Twelve?

I admit, I haven't read through the plethora of responses, so this may have been brought up already.

As with most things Christianity, this has already been asked.


Full Question

Why is Paul referred to as an apostle when he clearly was not one of the Twelve?

Answer

The Catholic Encyclopedia defines "apostle" as "one who is sent forth, dispatched—in other words, who is entrusted with a mission, rather, a foreign mission. It has, however, a stronger sense than the word messenger and means as much as a delegate."

St. Paul was clearly sent forth by Jesus, entrusted with a mission. In our Lord’s own words, Paul became "a chosen instrument of mine to carry my name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel" (Acts 9:15).

Paul refers to himself as an apostle many times in the New Testament, and he even defends his apostleship in his first epistle to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 9:1–2).

edit on 3/11/2016 by IsidoreOfSeville because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 11 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: IsidoreOfSeville
Barzini has been banned under that name.
I think your response is going to come from Mryhh [sic].


edit on 11-3-2016 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 20 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Every time a Christian is asked how Saul could be a real apostle the first thing they do to distract you from the fact that there are only 12 is attempt to define the word itself, hoping you won't press them about it. But the definition of the word has nothing to do with the number of Apostles.

It's a distraction technique. There are clearly only 12 Apostles. Matthias replaced Judas, that makes it impossible for Saul, who never met Jesus, to be one. Never before or after his death.

Christans have no logic, common sense and apparently can't read because the Bible clearly only recognizes 12 total apostles.

Ridiculous. Paul is an apostle of Paul and a charlatan.



posted on Mar, 20 2016 @ 08:59 PM
link   

edit on 20-3-2016 by Megacore because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2016 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Barzini

I'm wondering if this thread is a Numerology one, or something indeed seriously founded from the Christian point of view?

By the way Jesus with his 12 apostles were always 13, in the same way were Jacob and his 12 sons.

After Christ Ascension to heaven the number became reduced to 12, but St. Peter was clearly chosen to replace Jesus as head of the Church, so there was anyway an apostle seat vacant.

Another member has asked since so many posts ago to the author of the thread to provide a definite proof that there was something St. Paul taught that contradict Jesus teachings? That fundamental question was never fully answered here.

That the gentile Christians must not ovey all the jewish ritual laws was not revealed only to St. Paul, also St Peter received the same instructions in a so famous dream, so that is proof of nothing.

When St John received his Revelation that he wrote down in The island of Patmos, he was already a very old man, that happened many years after St Paul was executed by the Romans for the crime of to be a Christian. That automatically should exclude him of any reference to false prophets in that book.

To have been a Pharisee before is not enough reason to exclude St Paul of the ministry, Joseph of Arimatea and Nicodemus were two Pharisees that followed Jesus too.

By the way on St. Mark 9, 38-39 Jesus himself talked about other apostles that were not among his disciples, he called to also respect them.

I am afraid that this thread smells to heresy in many aspects.

Thanks

The Angel of Lightness
edit on 3/25/2016 by The angel of light because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 08:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: The angel of light
a reply to: Barzini

I'm wondering if this thread is a Numerology one, or something indeed seriously founded from the Christian point of view?

By the way Jesus with his 12 apostles were always 13, in the same way were Jacob and his 12 sons.


And? Jesus wasn't an Apostle and Jacob wasn't a tribe.



"After Christ Ascension to heaven the number became reduced to 12, but St. Peter was clearly chosen to replace Jesus as head of the Church, so there was anyway an apostle seat vacant."

No, James was. The number 12 only got reduced when Judas died and was replaced by Matthias. 13 has no biblical significance and is a dreaded number.


"Another member has asked since so many posts ago to the author of the thread to provide a definite proof that there was something St. Paul taught that contradict Jesus teachings? That fundamental question was never fully answered here."

Just about his whole doctrine contradicts Jesus.

"That the gentile Christians must not ovey all the jewish ritual laws was not revealed only to St. Paul, also St Peter received the same instructions in a so famous dream, so that is proof of nothing.

When St John received his Revelation that he wrote down in The island of Patmos, he was already a very old man, that happened many years after St Paul was executed by the Romans for the crime of to be a Christian. That automatically should exclude him of any reference to false prophets in that book."

Faulty logic. Nobody knows how or when Paul died, he was no martyr though. John is recieving a direct Revelation and he congratulated the Ephesians for rejecting liars who say they are apostles. The Ephesians rejected Paul, as did all of Asia. The vision of new Jerusalem, as the OP said, states that there are ONLY 12 Apostles.

To have been a Pharisee before is not enough reason to exclude St Paul of the ministry, Joseph of Arimatea and Nicodemus were two Pharisees that followed Jesus too.

By the way on St. M

I am afraid that this thread smells to heresy in many aspects.

Thanks

The Angel of Lightness

Heresy is a term invented by oppressive Roman Catholic priests who idolized Paul. I doubt anybody cares about heresy today based on a book that makes a false prophet a hero and the apostles villainous Judaizers.
edit on 8-4-2016 by Solarmania because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-4-2016 by Solarmania because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-4-2016 by Solarmania because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Solarmania

Excuse me Dear Solarmania,

There is ATS a forum of Literature, I know it perfectly, where historic novels are pretty welcome. I think that might be a nice place to have this thread.

Garcia Marquez wrote years ago a very controversial book of the General in his Labyrinth, a Historic novel based on the life of General Simon Bolivar, he was strongly criticized by Historians for the so liberal way he treated History on it, mixing it with fantasy.

Few readers understood that what is Literature is a great virtue in History is of course unacceptable.

I lot of your points of view are not seriously based on no historic or biblical evidence at all, so I would classify then as a delighting type of fiction for people interested in modern mythology.

The Martyrdom of St Paul, ( Saul of Tarsus) is unquestionable at all, the fact that we don't have a consensus of an exact date does not have weight to contradict its occurrence that anyway was at some point of the second half of 60s decade of the first century. The most accepted date for his beheading is in between 66-68 AD at Aquae Salviae, which is now known as Tre Fontane.

Pls check:
www.scriptureseeds.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

No serious Historian would put him still alive by the time St John finished to write down the book of Revelation. Early Church tradition dates the Revelation book to end of the emperor Domitian (reigned AD 81–96), and most modern scholars agree, although the author may have written a first version under Vespasian (AD 69–79) and updated it under Domitian.

en.wikipedia.org...

I Trust in professional Theologians or Historians and not in the fictions that this thread try to portrait as reality, it can be a kind of personal utopia , not more than that.

You are also quite wrong in your very subjective definition of Heresy, since heretic movements correspond to the so called apostasy that would emerge in the Christendom at some point, a prediction that is contained in the Revelation book but also in some writings of the Apostles.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness



new topics




 
7
<< 19  20  21   >>

log in

join