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 vs. Satan's Servants

page: 3
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 07:46 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


So what apostle ever called Paul one?

Exactly.




posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 08:59 AM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix

Peter Nor John, who seemed to bie pillars n the church never said he wasn't or refuted his claim to be an apostle. So the Bible support it.

Do you think they did not ever read his letters? Paul was introduced to the by Barnabas to the original apostles and elders and later called by the Holy Ghost to go to the Gentiles, with the signs of tongues, miracles and healing that accompanied an Apostle.

From the early first century of church history and tradition all accepted Paul's apostleship.

You and those y ou follow today stand on weaker ground than Paul eveer did.

But let's say you are right the bible is a farce unpreserved of God, written of men, nothing but hate and murder.

What do you suggest people who are inclined to religion do and read?



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 09:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix

Peter Nor John, who seemed to bie pillars n the church never said he wasn't or refuted his claim to be an apostle. So the Bible support it.

Do you think they did not ever read his letters? Paul was introduced to the by Barnabas to the original apostles and elders and later called by the Holy Ghost to go to the Gentiles, with the signs of tongues, miracles and healing that accompanied an Apostle.

From the early first century of church history and tradition all accepted Paul's apostleship.

You and those y ou follow today stand on weaker ground than Paul eveer did.

But let's say you are right the bible is a farce unpreserved of God, written of men, nothing but hate and murder.

What do you suggest people who are inclined to religion do and read?



I didn't ask for sophistry CJ.

I asked you to produce a single instance of a real apostle calling Paul one.

Peter is the only one who says his name and only called him beloved brother which is not calling him an apostle.

2 Peter is a polemic AGAINST Paul as is James. I posted in detail how and why in the Paul invented Christianity thread.

Paul is Balaam in 2 Peter and Revelation because he is on record as teaching the doctrine of Balaam that eating idol meat is fine.

Which means JESUS repudiated Paul TOO.



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


Peter actually says Paul's writings lead people astray, that faith without works theology, Paul's theology, was shortsighted and blind.

Just because he feigned a compliment doesn't make him pro Paul, the epistle itself is repudiation of Pauline theology.

You are incapable of reading between the line CJ.



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix

No they don't. Peter says people of no understanding (like yourself) wrest the scriptures not only of Paul but of others to their own destruction. Once again here they clear as day any highschooler with a 6th grade reading level can understand them.

2 Peter 3:14-18 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction. Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness. But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.




edit on 13-1-2017 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 01:45 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Yes they do.

I am going to now make a list of everything negative Paul ever said about the apostles.

I assure you that you will enjoy hearing the bad mouthing of Christs apostles.
edit on 13-1-2017 by TerriblePhoenix because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenixDon't waste your time. I have seen your claims in all your different ATS user accts about Pau already

A I am sure all the verses of the Bible you use will be out of out of context and of private interpretation, where you will claim it is the 11 plus one and maybe the brothers of Jesus and not the false apostles he is actually referring to.

The only one comes close is when he talks about how some can have a wife and he and Barnabas must not, or they work with their hands while others do not. You still will be out of context because it had nothing to do with the Peter and the others as much a it had to do with them to whom he was writing to not helping them out. But Paul didn't want to ask so he was not chargeable to any but Christ Alone.

I have told you a hundred times you take things out of context and create a whole new thought that is not even in the writing. It is called pretexting or adding to the scripture which is a cursed to those who do it three times in scriptures



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 02:40 PM
link   
I shall begin with that gold mine of hatred and lies about the apostles called Galatians.

Paul claims that his gospel is not from human origins.

1:11

For I want you to know, brothers and sisters, that the gospel that was proclaimed by me is not of human origin; for I did not receive it from a human source, nor was I taught it, but I have received it through a revelation from Jesus Christ.


The same Jesus who warned in Mt. 24 not to believe anyone who makes such claims?

Did Jesus lie to his apostles?

And if Paul teaches a gospel that he wasn't taught by the apostles it is not the same gospel because what purpose was there to personally teach his friends one Gospel and by revelation teach a murderer and liar?

The same Gospel world have just been taught to him by a disciple or apostle and had no need to reveal it to Paul, his apostles would have done that.

So it is by Paul's admission a different gospel.

2 Paul and the other apostles.

This whole chapter is about the apostles and the title in my Bible is literally Paul and the other apostles, should anyone doubt me on this. It doesn't matter that it was the translators who titled it so because they know what they are doing, it's the NRSV, an acclaimed translation.



4. But because of false believers secretly brought in to spy on the freedom we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might enslave us.--- we did not submit to them even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might always remain with you.

6. And from those who were supposed to be acknowledged leaders (what they are makes no difference to me, God shows no partiality) ---those leaders contributed nothing to me.

SUPPOSED to be acknowledged leaders? God shows no partiality? Paul has apparently never read the OT where God operates with extreme partiality choosing 12 tribes as his chosen people, undeniably partial.

7. On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel for the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel for the uncircumcised....

Blatant lie. Paul was forbidden by the Holy Spirit from preaching in Asia and Peter was appointed by God to be the apostle to the gentiles according to Paul's boy Luke.

He wasn't given exclusive rights to preaching to the gentiles, he was banned from Asia and only allowed to preach outside of Asia.

They contributed nothing to him, i.e. taught him nothing. It's impossible then for him to be preaching the true Gospel entrusted to the disciples who were warned people would make claims like this and to "NOT BELIEVE THEM."

9. And when James and Cephas and John, who were acknowledged pillars,...

Now that Paul needs the approval of the acknowledged or supposed to be acknowledged leaders, and he is talking about the same people still, he claims the people who added nothing to him that he didn't care what they were, gave him the right hand of friendship and agreed to divide up preaching between Jew and gentile, 1 man getting the larger population with 12 getting the small.

Ok Paul. Tell us another one.

2:11 Paul allegedly rebukes Peter and calls him and Barnabas hypocrites led astray by Jews, Jewish Christians who Paul is not supposed to be preaching to to begin with yet claims he to have Jews in his group.

Can this guy tell the truth about anything?

2 :16


"... yet we know that a person is justified not by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ.... no one will be justified by works of the law. "

" Senseless man, do you need to be told, faith without works is dead? " Epistle of James.

I would love to hear someone claim now that Paul would never say a bad word about the apostles, like calling them servants of the devil, because he does it in Galatians and uses names this time.

Nobody can claim that the apostles taught what Paul did, I have proven that is a farce using the words of Paul himself and of James.

He called Barnabas, the first person to give him a chance, and Peter, hypocrites, behind their backs in a letter without revealing Peter's response.

I don't think I have to make a single more comment, I have proven that Paul did hate the apostles and taught a different Gospel with Paul's own words.

To deny... is to lie, in this case.
edit on 13-1-2017 by TerriblePhoenix because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 02:55 PM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix

Right off the bat firsrt you start at verse 11 so it ends up being taken out of context

HERE is how you should post it then take it one verse at a time. And ask who is he speaking too an why? See it there he is wondering why they were being led astray so easily from the gospel they were saved by. The context is still not complete the next chapter and the one after that must also be read so that you get the whole idea of thought and context. But to pick and choose is not Bible study, it is Bible roulette and private interpretation.

What is his purpose. The purpose is not the gospel he got from Christ. So you divorce the verse and create a private interpretation.


Galatians 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


Galatians 1:2 And all the brethren which are with me, unto the churches of Galatia:

Galatians 1:3 Grace be to you and peace from God the Father, and from our Lord Jesus Christ,

Galatians 1:4 Who gave himself for our sins, that he might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father:

Galatians 1:5 To whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

Galatians 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

Galatians 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Galatians 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Galatians 1:10 For do I now persuade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ.

Galatians 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.

Galatians 1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Galatians 1:13 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 1:14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

Galatians 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,

Galatians 1:16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

Galatians 1:17 Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

Galatians 1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.

Galatians 1:19 But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.

Galatians 1:20 Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.

Galatians 1:21 Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia;

Galatians 1:22 And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ:

Galatians 1:23 But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.

Galatians 1:24 And they glorified God in me.



edit on 13-1-2017 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)


(post by TerriblePhoenix removed for a manners violation)
(post by TerriblePhoenix removed for a manners violation)

posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Paul called Peter and Barnabas hypocrites, denied that works were important for salvation instead insisting faith alone justifies.


I would love to know how and what I allegedly took out of context.

LOVE.



posted on Jan, 13 2017 @ 03:38 PM
link   
a reply to: ChesterJohn


So why don't you quote me and explain, CJ?

Do you know how?



posted on Jan, 15 2017 @ 08:00 PM
link   
a reply to: TerriblePhoenix

Because your words are worth quoting as God's words are. For he is wise and true and life is found in his words.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join