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: 3
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Barzini

Not Again!

Paul is more righteous than you.

Rasaghul/Gnosisisfaith




posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 11:09 AM
link   
Someone earlier mentioned Christs resurrection, which Paul never does. He didn't know about it.
If You threw away Pauls letters, mankind would lose nothing.

All you who can't see this baffle me.

But you can't refute me, I have scripture on my side and am not lacking in biblical knowledge the slightest bit. This is a book I read every day. You will never prove my assertion wrong. Ever. Follow the false prophet, I don't care.

I'm riding with Christ.



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 11:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Barzini

The Word of the Lord is always confirmed by others - If I heard a word from the Lord calling me to be an apostle ( comes from the greek apostolos meaning "one who is sent away" is an ambassador or messenger, and is in no way limited to only 12 people for the last 2000 + years) then it would have to be confirmed by others hearing the same word. There is no time in the bible that there was not confirmation from another of the same word for the original hearer.

Acts 13:2-3 While they were ministering to the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, "Set apart for Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them." Then, when they had fasted and prayed and laid their hands on them, they sent them away

Of the disciples of Jesus there can only be 12, but an apostle is something different indeed - and there have been many many many many in the last 2000+ years. And Pauls apostleship having been a directive of God and the Holy Spirit, was confirmed by many, including the disciples.


Acts 15:22-27: Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, men who were leaders among the believers. 23 With them they sent the following letter:

The apostles and elders, your brothers,

To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:

Greetings.

24 We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25 So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing.


There have been false apostles since early Christianity til now, and Paul was not one of them.



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 11:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barzini
Someone earlier mentioned Christs resurrection, which Paul never does. He didn't know about it.


Oh Paul didn't know anything about the Ressurection nor did he ever mention it. Hem, very interesting let's see if that is true.

Resurrection (from the Latin noun resurrectio -onis, from the verb rego, "to make straight, rule" + preposition sub, "under", altered to subrigo and contracted to surgo, surrexi, surrectum + preposition re-, "again",[1] thus literally "a straightening from under again") is the concept of a living being coming back to life after death.
Resurrection

Here are specific mentions of the word Resurrection by Paul

Ro 1:4, 3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh; And declared [to be] the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
Ro 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also [in the likeness] of [his] resurrection:
Php 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;


And here are specific mentions of other words that are representative of the Resurrection spoken by Paul

Ro 4:24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
Ro 6:4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Ro 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him.
Ro 8:11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.
Ro 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
1Co 15:12 ¶ Now if Christ be preached that he rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead?
1Co 15:20 ¶ But now is Christ risen from the dead, [and] become the firstfruits of them that slept.
Ga 1:1 ¶ Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead; )
Eph 1:20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set [him] at his own right hand in the heavenly [places],
Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with [him] through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
1Th 1:10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, [even] Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.
2Ti 2:8 ¶ Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:


There are many more but these suffice to prove that you are wrong Barzini/Rasaghul/Gnosisisfaith and God's preserved words are true..


edit on 22-2-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 11:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Kitana

I understand what Paul, and you, are trying to say. I just don't buy it. I don't believe Paul to be the person to declare God's New Covenant for Israel, that abolishes all of the Law.






edit on 22-2-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 11:49 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

Paul did not declare it first, Jesus did

Luke 22:20 - In the same way, after supper He took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is poured out for you.



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 11:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: GBP/JPY
Yessirr.Paul is the 12th....mankind is not allowed to vote in the 12th, as they did.....Paul ploionwed deep, huh!!!!


So, you admit that their can only be 12, but are saying Paul was the 12th.

Supply me with scripture the evidence that Matthias' Apostleship was questioned by Jesus, here is a hint: It doesn't exist.

You are saying you know better than the men who spent 3 years with him, the Bible itself and even Paul himself who never denounced Matthias.

Casting lots was serious biz in this instance and considered the appropriate method for letting God decide, this wasn't a game of one potato, two potatoes.

When the Apostles needed to supply Paul and his converts with answers on how to live and specifically on circumcision, they consult the Holy Spirit. They werent intent on burdening the "gentile" and 4 easy instructions were given with circumcision being a non issue.

Paul, on return, doesn't ever convey these 4 instructions and literally lies saying they only said to help the poor. And he makes circumcision an issue as if it was being demanded by the Apostles when it wasn't. They didn't care about circumcision.

I'm just getting started.
edit on 22-2-2016 by Barzini because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 11:52 AM
link   
a reply to: windword

That is true Paul never brought to Israel a New Covenant. That is under the gospel of the Kingdom. John the Baptist, Jesus, the 12, 72 all preached the Gospel of the Kingdom.

Here are the only places New Covenant are mentioned in the preserved word of God.

Jer 31:31 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
Heb 8:8 For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:
Heb 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.
Heb 12:24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than [that of] Abel.


Paul preaches the Gospel of the Grace of God. Under this Gospel all men Jew or Gentile can be saved. He brought a New Testament

Eph 2:14 ¶ For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby:
1Co 11:25 After the same manner also [he took] the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], in remembrance of me.
2Co 3:6 ¶ Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.



edit on 22-2-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

You missed Luke where Jesus said it:

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Kitana

I do not believe the version you are using is the preserved words of God


Lu 22:20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

The version I speak of has no word changes, no chapter, section or verse removals. It is the whole and complete word of God that you can hold in your hand. It has a built in dictionary by which you can define EVERY word by its context and it has a supernaturally divine built in Cross Reference.


edit on 22-2-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:05 PM
link   
Where did Paul come up with this:


1 Corinthians 14 :
34Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
35And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
37If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.


I don`t remember Jesus ever saying anything like this.



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: zazzafrazz

Paul:s was a manipulator and deceiver from my point of view and pushes his idol of Jesus instead of following Yeshua:s teaching. To much ego to be an anointed and therefor make souls miss the mark.



1 Timothy

For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony given at the proper time. For this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying) as a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth. Therefore I want the men in every place to pray, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and dissension.

Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments,but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness. A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.


Reminds me of Muhammad. The same kind behavior of putting himself in between god and the people rewriting the message to fit his own agenda and need of control.



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:13 PM
link   
This whole "gospel of the kingdom" nonsense is... nonsense. Jesus taught The Way. Faith being dead without fruitful works is what he taught.

Paulines despise this notion that you have to be a good person and do good things in addition to faith to attain salvation and preach heavily that faith alone justifies, depspite what Jesus and also James taught.

So what's with the early schism?

Eliminate Paul, eliminate the schism.

There is Pauline Christianity and there is the Way. The Way of Christ.



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Tardacus

He(Paul) says the things that he writes to them are the commandments of the Lord.

There is you answer.



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Tardacus

He(Paul) says the things that he writes to them are the commandments of the Lord.

There is you answer.




HE is lying.



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Barzini

Let's see if the gospel of the Kingdom was all nonsense or not.


Mt 4:23 ¶ And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.
Mt 9:35 ¶ And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.
Mt 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
Mr 1:14 ¶ Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,


Seems Jesus Taught preached the Gospel of the Kingdom.

Barzini/Rasaghul said, "Jesus taught The Way"

Please note the capitalization of the word way in Barzini/Rasaghul's statement. The problem is he only said he was the way the truth and the life. It is never said he taught the way or preached the way. the way is an ambiguous idea and can be interpreted many ways. Jesus was more specific with his teaching and what he preached he was anything but ambiguous in his teaching.

Sorry Ras/Bar you are wrong again.



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

a compact, covenant (Aristophanes av. 440), very often in the Scriptures for בְּרִית (Vulg.testamentum). For the word covenant is used to denote the close relationship which God entered into, first with Noah (Genesis 6:18; Genesis 9:9ff (cf. Sir. 44:18)), then with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and their posterity (Leviticus 26:42 (cf. 2 Macc. 1:2)), but especially with Abraham (Genesis 15 and Genesis 17), and afterward through Moses with the people of Israel (Exodus 24; Deuteronomy 5:2; Deuteronomy 28:69 ()). By this last covenant the Israelites are bound to obey God's will as expressed and solemnly promulged in the Mosaic law; and he promises them his almighty protection and blessings of every kind in this world, but threatens transgressors with the severest punishments. Hence, in the N. T. we find mention of αἱ πλάκες τῆς διαθήκης (הַבְּרִית לוּחות, Deuteronomy 9:9, 15), the tables of the law, on which the duties of the covenant were inscribed (Exodus 20); of ἡ κιβωτός τῆς διαθήκης (הַבְּרִית אֲרון, Deuteronomy 10:8; Deuteronomy 31:9; Joshua 3:6, etc.), the ark of the covenant or law, in which those tables were deposited, Hebrews 9:4; Revelation 11:19; of ἡ διαθήκη περιτομῆς, the covenant of circumcision, made with Abraham, whose sign and seal was circumcision (Genesis 17:10ff), Acts 7:8; of τό αἷμα τῆς διαθήκης, the blood of the victims, by the shedding and sprinkling of which the Mosaic covenant was ratified, Hebrews 9:20 from Exodus 24:8; of αἱ διαθῆκαι, the covenants, one made with Abraham, the other through Moses with the Israelites, Romans 9:4 (L text Tr marginal reading ἡ διαθήκη) (Sap). 18:22; Sir. 44:11; 2 Macc. 8:15; Epistle of Barnabas 9 [ET]; (cf. Winer's Grammar, 177 (166))); of αἱ διαθῆκαι τῆς ἐπαγγελίας, the covenants to which the promise of salvation through the Messiah was annexed, Ephesians 2:12 (συνθηκαι ἀγαθῶν ὑποσχέσεων, Wis. 12:21); for Christian salvation is the fulfillment of the divine promises annexed to those covenants, especially to that made with Abraham: Luke 1:72; Acts 3:25; Romans 11:27; Galatians 3:17 (where διαθήκη is God's arrangement, i. e. the promise made to Abraham). As the new and far more excellent bond of friendship which God in the Messiah's time would enter into with the people of Israel is called, חֲדָשָׁה בְּרִית, καινή διαθήκη (Jeremiah 38:31 ()) — which divine promise Christ has made good (Hebrews 8:8-10; Hebrews 10:16) — we find in the N. T. two distinct covenants spoken of, δύο διαθῆκαι (Galatians 4:24), viz. the Mosaic and the Christian, with the former of which (τῇ πρώτη διαθήκη, Hebrews 9:15, 18, cf. 8:9) the latter is contrasted, as καινή διαθήκη, Matthew 26:28; Mark 14:24 (in both passages in R G L (in Matthew in Tr also)); Luke 22:20; 1 Corinthians 11:25; 2 Corinthians 3:6; Hebrews 8:8; κρείττων διαθήκη, Hebrews 7:22; αἰώνιος διαθήκη, Hebrews 13:20; and Christ is called κρείττονος or καινῆς or νέας διαθήκης μεσίτης: Hebrews 8:6; Hebrews 9:15; Hebrews 12:24. This new covenant binds men to exercise faith in Christ, and God promises them grace and salvation eternal. This covenant Christ set up and ratified by undergoing death; hence, the phrases τό αἷμα τῆς καινῆς διαθήκης, τό αἷμα τῆς διαθήκης (see αἷμα sub at the end) (Hebrews 10:29); τό αἷμα μου τῆς διαθήκης, my blood by the shedding of which the covenant is established, Matthew 26:28 T WH and Mark 14:24 T Tr WH (on two genitives after one noun cf. Matthiae, § 380, Anm. 1; Kühner, ii., p. 288f; (Jelf, § 543, 1, cf § 466; Winers Grammar, § 30, 3 Note 3; Buttmann, 155 (136))). By metonymy of the contained for the container ἡ παλαιά διαθήκη is used in 2 Corinthians 3:14 of the sacred books of the O. T. because in them the conditions and principles of the older covenant were recorded. Finally must be noted the amphiboly or twofold use (cf. Philo de mut. nom. § 6) by which the writer to the Hebrews, in Hebrews 9:16f, substitutes for the meaning covenant which διαθήκη bears elsewhere in the Epistle that of testament (see 1 above), and likens Christ to a testator — not only because the author regards eternal blessedness as an inheritance bequeathed by Christ, but also because he is endeavoring to show, both that the attainment of eternal salvation is made possible for the disciples of Christ by his death (Hebrews 9:15), and that even the Mosaic covenant had been consecrated by blood (Hebrews 9:18ff). This, apparently, led the Latin Vulg. to render διαθήκη wherever it occurs in the Bible (i. e. in the New Testament, not always in the Old Testament; see B. D. under the word , and B. D. American edition under the word ) by the word testamentum.

biblehub.com...

biblehub.com...

If you choose to speak to people about God's Word, it helps to know it a little better, as in, knowing why things get translated sometimes the way they do. I accept more than the Latin vulgate's translation for a reason.

edit on 22-2-2016 by Kitana because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Kitana




Luke 22:20 - In the same way, after supper He took the cup, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood, which is poured out for you.



"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18"For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.…



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Barzini

Don't just say it Rasaghul prove it.

Prove he is lying.

Quote scripture or link a site but what ever you do prove your OPINION to be true.



posted on Feb, 22 2016 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Kitana

It is not about how men translate. It is about God keeping his promise to preserve his words from the time of David's "generation for ever" as found in Psalm 12:6,7.


Ps 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.


Using covenant instead of testament breaks the divine cross reference to the teachings of Paul under the Gospel of the Grace of God. Then it keeps you locked under covenants. covenants are like contracts you do one thing the other party does something if any fail the covenant is void.

Is that the kind of relationship we under the gospel of the Grace are to have with God?


edit on 22-2-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join