Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Paul's gospel must be accepted

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


I think the OP is suggesting that if you reject the writings of Paul you might as well reject all of the Bible, which you have pretty much done throughout a number of different threads by discrediting disciples one by one.




posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Akragon
 


I think the OP is suggesting that if you reject the writings of Paul you might as well reject all of the Bible, which you have pretty much done throughout a number of different threads by discrediting disciples one by one.



yeh I kinda thought that as well...

That idea was why I wrote THIS thread...

All or nothing doesn't fly with me.... Its not one book, and I see no reason why I should accept it as such, aside from Christian theology, which I do not agree with either for the most part.

Paul was a fraud... he basically hijacked the religion and made it his own... and thus Paulianity was born...

I have a thread coming up about peter too by the way... but Paul is by far my favorite to pick on...

And Paul wasn't a disciple or an appostle either...(IMHO)


He did not know Jesus...

edit on 13-2-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 





I have a thread coming up about peter too by the way... but Paul is by far my favorite to pick on...


Hey wait! You haven't even successfully discredited Paul yet! I'm still waiting for you to show me where his teachings are different than Jesus'!



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


Well, if you reject the explanation Jesus gave of the sin of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, you likewise have to reject the MENTION of the existence of the sin of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit He gave in the previous sentence.

Jesus explained exactly what that sin is. Without Him walking in the flesh and doing miracles in front of people it's impossible for a human to commit.

And it is a red herring, neither of us were talking about blasphemy of the Spirit before you mentioned it. You brought up murder.


edit on 13-2-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Akragon
 





If you have something relevant to say... post some scripture and give your interpretation of it...


Bottom line, Paul, John and Jesus all spoke of the relevance of faith in Jesus being the deciding factor of eternal life.

Secondly, Jesus did say he was God when he quoted "I am he" from the Old Testament.



And when tempted by the devil to worship him, Jesus rebuked him saying man should worship God alone. Yet numerous people dropped to their knees and worshipped Jesus without a single rebuke from Him.

I guess He was a hypocrite and encouraged idolatry?



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Jesus would never have encouraged anyone to worship anyone in the flesh, even himself. The flesh represented man's sins. This is why he didn't rebuke people that worshiped him or declared him to be God, even though he was God. At the time that Jesus was speaking to Satan, he was getting ready to take on every human emotion as well as the sins of the whole world.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 





Originally posted by Akragon
Its not like my gospel must be accepted...


Your Gospel…


What Gospel would that be?


- JC



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joecroft
reply to post by Akragon
 





Originally posted by Akragon
Its not like my gospel must be accepted...


Your Gospel…


What Gospel would that be?


- JC


That would be the gospel according to Akragon...Silly

Still waiting for someone to publish it... I'll be back after work

edit on 13-2-2013 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Jesus would never have encouraged anyone to worship anyone in the flesh, even himself. The flesh represented man's sins. This is why he didn't rebuke people that worshiped him or declared him to be God, even though he was God. At the time that Jesus was speaking to Satan, he was getting ready to take on every human emotion as well as the sins of the whole world.


Umm, Christ didn't have sinful flesh.



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 06:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 




Originally posted by Akragon
That would be the gospel according to Akragon...Silly

Still waiting for someone to publish it... I'll be back after work




You’ve been working on that, for quite some time…

I look forward to reading it


- JC



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 11:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by Akragon
 





I have a thread coming up about peter too by the way... but Paul is by far my favorite to pick on...


Hey wait! You haven't even successfully discredited Paul yet! I'm still waiting for you to show me where his teachings are different than Jesus'!


Alrighty...

Though I don't see a point... you'll likely just explain it away just like everyone else tries to..

Paul.

Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:


Jesus

27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.

29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.



Strike one...

Paul

1Cor.4
[15] For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel..



Jesus

Matthew 23:9
And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.

Strike two...

Paul

Eph.1
[7] In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace



The lords prayer?

14 For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:

15 But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.


Strike three!!

Yerrr outa there Paul!!!



posted on Feb, 13 2013 @ 11:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
reply to post by Akragon
 


Well, if you reject the explanation Jesus gave of the sin of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit, you likewise have to reject the MENTION of the existence of the sin of blasphemy of the Holy Spirit He gave in the previous sentence.

Jesus explained exactly what that sin is. Without Him walking in the flesh and doing miracles in front of people it's impossible for a human to commit.

And it is a red herring, neither of us were talking about blasphemy of the Spirit before you mentioned it. You brought up murder.


edit on 13-2-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)


Our understanding or interpretation of the "holy spirit"... is different... so im not rejecting anything...

I just disagree with what Christian theology says in certain terms...

Again, Not Christian...

31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.

IF said holy spirit/Ghost is within... IF one assults a person with words that is blasphemy against the spirit... as everyone knows words can cut deeper then a knife... It is not forgiven meaning it will return to you... but can be repaid so to speak in one incarnation

physical assault is also blasphemy against the holy spirit... which can be repaid within this life...

Murder is the ultimate blasphemy against a man/womans spirit, in which you also play the hand of God...

This blasphemy against the spirit can not be repaid in one life... And I think said person is doomed in his next incarnation to the same fate he delt




posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 08:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


As for strike one, Paul is basically saying the same thing Jesus did. You may have bolded that no one can be plucked out of the Father's hand, but you ignore that right before that statement, that no one can be plucked from Jesus hand either.

I've already explained in this thread why Jesus told everyone that the Father was greater than he. It was because Jesus was in the flesh. God the Father pulled the strings of Jesus while he was here on earth, therefore, making God the Father greater than Jesus during the time he was here on earth.

As for strike two, Paul may have used the term "father" (lower case) to show that he loved them like a father because he would not only instruct them in Christ, but love them in Christ like a real father would. Paul never asked the Corinthians to call him father, now did he? Jesus said not to have anyone CALL you father.

As for strike three, Paul was talking about the trespasses against God, not man. The Lord's prayer mentions both. We are to ask God for forgiveness against our trespasses against him just like we are to ask for forgiveness from other men for the ones we commit against them. The blood of Jesus allows us forgiveness from the trespasses we make against both of them.

edit on 14-2-2013 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


You left out the precise explanation of the unforgivable sin...

(See Mark 3:29-30)


edit on 14-2-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Deetermined


Umm, Christ didn't have sinful flesh.


You're right, but flesh itself REPRESENTED sin. If man had never sinned, there never would have been a need for Jesus to come in the flesh to begin with.

edit on 14-2-2013 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined

Originally posted by NOTurTypical

Originally posted by Deetermined


Umm, Christ didn't have sinful flesh.


You're right, but flesh itself REPRESENTED sin. If man had never sinned, there never would have been a need for Jesus to come in the flesh to begin with.



That's a moot point. Christ's flesh cannot be compared to our flesh, His had no sin. And it's clearly seen in scripture that Christ never rebuked anyone for worshipping Him. Not once.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 09:25 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Help me to understand in more detail what your point is. As far as I can tell, we have the same argument. How does my point of view differ from yours?



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 09:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Deetermined
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Help me to understand in more detail what your point is. As far as I can tell, we have the same argument. How does my point of view differ from yours?


I can't speak for your point. But mine is that Christ is not a hypocrite, nor does He encourage idolatry. He also rebuked the devil saying that man shall worship God alone, yet accepted worship numerous times without rebuking anyone.

This is to point out to Akragon that Jesus knew He was deity.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 09:43 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I agree.

I wasn't sure how deep we were going into this discussion because I think we've had some differences of opinion in the past about the Trinity and Jesus' role in it, but obviously we're not going there for now. Just wanted to make sure.



posted on Feb, 14 2013 @ 09:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Akragon
 


I know you think that the Holy Spirit is instilled in everyone at the time of birth, but according to the Bible, it's not. But we already know that you don't agree with everything written in the Bible, so there's no need to argue that point.

In the meanwhile, I think those that blasphemed against the Holy Spirit were the ones who saw Jesus' works and claimed that he did them through the power of the devil and not God. I believe that is what it means by "blaspheme against the Holy Spirit" (as was pointed out earlier by Mark 3:30).

Mark 3:28-30

28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:

29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.

30 Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit.





new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join