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.

 

Paul rebukes Peter Galatians 2:11-14

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 12:14 PM
link   
Galatians 2:11-14

But when Cephas(Peter) came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, since he stood self condemned; for until certain people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles. But after they came, he drew back and kept himself separate from the circumcision faction. And the other Jews joined him in this hypocrisy, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not acting consistently with the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, " If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews.

The charge here is that Peter is being social with the Gentiles except when James' selected emissaries show up, then he hides his association with the Gentiles. James is like the Godfather here and if he knows where to find Peter and it is near the Gentiles, James is aware of it and Peter doesn't need to hide it. So I don't believe that he was or that Barnabas was or that anybody was being a hypocrite but Paul. Jesus instructed his Apostles to make disciples of all nations, James knew that and therefore would not have objected to Peter associating with Gentiles.

Which brings us to the other charge which contradicts with the first. That Peter was requiring the Gentiles to live like Jews, which doesn't seem to be true because he is socializing and being friendly and James already issued his decree that it was not necessary to burden the Gentiles with Jewish laws and only required no sexual immorality and three dietary laws that were no big deal. Plus if Peter was acting like a Gentile around Gentiles that is proof he wasn't trying to get them to live like Jews, he was living like them. It's a contradiction that just doesn't make sense, and Peter can't defend himself in a letter he wasn't going to read so I am going to guess that Paul is just bragging about confronting Peter and doesn't care if his accusations are true or even make sense. He doesn't even record Peter's answer to the accusations which is suspicious to say the least.

And to accuse him of not being consistent with the truth(living a lie) is something that requires proof especially when it's the truth of the gospel we are concerned with. Id like some proof of this specific instance because I don't remember it anywhere else, not even acts. After acts Paul never has any dealings with the 12 again so I don't believe it.

And everything Paul accused Peter of he is guilty of himself. He is a hypocrite, making Timothy get circumcised after stating that anyone who gets circumcised is bound to the whole Law and that Christ will profit him nothing meaning he will be outside the protection of Christ and unable to profit from his death. The fact that Paul speaks of Christ in terms of gains should give you some clue what kind of guy Paul is.

That's all for today.
were
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 @ 12:19 PM
link   
An alternative viewpoint;
Not compromising the gospel



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: DISRAELI
An alternative viewpoint;
Not compromising the gospel


Let me guess your alternative viewpoints:

Paul was right, even though he declines to record Peter's response you still believe Paul. Big surprise.

You think by bringing to light the actual events and there true context I am "comprising the gospel"

And you have a long apologetical spiel about how Paul isn't the lying no good trouble maker that he is that consists of a lot of words and doesn't say anything true and/or effective, but just might be enough to convince a dullard so you give it a shot.

Just a guess.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Solarmania


And you have a long apologetical spiel about how Paul isn't the lying no good trouble maker that he is that consists of a lot of words and doesn't say anything true and/or effective, but just might be enough to convince a dullard so you give it a shot.

I got lost . I thought we were discussing Peter. Now it has spilled over to Saul/Paul. Poor ole Saul/Paul; gets blamed for everything I guess.

Seriously, perhaps you are letting some hatred get the best of your soul. At this point the Jerusalem synagogue is being established and it is true that there is a lot of mistrust and downright hatred towards Jews and Romans both who had a hand in the Christ Jesus' death. In fact the Jerusalem Synagogue did not allow Greek or Latin of any sort into that Synagogue. The Greek speaking Christian Jews had their own synagogues which were under James the Nasi but there was still segregation going on between the Hebrew/Aramaic and Greek/Latin factions. This was a gradual correction and not an overnight declaration of rules and regulations.

As far as the episode of Saul/Paul and Timothy was concerned, that was done for reason of gaining the confidence of the disbelieving Jews to accept them as brothers first and foremost. Nothing more. It was not for the sake of salvation of Timothy nor was ever implied for that reason. It was a game of good cop /bad cop thing. The non believers would never even give them a chance to witness if they had believed them uncircumcised.

I don't really think you are very Christianized with your perspective of scripture.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 06:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede

The episode in question is Paul calling Peter and the others hypcrites and bragging about his alleged rebuke of Peter that is mysteriously cut off without Peters reply and never appears in scripture and is only mentioned by Paul bragging about it in his letter.

I don't believe Peter was guilty of the charges Paul made against him and for good and already mentioned reasons. I believe Paul was trying to make himself look like a big shot. He also is projecting as he himself is guilty of what he accused Peter of and it's all recorded in the bible, in his words and Lukes.

As far as my reply to Disraeli it was not to you and he knows what I am talking about.

As far as being Christian, I don't want to be Christian. I'm happy just being a disciple of the Messiah, among other things. Christian is such a played out word and Christianity with its love of Paul is not the religion for me.

I see right through everything he says. I compare h is teachings to Yeshua and they are not the same. I don't believe his I heard Jesus voice in the desert story because the Messiah warned about it and because it's a bs story. Everything Paul says is a lie, except for a few times when he absolutely can't lie. He starts a rift between the Greeks/Romans and the Israelites that got most of the Apostles killed and was successful for 2000 years.

His time is up. Enough people have figured it out. Books, websites explaining it in far greater detail exist. But it's in the bible itself where the best information is, you just have to read it all straight through.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 08:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Solarmania


As far as my reply to Disraeli it was not to you and he knows what I am talking about.

I thought we had an open forum here on ATS. You need not be so hate filled and insulting. It will never be profitable.

Peter has had a very questionable history and it would do you well to realize that.

The walking on water thing does show his weakness.

He was rebuked by Jesus at one time.

He swore to die with Jesus and then denied Him three time.

He was slothful and slept on night watch.

But the one that really gets to me is --
Matthew 26:71-74
(71) And when he was gone out into the porch, another maid saw him, and said unto them that were there, This fellow was also with Jesus of Nazareth.
(72) And again he denied with an oath, I do not know the man.
(73) And after a while came unto him they that stood by, and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech bewrayeth thee.
(74)Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man. And immediately the cock crew.

Peter was quite a buddy wasn't he? And you could never believe that this guy was a segregationist.

Well I do believe Saul/Paul's account because it fits right in with what Peter was. He was just like you and me and everyone else.



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 10:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Padawan Solarmania.


From Padawan Solarmania.
As far as being Christian, I don't want to be Christian. I'm happy just being a disciple of the Messiah,


So what does a disciple of the Messiah believe Padawan?

Really curious on this so I/we know where your coming from.

Who appointed you a disciple of the Messiah, is he still alive?
Didn't think you could be a disciple of someone who has been dead for over 2000 years Padawan.

Also Padawan, you have to start using examples of why you believe what you do. Just stating them holds no weight.

Coomba98





edit on 8-4-2016 by coomba98 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 8 2016 @ 11:00 PM
link   
If Jesus came back Id bet London to a brick one of the 10,000 channels of Christian cluelessness would execute him for heresy



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 01:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Seede

I know all about Peter denying Christ 3 times because I have read the bible. Do you think I just Google stuff and make threads I don't know the details of the story?

If you read my op than you can tell I know the bible quite well. Peter was no Judas, Jesus was going to die anyway and Peter was told ahead of time that this would happen, as with Judas.

In Peters case Jesus still saw fit to say "on this rock I build my church" even though Jesus knew Peter would deny knowing him.

So I don't think denying knowing someone when admission could get you killed is bad when Christ wants you to live and be a pillar of the church.

Don't come with terrible reasons like that if your goal is to make Peter out to be a bad guy. It's not even like Christ was mad about it, so why are you?

Paul has a resume of murderer of the innocent and incarceration of the innocent and was in the employ of Rome and the high priest to capture and kill the followers of Jesus. He never truly repented and his conversion was a ploy to get approval from the Apostles and then turn on them. And he did just that.

So you would be well to do to learn the bible. Peter was a good guy, better than me, you or Paul the false prophet.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 01:54 AM
link   
a reply to: Seede

And when they came to arrest Jesus who was the one who cut off the centurions ear in defense? Peter, a good friend who would have died then and there, but Jesus rebuked him because his death was something that had to happen.

If you knew the bible better you would know that Jesus TOLD Peter he was going to deny him, who is Peter to make Christ a liar? He was following orders.

But yeah you go ahead and believe Paul. That shows me what kind of person you are.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Seede

Maybe that was a little rude, but I tend to get frustrated when people who don't understand the entire story of the new testament in context make up terrible excuses for Paul and his obvious lies.

Paul was a Roman agent, he never knew Jesus and that is why his doctrine is so different. He didn't spend over 3 years with Christ and his conversion story is for the gullible, the ancient gullible. The Apostles and James never trusted Paul and they were chosen by Christ, who is perfect and didn't choose the wrong men to lead his church.

So when an unsavory character like Paul comes along lying in the name of God and in the name of Christ I tend to not think of people as too bright that believe his bs story. Even in the context that the bible is pure fact(it isn't) I still see Paul as a false prophet, and can not take seriously anyone who doesn't get what is so obvious to the thinking man of today.

And you are wrong, Paul's story about "rebuking Peter" and what he accuses him of is NOT in line with the type of guy Peter was, rock of Christs church and all, it seems you even believe Paul over Jesus.

So, maybe it wasn't rude but the wake up call you needed.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 04:39 AM
link   
a reply to: By Padawan Solarmania:

Start using examples for your opinion. Why do you refuse this? To make an argument in favour of your opinion examples are Super! Especially if you know the bible so well.


By Padawan:
Paul has a resume of murderer of the innocent and incarceration of the innocent. So you would be well to do to learn


No doubt here, but Innocent is like the Truth. Subjective dependent of beliefs.
(unless scientifically proven that is, than the Truth is the Truth! And perched up here in the 21st century life is different.)


By Padawan:
and was in the employ of Rome and the high priest to capture and kill the followers of Jesus.


This is the part where you need to provide evidence. As I have never heard of this Padawan. Strange.


By Padawan:
And when they came to arrest Jesus who was the one who cut off the centurions ear in defence? Peter, a good friend who would have died then and there, but Jesus rebuked him because his death was something that had to happen.


So you blame the man (Peter) for doing as Fate foretold?

Why?

If that was his destiny, and Yeshi knew it all along! Why?

Yeshua actually saved his life there and than! Otherwise the centurions would have killed Peter! Yeshua saved Peters life there Padawan. There is no explanation for this other than Yeshua loved Peter, and saved him out of love.
(and if you believe his all knowing and what not then he had more things to do before he died. Just sayin Padawan.)


By Padawan:
If you knew the bible better you would know that Jesus TOLD Peter he was going to deny him, who is Peter to make Christ a liar? He was following orders.


You see the Bible differently then most people Padawan. Strange. You should keep to one set of texts/religion.
If im wrong Padawan, then start providing evidence apart from evidence of opinion!


By Padawan:
But yeah you go ahead and believe Paul. That shows me what kind of person you are.


Sigh. Your impertinence is unbelievable Padawan.


By Padawan
Maybe that was a little rude, but I tend to get frustrated when people who don't understand the entire story of the new testament in context make up terrible excuses for Paul and his obvious lies.


Sigh, how presumptuous of you for knowing what other people know Padawan. Added to that your impertinence is showing in a passive aggressive manner Padawan.


By Padawan
Paul was a Roman agent,


This is the part where you need to provide evidence. As I have never heard of this Padawan. Strange.

By Padawan

[1]he never knew Jesus and that is why his doctrine is so different. [2]He didn't spend over 3 years with Christ and his conversion story is for the gullible, the ancient gullible. [3]The Apostles and James never trusted Paul and they were chosen by Christ, [4]who is perfect and didn't choose the wrong men to lead his church.


Ok im gonna do this in small pieces.

1. Sigh.
Your forgetting the first part of 1 Timothy:
'1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope'

In Acts 9 God himself says Paul/Saul is his chosen. Lets start at 9:10 when God spoke with Ananias.

'10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a visio'n, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
11 And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth,
12 And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight.'

Now get this Padawan, Ananias thinks like you Padawan!!!!

Ananias he says he says to God:

'13 Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
14 And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.'

Just to let that sink in Padawan, re-read that part, no re-read!

Then you know what the big guy says Padawan, (believed to be Yeshua).

hehehe, (whispers) 'here ill show you':

'15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
16 For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.'

Whats your response for this Padawan?

2. Sigh.
He didn't need to! See above. He was his chosen vessel. What parts of the Bible do you believe Padawan?
Then you warp them Padawan why? Why?

3. Ok this is where your confusing things so ill quote from here Padawan, please explain this confusion from your perspective.


By Padawan
[3]The Apostles and James never trusted Paul and they were chosen by Christ,


Not going to argue here, people go through periods of like and dislike throughout friendship within ones life. Not everyone agrees on all things and sometimes that can cause problems. So yeah, or no. Meh! Does not matter for what is to come is nothing freaking short of PHWAOR!!!! PADAWAN!

3/4.

By Padawan
[4]The Apostles and James never trusted Paul, and they were chosen by Christ, who is perfect and didn't choose the wrong men to lead his church.


Why do you deny Christ Padawan? For emphasis:

and they were chosen by Christ, who is perfect and didn't choose the wrong men to lead his church.


By Padawan
So, maybe it wasn't rude but the wake up call you needed.


Your telling me Padawan. Talk about projecting your insecurities onto others Padawan.

Master Coomba98

(Ps Padawan, provide evidence of your opinion. Helps super!, hint hint)
edit on 9-4-2016 by coomba98 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 05:54 AM
link   
a reply to: coomba98

You see commba, your juvenile behavior of calling me Padawan, which I don't know or care what is meant by it, betrays your phony image of someone who legitimately cares about the issue and serves only to reveal your true goal, which is riding my Johnson every time I make a comment.

Don't think I don't know what type of person that makes you. The type who is too afraid to act tough in public and goes on the internet to harass people because you are safe behind your computer.

And the type of person that develops obsessions for people who speak their beliefs on a forum that is supposed to be just for that.

So you must want only people who agree with you and think like you to have a say, or just don't agree with what I say and want to discredit me.

If I have said something untrue, prove it. If you can't then stop complaining. I know the Bible well enough that I don't have to rifle through the pages of it to say something about it that is true. Nor do I have to provide evidence for the uneducated that Paul was a Roman agent. The High Priest was the one who he was working for and the high priest was installed by Rome. It was his Roman citizenship that he invoked when he was about to get murdered and Roman soldiers came to his rescue. He invoked Caesar as he was being "arrested" as was his right as a Roman citizen. The same Rome that conspired with the Sadduccee priesthood to have Jesus killed, even though they would blame the other party they were both responsible. So had Paul REALLY been a convert he would never appeal to Rome to save the same life (his) that he previously claimed he would give willingly for Christ.

PAY ATTENTION TO THAT LAST SENTENCE SEEDE, because you charged Peter with this offence (which isn't true, he could have been killed by the Romans for drawing his sword at Jesus arrest and was willing to die for Christ) But it is Paul who is the one that is truly guilty of the offense you charged Peter with, making your entire reasoning incorrect. Peter didn't have the power to make Christ a liar, and more or less was following orders when he denied Christ, who TOLD him he would do it, and if you actually thought things through you would see that Christ didn't WANT Peter to confess knowing Jesus because he needed him alive to be a pillar of the church.

Coomba, you are a joke. Name calling isn't going to bother me from some juvenile on the internet. I only respond to this one message to tell you how pathetic it is to call someone names and you are probably thinking to yourself "I'm cool, I call people names on the internet because I am not intelligent enough to participate in the discussion and don't like what this guy is saying so let me project my insecurities on someone who is more intelligent than me so I can feel less pathetic and miserable."

Name calling? Come on dude, I don't watch Harry Potter or Lord of the rings or wherever the hell you are getting padawan from. But it is a really sad fact that at this point in your life you have to resort to name calling to make yourself feel special.

I almost pity you. Now I am not going to pay attention to another message from you, so give up or become more obsessed but either way I will have no knowledge of anything you say as it is it very easy to ignore someone by just not reading their messages. You will be talking to the wind and showing observers your ignorance. Your best bet is to start your own thread trying to debunk me if you disagree. But you won't, because you are obsessed with me.

Creepy.



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 06:20 AM
link   
a reply to: Solarmania

Holy crap Padawan!, should this not be in the 'rant' section? Wow!

Ive known you since you were Gnosisfaith. 30+ accounts ago!! WTF!

Im not being juvenile digger, this is an open forum, meaning we all have input. I/we have merely questioned the statements you have posted. As well as I asking what you really believe, But you keep persisting on not answering these simple questions.

Like I keep saying, and everyone here is waiting on. Provide evidence of why you believe these things. Not evidence of opinion.

Attacking someone's character is a very sad way of getting your view across Padawan.

Stop being so abusing man! It is very unbecoming of someone of the Light! (which you proclaim to be)

Now... be civil Padawan, can you please answer my queries in my previous post? Please?

Does anyone else wish to here Padawan answer these question? As they are quiet valid?

Coomba98


edit on 9-4-2016 by coomba98 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 06:20 AM
link   

edit on 9-4-2016 by coomba98 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 06:47 AM
link   

edit on 9-4-2016 by coomba98 because: (no reason given)


As its your thread and you brought it up.


By Padawan
I don't watch Harry Potter or Lord of the rings or wherever the hell you are getting padawan from.


Ive watched Harry Potter but never read the books. 3/5 in my opinion. Cant get around magi needing a wand. But that's just me.

Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit. Read both. Books I found were childish , but he was a father who created this for his infant children to lull them to sleep. The movies, freaking awesome!! 4.5/5. Probably alittle more. Near perfect Padawan. I recommend watching. (whispers: BuBut its not real, remember that Padawan!)

Also Padawan, if your have not heard of Star Wars you really do need to go out and experience society. Its awesome man I tell you.

Coomba98
edit on 9-4-2016 by coomba98 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 06:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Padawan Solarmania

As its your thread Padawan, and you brought it up.


By Padawan
I don't watch Harry Potter or Lord of the rings or wherever the hell you are getting padawan from.


Ive watched Harry Potter but never read the books. 3/5 in my opinion. Cant get around magi needing a wand. But that's just me.

Lord of the Rings/The Hobbit. Read both. Books I found were childish , but he was a father who created this for his infant children to lull them to sleep. The movies, freaking awesome!! 4.5/5. Probably alittle more. Near perfect Padawan. I recommend watching. (whispers: But its not real, remember that Padawan!)

Also Padawan if you have not heard of Star Wars, you really do need to go out and experience society.

Its awesome man I tell you!

Coomba98
edit on 9-4-2016 by coomba98 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 08:04 AM
link   
The following are four of the best websites on the internet that I stumbled upon last year when I sat down and studied the New Testament and figured out that Paul was a false prophet. I noticed he was contradicting Jesus and fighting with the Apostles and just decided to Google false apostle Paul and see if I wasn't crazy. What I found was enlightening, and made me angry and then happy that I had found the truth.

Justgivemethetruth

Judaismvschristianity

lasttrumpet

problemswithpaul

I love personally discussing the topic but links are often helpful because I can't type every damn reason why Paul is a false prophet, so you can discuss the topic amongst yourselves as I have brought attention to a great point and that is what I wanted to do. I could argue all day about this but it just degenerates into a contest of who is smarter and who knows the bible better and everyone thinks it's them. Sometimes people just post a page of the Bible and think that is countering a comment but half the time the posted scripture is irrelevant or interpreted falsely even as personal interpretations go. Or they don't use their own words to explain how and why said scripture is relevant to the conversation.

It's just "Well, I used scripture so I proved you wrong because it's scripture."

Except that they just quoted something they just Googled and aren't speaking from personal knowledge but freshly Googled scripture with keywords in it that appear in the discussed topic but are iften from unrelated verses.

I have seen it and see it every time I come on here. Paul zealots have a complete absence of morals and can not even see it, they lie often and without guilt and dismiss logic that conflicts with what Paul said as from the devil. Not being Jewish they love his anti Torah rhetoric but will deny that Paul is anti Torah and deny that he taught his own separate doctrine.

I have no problem with people believing in the Gospel and its miracles. But Jesus warned prophetically that someone fitting Paul's description would come along in his name and deceive if possible even the elect. He said don't believe people who say they saw me in secret or in the wilderness, sternly. (Matthew 24:23-end of passage) And the guy shows up, does everything Jesus said he would, and people still believe him today, even though the people he told this to, along with all the churches in Asia listened and rejected Paul. And Jesus praises them for it in the letter to Ephesus, because that was the region that Paul had the most trouble I believe. I know the Ephesians did reject Paul, even if he wrote them a letter that we don't know if was ever received or obeyed anyway. He was a mad man writing all those letters desperate to inflict his will upon his decieved followers.
edit on 9-4-2016 by Solarmania because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 11:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Solarmania


So had Paul REALLY been a convert he would never appeal to Rome to save the same life (his) that he previously claimed he would give willingly for Christ.

That also can apply to Peter could it not? Peter told Jesus that he would die for Him and then what did Peter do?
"Then began he to curse and to swear, saying, I know not the man."

But it does seem to me that you are adamant in Peters defense which I am led to believe is that you subscribe to Peter being of special authority. My belief is that Peter was one of the pillars of the Jerusalem Synagogue but nothing more. He was foremost a Jew of little education who was third in authority of the Nazarene Synagogue for well over three decades. I see nothing more than this in Peter. The Nazarene Synagogue's history does not agree with the perspective that Peter was anointed or endowed with any sort of divine authority such as many are taught.

As far as the revelation of the Christ being Jesus can be accepted with common sense but not that an entire salvation message of Christianity will be bestowed upon a sinner of the Creators creation. I can understand that the future Church of Jesus would be built upon this premise that indeed Jesus was the Christ but not that some magic has been delivered to the very Romans that put Him to death. That may be your understanding but it certainly is not my understanding.

You seem also to be just as adamant in that you believe Saul/Paul to be a double agent of sorts and is out to destroy the church of your Peter. If this be true then I would question why would the Romans be so stupid as to let the Synagogue of James flourish for well over three decades? Now I admit that I am not very intelligent but I would have the sense to simply start with James and his people first. Why would I as a Roman agent take twenty or so years gadding all about the country side, getting my head bashed in and beat to a pulp just to bad mouth a religion? Makes no sense at all.

Lets get real in this discussion. Who was this Saul/Paul working for? Pilate? Not for long because Pilate was deposed shortly after Jesus died. The Sanhedrin? Not really because the house of Annas and Caiaphas also fell in about the same time as as Saul/Paul was converted. Actually nothing adds up to Saul/Paul being an agent of Rome. So you are then trying to sell the story that Saul/Paul who was a wealthy Jew became a sinister agent for Rome and tried to destroy a small sect of crazies in Jerusalem? Do you understand that you are saying that Rome was so stupid as to go about this for over thirty years in the manner of which you say they did?

Well doesn't 68-70 CE tell you that the real world is just like it happened. The Romans came into Jerusalem and leveled the whole city. Now that is the way Rome worked and that is what they would have done had it been as you have postulated. Not one Saul/Paul taking years to bad mouth a religion. That is not even common sense. That is in my opinion of course.

Now with all of that rant said, I do admit that the new man Paul was not connected to The Nazarene's Synagogue and he was not commissioned by James with any authority. He was commissioned by Jesus and not by the Synagogue but as I have said in other rants that the gifts of the Holy Spirit which were given to the congregation would have told the truth in this matter. I can not rule this out because if I did then the entire works of the Holly Spirit would be of no effect.

As the entire congregation was filled with the Holy Spirit and given the gifts of the Holy Spirit then we must either accept this as fact or reject this as the Romans did. The Holy Spirit gave to the people as it pleased and one of the very most important gifts was that of discernment. This gift was to protect the movement from destruction. The very destruction that you say was Saul/Paul. Now when Saul/Paul visited James for fifteen days then I want you to tell me why the Holy Spirit did not reveal this agent of destruction? Are you telling me now that the Holy spirit could or would not reveal this man if he were as you say?



posted on Apr, 9 2016 @ 10:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Padawan Solarmania

Padawan, providing links, that's a start.

However.. I cannot believe you read opinions based on a Bible you believe to be corrupted by politicians. The NKJV
(Just quietly Padawan, shhhhh: I think this as well).

No need to look further the hocus pocus websites, but some of the points appear to be from ignorance.

How many times have you abused people who refer to the NKJV Bible because you think its a... fraud I believe one of your responses were.

You are one confusing Padawan, Padawan.

What parts of the Bible do believe?

Do you hold the Dead Sea scrolls as truer than the Bible?

Ohh and everyone uses Google. Don't appear to be a genius who remembers everything always all the time. Nobody is like that as the human mind is not that advanced. Google is like a good librarian assistant who points you in the right direction. Then you open up the books.


By Padawan:
I love personally discussing the topic


No you don't Padawan, you like stating you beliefs and degrading and belittling everyone who has an opinion otherwise.
This is not a good way of saying you love 'discussing' the topic.

You still have not responded to my post above with Acts. So Acts is not a book you think legitimate for your beliefs?

Coomba98



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join