Did Paul Invent Christianity?

a reply to: Malocchio

You were already in error parroting about the 12 disciples were chose as a representation the 12 tribes of Israel.
Simon was a Canaanite chosen and named by Jesus as a Apostle.

Which tribe is the Canaanite?

What makes you think we can accept anything you say as truth?

2 Corinthians 11:4

For if someone comes and proclaims a different Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or a different gospel from the one you accepted, you submit to it readily enough. I think that I am not the least inferior to these arch-apostles.

Paul has his own revealed ''gospel" that is different from the Apostles. Here he writes people have turned from his gospel and "submit to it readily enough."

He obviously meant the Apostles are gaining members from his group who obviously know this guy's f.o.s. and claims he is just as good as the super or arch-apostles, a sarcastic insult out of jealousy.

7-12 is more pleading his case, false humility and boasting. 12 gets interesting.

11:12

And what I do I will continue to do, in order to deny an opportunity to those who want an opportunity to be recognized as our equals [false arrogant flattery and more Apostolic insults] in what they boast about. For such boasters are false apostles, deceitful workers, disguising themselves as Apostles of Christ. And no wonder! Even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is not strange if his ministers also disguise themselves as ministers of righteousness.


For millennia there has been use of this quote to promote Satan and Christians have no clue that Paul just called the 12 Apostles ''false apostles" and ''ministers" of "Satan."

It's not like it could honestly be denied by anyone who has read all the New Testament that it is the story of Paul marginalizing the importance of the 12 Christ chosen Apostles and actually declaring them ministers of Satan in the end.

Yet Christianity feigns a harmonious existence between the Apostles and the false prophet and if challenged sides with Paul because the Apostles were too Jewish and even though it was decreed by James a burden free life for the gentile people they still called them ''Judaizers" and told lies about Jewish Nazarene ''Christianity."

I am glad that I read the book before blindly selling my soul to a false prophets plan for salvation based on a death atoning for my sins.

I will take responsibility for my sins and live on earth as if it was Heaven and love it.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Matrixsurvivor
Learn to rightly divide the word of truth and you might figure it out.

That doesn't mean anything you know.

The real words of truth are indivisible and any division of truth is not right at all.

Whatever you think that statement means, if you even have an idea and don't just say it , I guarantee you they are meaningless words concocted by a far out mind to solve the false prophet Paul problem.

It actually shows you know that Paul's teachings and Christ and the Apostles don't go together and need to be divided.

So I accept your admission that they don't go together and need to be divided, but the lesson of the false prophet Paul is valuable for learning about decievers in the name of Christ so I don't think I am going to saw my Bible in half at your recommendation, that's going to far.


So when one ''divides the word of truth," who are the divided people that get the divided books?

Who gets what books of the word of truth?

I am jk. I know you don't know what it means because it means nothing. It's like saying ''Make America great again."

Wasn't it great to begin with?

a reply to: Malocchio

Quoting Paul to prove Paul was a false Apostle.

You do know what they call that don't you?

a reply to: Malocchio
Once again it proves you do not believe God is strong enough to preserve his words to every generation. And believing that is alack of faith on your part if not just blatant unbelief a sin worse than murder.

2 Timothy 2:15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

If God says rightly divide you need to rightly divide.

If you deny this then you are denying all the word of God. Once you pick and choose what is God's word you become god in his place, deciding what is Gods words and what is not, therefore you are a wrong and God is true.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: Malocchio

You were already in error parroting about the 12 disciples were chose as a representation the 12 tribes of Israel.
Simon was a Canaanite chosen and named by Jesus as a Apostle.

I was never parroting or in error. 12 does represent the 12 tribes regardless of the birthplace of an Apostle. What a weak argument that shows lack of knowledge.

Simon is a very Hebrew name, his place of birth or residence is irrelevant and ALL Israelites live in what used to be Canaan, in Biblical times it was a coastal nation.

12 is still 12 and if you hadn't ignored the thousand times I've quoted Revelation and New Jerusalem here I wouldn't have to show you again and send you packing again, that I am not imaging things.

Revelation 21:12

and at the gat twelve angels, and on the gates are inscribed the names of the 12 tribes of the Israelites;...And the wall of the city has 12 foundations, and on them are the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

Tell me again that the 12 Apostles and 12 tribes aren't symbolically related while the New Jerusalem forever stands witness to the fact that you accuse me of a blunder because you don't know certain Bible passages and not because I blundered.

Certainty is best before arrogant assertions of blunder and you should remember that. Did you think 12 tribes had no symbolic link to the 12 Apostles? You miss the obvious then and that's both apparent and not my fault.

Which tribe is the Canaanite?

Ham's son was way back in Genesis and the Canaanites were exterminated by Joshua so what's your point?

Canaanites were called Phoenicians in the time of Jesus. Anybody reading with any sense knows your full of contempt and error and everytime you comment you make it about me and a fake mistake that I supposedly made that ends with my full correction of your misunderstanding.

What makes you think we can accept anything you say as truth?

There is a we?

I have no interest in you, just love proving you are wrong every time you speak because you like to insult people.

I don't care if you listen to me, I'm right but it is no matter to me if you listen. The people that know just know and the rest are like you, angry and full of insults from frustration at being wrong about something you feel strongly about but haven't studied thoroughly and I am just the bearer of bad news, not your friend.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Yeah but only Paul said that not God.


You are not applying logic again as you said Matthew only speaks for Matthew.

But Paul speaks for God?

I am not in the mood to deal with cult Christianity right now, go chop up your Bible you can't even answer my questions so don't expect to hear from me.

You are a one way street, everything is about you.

a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

Text(manmade requirements? Um, I'm sorry...but, they were praying to God to show them WHO He wanted to replace Judas!

You need not be sorry. You simply do not understand. Simply because a person prays for a specific thing does not mean that it is the Creator's perfect will or even His permissive will. Peter has been rebuked before by Jesus and he was filled with the spirit of The Most High. The Disciples [apostles] did not seek Jesus' perfect will but took it upon themselves to choose two men to replace Judas and the reason for that decision was the man Peter. Yes the same Peter that denied his Creator and even cursed, with a lie, that he did not even know his Creator Jesus. So it was this same sinner called Peter that decided to make a rule and choose a replacement for a devil. Then after making the rules he expected the Creator to abide by his [Peter's] rules and finish the game by drawing lots.

Now I have some reserves in all of this apostle thing and that is why I agree with Chester John that all of this may not be the perfect will of the Creator Jesus. Note that I said His perfect will. The reason is that James who was the Nasi of the movement was chosen by Jesus Himself. John was second in authority while Peter was third. This format was in effect as they choose this game of chance and both James and John are silent in this affair. All we have is a man made game of rules which were not taken to the Creator in the first place. Why? Can you answer this?

The reason I do have reserves is that Jesus chose Saul/Paul without the game of chance by men. I believe that this is the very reason that Paul tells us that he is the thirteenth apostle chosen by Jesus Himself. Jesus chose twelve men as His authority and disowned one by foreknowledge. He then chose one more [Saul/Paul] to replace the one He disowned. Hereafter the twelve are not with Matthias but are inclusive with Saul/Paul.

In 44 CE there were twelve apostles sent out two by two by the Nasi James to evangelize. James Zebedee was dead and had been replaced by Matthias and yet Matthias was not one of those twelve but Paul was one of those twelve. If that is true then tell me why should that be? Where is Matthias and what happened to Matthias? Why was it noted that Paul was assigned with Peter and Matthias was nowhere to be noted?

There are some who insist that the Roman church glorified Paul as a saint and apostle but this is not true. Paul was accepted by the entire Nazarene movement and active in brotherhood with the disciples several decades before the Roman organization was even thought of. Paul was part and parcel of the Jewish movement even though he was not a passive member of the congregation. Paul replaced Judas by Jesus' own choice and not by man. If you kick against Paul you then kick against the Christ that anointed Paul.

I find this entire subject very revealing in that Jesus chose twelve men for His purpose. He then chose James His brother for His high Priest [Nasai]. He then Chose Saul/Paul to replace Judas. Have you noted that it was Jesus who did all of the choosing? And now you are expected to accept that Jesus had men roll dice or draw straws to play in a game of chance? Now I am not saying that the event did not happen as it is written in scripture but what I am saying is that I have reserves that this entire man game was accepted by Jesus.

a reply to: Malocchio

See you just made yourself God in claiming what was inspired of God as not his word.

a reply to: Malocchio

See you have to change God's word to make it fit your preconceived ideas. Sorry but the word of God calls Simon a Cannanite. A Canaanite is not a Jew living in Israel, it is his nationality. The land of Canaan ceased to exist once Israel came into the land.

Just like Palestine is not a nation but any area. Those who claim Palestinian nationality are actually Arab's by DNA.

a reply to: Malocchio

Anything but believe the word of God.

a reply to: Seede James Zebedee was dead and had been replaced by Matthias

Once again you show you lack of knowledge in the Bible.

Matthias replaced Judas Iscariot.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Once again you show you lack of knowledge in the Bible. Matthias replaced Judas Iscariot.

Yes Matthias did replace Judas. That is by men's own appointment but not verified by Jesus.

"In 44 CE there were twelve apostles sent out two by two by the Jamesthe Just to evangelize. James Zebedee was dead and had been replaced by Matthias and yet Matthias was not one of those twelve but Paul was one of those twelve. If that is true then tell me why should that be? Where is Matthias and what happened to Matthias? Why was it noted that Paul was assigned with Peter and Matthias was nowhere to be noted? "

I did need clarification as here is the intent. James Zebdee had been beheaded by Agrippa in 44CE and the apostleship had been replaced by Matthias. (meaning that Matthias was regarded as an appointed apostle by Jesus). This left ten authentic disciples living, with Matthias in question. Paul was appointed to team with Peter by the high priest who was James the Just and yet Matthias was not mentioned at all. Why? What happened to Matthias and why was he not assigned a teammate to evangelize? If Matthias was a chosen disciple and Paul not a chosen disciple then why was Paul sent out with Peter and Matthias not even mentioned? Makes no sense to me and leaves me in doubt as to Matthias being chosen by Jesus.

I am not doubting the MSS or translations of which relates this event but what I do doubt is the acceptance of Matthias by Jesus. I also doubt the reasoning of Peter for choosing the method of replacing Judas such as was his reasoning. The reason Peter gave was ---

Act 1:20
For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.

The JPS translation is
Psalms 69:26
"Let their encampment be desolate; let none dwell in their tents."
and
Psalms 109:8
"Let his days be few; let another take his charge."

All of which is completely out of context in this reason to appoint Matthias in the manner of which Peter choose.
I invite you and all others to read this Psalms 69 and 109 in context and then tell me that it makes sense. Then tell me that it was of the Jesus' choosing. Not even related in my understanding. It was by man's own desire to replace Judas in the manner and time that they chose. There are no scriptures by Jesus that insist that the number twelve must be sustained in the manner of which is understood by most.

I may be ignorant but I am not dumb.

a reply to: Seede

Matthias was verified by the Holy Ghost via a lot system

There were at least three James

a reply to: ChesterJohn

TextMatthias was verified by the Holy Ghost via a lot system

Therein lays my problem. From what I understand this was but a vote and in that I have my doubts. Firstly the men were not as yet baptized with the Holy Ghost [Spirit]. If they had been infilled with the power of the Spirit then I would not question this at all but as yet they were not.

Another question in my doubt was that if you had eleven men who cast a vote and you had only one vote different from the eleven then you would have had one more man who was not of the Holy Spirit would you not? You would have to have had all eleven to be of the perfect will of Jesus. In this event I cannot bring myself to believe this was the perfect will of Jesus.

Shortly after this vote was the appearance of Jesus to the apostles. They were told that Jesus would appear to them and to go to the upper room and wait. Why then did not the men simply wait and ask Jesus?

There are too many discrepancies along with a lack of confirmation that this was acceptable to Jesus. We have NT confirmation of all apostles, and even Paul, from Jesus except Matthias. Out of the entire narrative of the NT, Matthias is mentioned only in this event twice and nothing even mentioned as the Holy Spirit being involved. Yet Saul/Paul has a lengthy confirmation directly from Jesus. The bible does not say that the Holy Spirit directed any of this. My belief is that the entire matter was of Peter's design and was a feel good type of idea and I also believe Saul/Paul was the true replacement of Judas.

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Quoting Paul to prove Paul was a false Apostle.

well we can always quote Jesus, or do you have a problem with that as well?

Math 12:37
37 For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

a reply to: ChesterJohn

Once you pick and choose what is God's word you become god in his place, deciding what is Gods words and what is not, therefore you are a wrong and God is true.

You do realize what books make up the bible was a human political decision, aided supposedly by the holy spirit, but formalized by a vote of bishops, and decreed to be the state religion by the pagan emperor Constantine, who incidentally did not become a christian until his deathbed confession witnessed only by his mother Helen.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

you believe that because you want to.

I believe that God kept his word to preserve his word to every generation as found in Ps 12:6,7, and he did so in the only one English Version. The only one that has ALL the Bible verses in it. The only one that can define the word by its context and the only one that has a super-natural divine built in Cross reference system.

a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

Can't quote the same person to prove that person is false. Otherwise you could do that for Jesus as well.

a reply to: Seede

Acts 1:24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,

Acts 1:25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.

Acts 1:26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

They also had the Holy Ghost which they received of Jesus

John 20:21 Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.

John 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: