Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Paul was a murderer

page: 15
6
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I also remember you saying that Acts was an affidavit for Paul and his trial. If it actually was an affidavit, why doesn't Saul/Paul come into the picture until at the very end of chapter 7? Strange that the court needed information about some of Peter's journeys in Paul's trials don't you think? What was the purpose of the first 7 chapters in Acts if it was only an affidavit for Paul?




posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 11:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


I also remember you saying that Acts was an affidavit for Paul and his trial. If it actually was an affidavit, why doesn't Saul/Paul come into the picture until at the very end of chapter 7? Strange that the court needed information about some of Peter's journeys in Paul's trials don't you think? What was the purpose of the first 7 chapters in Acts if it was only an affidavit for Paul?


Because it set the stage. Not just for Paul's affidavit, but for the Christian movement.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


That's why he founded the church along with Peter, right? He wrote the book on Christianity, the doctrine that all churches follow! How exactly didn't he create Christianity?


Because he joined the Christian movement which was alive and well before he converted.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Christianity wasn't a religion until Paul came into the picture.
The message Paul taught is nothing like that of Jesus. Why do you defend a guy who created what you hate?



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


You realize that the Gospel of Luke and Acts were most likely one work split into two, both written at the same time, right? Why would Luke write about Jesus' ministry when Paul's ministry is what was on trial? Why would Luke write his gospel along with the affidavit if it only concerned Paul?
edit on 24-2-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Christianity wasn't a religion until Paul came into the picture.
The message Paul taught is nothing like that of Jesus. Why do you defend a guy who created what you hate?


Christianity was taught by Christ, spread by the disciples, and the church was birthed at Pentecost which was 50 days after the ascension of Jesus. Paul persecuted Christians as a Pharisee. If there were Christians to persecute then there was Christianity!



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


You realize that the Gospel of Luke and Acts were most likely one work split into two, both written at the same time, right?


Of course I realize that!

I brought it up last time we discussed this.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


Did Jesus spread it to Paul? If Paul never met him, then how does he have any authority to dictate what he meant and how he meant it? Especially since he persecuted the earliest followers of Jesus?

Also, Jesus was not Christian, he was most likely an Essene along with John the Baptist. Christianity is a watered down version of the Essene teachings. As I said, Christianity didn't turn into a religion until Paul came into the picture.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


Jesus was not a happy go lucky person . He was not come to earth to condemn but to accomplish the delivering of his Gospel and Sacrifice for sin . The next time Jesus comes back he is going to be very Judgemental . He will hold us to our faith and fruitfulness .
No I don't blow in the breeze like the chaff blows away leaving the heavier wheat . You seem to blow with the slightest of winds . Take root in Christ Jesus Gospel and bring forth fruit .John 15 . Or God the Father will pluck suckers or branches that brings forth no fruit out of the Vine . You see he is still in charge , all ways was . Jesus answers to God



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


So why was Jesus' gospel written along with what you consider an affidavit? Jesus' ministry has nothing to do with what Paul did or didn't do. The trial was about Paul, not Jesus.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


So I guess all of those people who were called Christians ( Christ Followers ) before the crucifiction who heard and preached the Gospel that Jesus gave them were non christians . Paul started to ( as God stated he would do and with Paul ) make a peoples out of no peoples . God made Christ Followers out of people called Gentiles . There were Jews , an exclusive people and the rest of the world or Gentiles.
Again the Jews would not share the Law or Gospel of Jesus with a Gentile , so God had Paul share it with us . What better reason for the Jew to defame the work of Paul .



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


Wasn't Paul a Jewish Pharisee? Sure, Jews wouldn't spread Jesus' gospel.... unless of course it was Paul, then they would.

Jesus never called himself Christ, not once. So how can you be so sure he considered his followers Christian?



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


No, He certainly was not an Essene. Jesus severely mocked the religious folks for adding things into the Torah that were not there, (see Mark 7). The Essenes were so nutty that they refused to take a dump on the Sabbath because it was considered "work".

And I never said "Jesus was a Christian", that term didn't exist yet when He was living. It came a little later by secular folks in an attempt to mock believers.


As I said, Christianity didn't turn into a religion until Paul came into the picture.


Huh.. so Paul started Christianity, then left it, then began persecuting the movement he started, then joined in with the movement after that again? Lolwut?
edit on 24-2-2013 by NOTurTypical because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 06:46 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 



Sure, Jews wouldn't spread Jesus' gospel.... unless of course it was Paul, then they would.


The disciples were Jews.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


So why was Jesus' gospel written along with what you consider an affidavit? Jesus' ministry has nothing to do with what Paul did or didn't do. The trial was about Paul, not Jesus.



I already said. For background. Would you consider he was trying to make a good record of the facts and details?



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


No Saul was a Jew born in Rome who was a Pharisees and a son of a Pharisees . When Saul who became Paul having been called of God to give the Gospel to the Gentile also being a Roman citizen , God changed him and the Holy Spirit was with him .The Holy Spirit was his teacher and gave to him the message from God .Jesus made the sacrifice for sin all Paul did was to bring it to the world outside of the Jewish world . You are working against God and his ordination of Paul and the Apostles . Some may look at Paul's turn around from persecutor to persecuted a very profound change of heart to follow Christ Jesus .



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter

Hi Simon Peter

You wrote : QUOTE

"Saul was a Jew born in Rome who was a Pharisees and a son of a Pharisees" -

I'm not sure how you place the port city of Tarsus ('Saul of Tarsus' i.e. his birth place) in Rome, when Tarsus was the capital city of Cilicia in present-day Turkey - no where near Rome, or Jerusalem for that matter.

Interestingly, it was the Cilician pirates (many of them of Jewish extraction that had 'gone pagan') out of Tarsus that introduced 'Mithraism' into Rome from Persia (i.e. the worship of the Iranian Mediator god Mitra) c. 79 BCE -

Mithraism became the greatest competitor to Christianity or the Mysteries of Christ as they were called (i.e. as a rival salvation cult or 'Mystery Religion') by the time Saul/Paul came around -

In fact the Mithraic cult also had a Bread and Wine Eucharist ceremony as well as baptism and catechism etc. ref: their own saviour god (the Roman version call him Mithras, whose powers echoed Helios the Sun god who dies and rises every day and every year ) whose titles included 'the Sun of Righteousness' , the 'Mediator between gods and men'; and 'Saviour of the World' etc

Saul of Tarsus uses several dozen Mithraic terms in his own warped theology e.g. 'behold I tell you a Musterion: we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be metamorphosised - in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye...'

or 'This is my Body which is broken for the Many...take and eat: also this is my Blood which has been shed for the Many, drink ye all of it...' all of which have Mithraic Mystery Religion overtones.

And these specific liturgical/cultic Mystery Religious terms were in wide use more than 100 years (e.g. within the Mithraic Mystery cults as well as in the Serapis and Orphic and Eleusian Mysteries) long before Saul began his torture & killing of Nazorean Messianists (i.e. the Evionim, 'the Poor ones' whose group was headed up by the brother of R. Yehoshua bar Yosef the Galilean Nazir aka Gk. ho Iesous - the blood family of 'Iesous' who represented the Torah Abiders, i.e. the arch enemies of Saul/Paul - see Galatians chapter 2 where Saul of Tarsus says 'Jacob and Peter, those two so-called Pillars of the Ekklesia...' where the tone is hostile.

The family of 'ho Iesous' (i.e. R. Yehoshua bar Yosef) aka 'Iesus' who ran the Evionim (i.e. Nazorean Messianists, or 'Palestinian Christians') was more or less wiped out by the time the 1st Failed Jewish War against Rome was over in 72 CE - leaving Saul's 'Torah-Free; churches alive and well in the Empire with Palestine ground to powder in the meantime by the superior Roman Army.

So Saul's being born in Tarsus (the capital of Roman Mithraism) seems to have infected his theology with Mithraisms' when he 'preached to the goyim' i.e. gentiles / non Jews about 'the Kingdom of Heaven'

Curiously perhaps, the Mithraic 'Persian cap' shape worn by Mithra when slaying the Ritual Bull is what inspired the shape of the modern Bishop's 'Mitre' (which term comes from Mitra) and of course the birth-day of Mithras was...you guessed it, December 25th - when the shadows start to get longer again after the 'dead' winter solstice.

At any rate, Saul of Tarsus may have died in Rome (or en route) but he was not born there.

Clear as mud ?




edit on 24-2-2013 by Sigismundus because: stuttering computtterrrr keeyboarddddd



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 11:17 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


No, Paul persecuted "Christians" (Essenes) then turned around and perverted their message into that of Christianity, where faith in Jesus is all you need, not works.

No works = Earth. Instead of putting forth the effort to fix the world, people have taken the easy way out by only believing in Jesus and not doing good works. See where faith has gotten us? Nowhere fast.



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 11:24 PM
link   
reply to post by NOTurTypical
 


So what did Paul have to do with Jesus' ministry? He never met Jesus, so why would the court need the details of Jesus' ministry when the trial was about Paul and his ministry? It doesn't make sense.

Another thing I find interesting is that Mark is widely accepted as being the first gospel to be completed, and the estimated date of its completion is around 70 CE or slightly earlier. If Paul's trial was in 62 CE, and the first gospel (Mark) was completed around 70 CE, then how was Luke's gospel completed by 62 CE?



posted on Feb, 24 2013 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by SimonPeter
 


He was persecuted alright! Yeah, he was stoned to dea... oh, he came out unscathed on that one by the power of god.

Now that that has come to mind, I wonder why god didn't do the same for Stephen when Saul and his men stoned him? He was a devoted disciple just like Paul supposedly was, so why save one and not the other? Seems like god chooses favorites for no particular reason.






top topics



 
6
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join