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 contradicts Jesus

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:08 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


If Paul taught nothing different than Jesus then why does he never quote him? He doesn't use Jesus' words not one time. That goes to show he DID teach things different from Jesus.

And you have Paul's teaching notes? You have recordings? You know for a fact that he did not leave copies of Jesus' teachings at churches? Because if he left copies, he would have had no reason to quote them in letters.




posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 


Do you have recordings that he did? That's a two way street, and since there is no evidence that he did then you shouldn't assume that he did. Occam's razor.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


Why did he have to make Paul the middle man? Did he decide not to preach all of his message before he died?

Somewhere it is written that Jesus said he was sent only to the lost of Israel.

Somewhere it is written that Jesus told Paul, "I'm sending you to the Gentiles"



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


That's a two way street, and since there is no evidence that he did then you shouldn't assume that he did. Occam's razor.

But then I'm not the one condemning another man based upon incomplete evidence. What kind of razor do you have?



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 


So Jesus decided to let Paul teach the more convoluted, harder to understand version to the Gentiles? I always thought that teaching in simple terms was the best way to teach the uninitiated, not in watered down, difficult to understand terms.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 


The evidence is in his epistles. Compare Jesus' words to Paul's, they are nothing alike, NOTHING.

Jesus taught a very simple, easy to understand message, that of loving one another. Paul came in and complicated everything threefold.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


I always thought that teaching in simple terms was the best way to teach the uninitiated, not in watered down, difficult to understand terms.

Like I already said. You have zero idea about what he taught in person. His letters were not introductions to Christianity. They were letters to people who had already been taught.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by lonewolf19792000

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


Wow, you're a fearful one aren't you? You are extremely afraid of the fictional hell, I can tell, otherwise you wouldn't say things like this.

If you only do good because you fear punishment then you are doing it for the wrong reasons.


It ain't sheol i'm afraid of. I don't do good for fear of punishment, i do good because the spirit he gave me desires to do good and he allows me to act in ways i used to not. You don't know me now and you didn't know who i used to be. I once enjoyed hurting people, i was doing drugs, having sex with married women. I was evil and i loved it.

Your condemnation will be greater because you had the light in your hands, you opened the book and you read from it and you chose to decieve people.


You are very sure of everything and believe that just because the book saved you everybody should open the same book and will get the same from that book. That book is very different read depending on spiritual experiances that takes the information to another level.

You might find something good in Pauls writing in your perspective bit for others it will not be good at all. Be happy that you can see something good in it but accept that to others Paul will never be a teacher of anything. God has his own way to teach every soul and we are stuck on different things.

Even if you are better you still have a very one way or the highway attitude towards others that are seeking higher understanding of god and is judging what you do not understand.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
This will be a short thread, but I think it will speak volumes on how Paul taught a message completely contradictory to Jesus' and how the bible is nowhere close to being the inerrant, infallible word of god.

I know some of you may think I'm running this into the ground, but I like to try and open people's eyes, even if my attempts end up failing. Even if it doesn't reach anyone, at least I can say I tried.


Jesus says:


Mark 12
27 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are badly mistaken!"


Jesus says that god is NOT (emphasis added) the god of the dead, but of the living.

Paul says:


Romans 14
9 For this very reason, Christ died and returned to life so that he might be the Lord of both the dead and the living.


Paul says that Jesus became the god of the living AND dead.

Whose word do you believe more? Jesus or Paul? Because this is the most blatant contradiction in the bible, in my opinion.

Will Christians admit to it though?


While personally I have severe issues with Paul and his writings. Your premise in this thread is flawed. Because Paul has not said anything contradictory here. Your first example comes before the crucifixion and the second example comes after. The conditions are not the same, at the time of Paul's writing this Christ had claimed victory over death.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 


So why are they used as tools of learning? If they are only meant for those who have been taught already then why are they used to teach the already taught? He calls himself a teacher, so why isn't he teaching to those who have not already been taught? Seems like a waste of his time to tell all of those churches something that they already knew don't you think?

If he taught those who weren't already "learned" in person, then he was not only for the Gentiles as it is written.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:38 PM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


That would imply that god changes. Ask any Christian if god changes and they will most likely tell you no.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 


Do you believe that believing Jesus rose from the dead is necessary to reach heaven? If not, then I have a hard time grasping why you are defending Paul so much. Paul taught that believing in Jesus' resurrection is necessary.

You don't come off as a Christian, yet you defend their biggest player to the death. Why are you so enamored by Paul that you refuse to think he wouldn't lie and deceive people?



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


He calls himself a teacher, so why isn't he teaching to those who have not already been taught? Seems like a waste of his time

Speaking of wasting time. I don't think I'll play here any more. I'll just quote to you your own words.

just because he earned respect doesn't mean he is any better than us. If we practice what he taught then we are equal to him, even if he was a better teacher than most.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is how you compare yourself to Jesus.

You are merely pretending to object to Paul out of your great respect for Jesus. Hypocrite! Liar! You don't respect Jesus one bit.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 


What does Paul have to do with Jesus? Haven't you been reading that I think Paul is the opposite of Jesus? Basically what you're saying here is that since I don't believe in Paul, that means I don't believe in Jesus. Lol, that is so backwards it's funny.

Like I said, Paul DID NOT teach the same thing Jesus did, so me saying to practice what Jesus taught does not equal me saying to practice what Paul taught. It seems like you're just looking for a reason to leave the discussion. You picked a pretty bad one.

This reply doesn't make one bit of sense honestly. If you don't or can't say why what I said is wrong, then by all means tuck tail and run away, but you still haven't proven anything by doing so.
edit on 29-5-2013 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


It isn't a matter of God changing. It is a matter of what he could and could not do within his own law. At the time Jesus says this he did not have the lawful authority to claim the dead yet. The whole point of the death and resurrection of Christ was to redeem all mankind past, present and future.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


God is all-powerful, so saying he "can't" do something is a bit of a misnomer don't you think?

Sorry if I come off as blunt, I don't mean anything personal by it.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


Do you believe that believing Jesus rose from the dead is necessary to reach heaven?

I've got no idea what heaven is. Jesus talked about it. Gospel of John seems to be about it. I don't know anything above the Sky. I merely quit pretending that I did know anything about it.


Paul taught that believing in Jesus' resurrection is necessary.

You don't come off as a Christian, yet you defend their biggest player to the death. Why are you so enamored by Paul that you refuse to think he wouldn't lie and deceive people?

That's why I'm not a Christian.

I defend Christianity because there are Christians. The alternative (no Christians) is unacceptable to me.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
 


It isn't that hard to understand. God sets rules down, rules that He himself has to abide by. Which is why the Death and Resurrection of Christ was necessary to begin with. Otherwise, when all was said and done anyone could say "Hey you cheated". It isn't a matter of him not being able to do something, when you are God I would imagine you could very well do whatever you like. It is a matter of him previously tying his hands on the subject, and having to conform to the ruleset for untying them. So that when all is said and done it is a clean win.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 04:33 PM
link   
reply to post by pthena
 


There are people like me also, so why not defend my side too? You seem to have just as much of a love affair with Paul as any Christian out there, yet you are not Christian? You say that because Paul teaches that believing in the resurrection is necessary, you are not Christian. If you don't agree with Paul, especially his biggest selling point, then why are you so hellbent on defending that he is right?


Why is it unacceptable to have no Christians? Not saying that I think there shouldn't be, I'm not one to try and convert people, but I like to express my opinion just as much as they do.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by KeliOnyx
 


So god set up rules that he knew he would eventually break? What was the point of the rules in the first place then?

Is god powerful enough to make a stone (rule) he himself cannot lift (break)? If so, he is not all-powerful.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join