Paul

[TEXBOW]

Paul is Gods’ chosen apostle to the Gentiles, so he writes to Gentiles only (he writes to Jews in Hebrews). It is Paul alone that speaks of salvation by grace through faith

Paul is not writing to Gentiles only. He is writing to both Jew and Gentile who are now Christians. Romans is the most obvious. We can identify several in Pauls letters who are Jews. Timothy was half Jew. Priscilla and Aquila were Jews. Many others.

When studying scripture, one should always ask: Who is speaking or writing? To whom are they speaking or writing? and What are the circumstances?

Let's take your advice. In 2 Timothy 2:15 Paul is writing to Timothy (The Who) The circumstances are Paul is giving Timothy instructions on ministry. When Timothy received that letter the only scriptures Timothy could "rightly divide" is the Old Testament and his letters. Timothy did not have the New Testament. We must ask ourselves what was Timothy to rightly divide.

Getting back to the Great Commission, Jesus is talking to the apostles, not all Jews in general. By the way…Jesus even stated that He has come to save the lost sheep of Israel…not Gentiles.

Matthew 15:24 (KJV)
24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Jesus only went to 2.5 Gentiles in his ministry – the Canaanite woman in Matthew 15, the Roman Centurion in Matthew 8, and the Samaritan woman (half Gentile) at the well in John 4.

Most, if not all Christian churches today believe that each and every one of us are to be missionaries and quote the Great Commission. But Paul states clearly that we do not all have the same calling:

Again taking your advise on understanding The Who, When and circumstances. We must remember that the mystery had not been reveled during the period before the cross. Of course Jesus instructed the Apostles to go only to the Jews. God's grace and salvation plan to the Gentiles had not been reveled by God YET. We cannot assume that post the revelation the 12 Apostles continued to take the message to the Jews only. Ephesians 3 tells us that the mystery was reveled not only to Paul but to the Holy Apostles and Prophets by the Holy Spirit. So that clearly means that many had knowledge of the mystery, possibly at the very same time Paul was given this knowledge. I believe the revelation was responsible for the transition nature of the book of Acts. We know that some in the Church in of Corinth claim to follow Peter (Cephas) 1 Corinthians 1:12-13

I agree that before the cross the message of salvation was much different and only for the Jews. I do not think we can say that the commission continued that way post the cross and after the Holy Spirit reveled the mystery to the other Apostles. I believe the light came on in Peters head first due to his experience with Cornelius.

I think the most important thing to divide in the scriptures is not Old Testament from New Testament but Before the Cross and After the Cross.

 

[Davy]

What's really crazy is the Pre-trib Rapture doctors falsely tell their believers that Christ's Olivet discourse isn't for the Church. It's obvious why, because there Jesus revealed that His coming to gather His Church is after... the great tribulation.

But to treat Apostle Paul's Epistles as if what Paul said should not all be heeded because Paul wasn't perfect like our Lord Jesus, then what 'doctrine of men' is that from???? I actually see that as a vain ATTACK on God's Word, especially since most of Paul's Epistles are of matters backed up from The Old Testament Books, which is all that was written in his day. So does that mean all the Old Testament Scriptures Paul quoted should be taken with a grain of salt too???

Nah, the idea that we should not heed everything in Paul's Epistles just because he was an imperfect man is a doctrine of devils! It suggests that Paul was not inspired by The Holy Spirit as a "chosen vessel" by Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 9).

 

[TEXBOW]

What's really crazy is the Pre-trib Rapture doctors falsely tell their believers that Christ's Olivet discourse isn't for the Church. It's obvious why, because there Jesus revealed that His coming to gather His Church is after... the great tribulation.

But to treat Apostle Paul's Epistles as if what Paul said should not all be heeded because Paul wasn't perfect like our Lord Jesus, then what 'doctrine of men' is that from???? I actually see that as a vain ATTACK on God's Word, especially since most of Paul's Epistles are of matters backed up from The Old Testament Books, which is all that was written in his day. So does that mean all the Old Testament Scriptures Paul quoted should be taken with a grain of salt too???

Nah, the idea that we should not heed everything in Paul's Epistles just because he was an imperfect man is a doctrine of devils! It suggests that Paul was not inspired by The Holy Spirit as a "chosen vessel" by Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 9).

Every word written by Paul was inspired by the Holy Spirit. Man's lack of understanding cannot re-direct a belief that the author is wrong. He is not. Every word spoken in the New Testament before the cross must take into consideration the mystery God reveled. The scriptures confirm that even the Apostles did not understand the purpose of the Cross until after.

 

[Bob Estey]

Are you saying God's written Word is not inspired??

If you don't believe God's Holy Writ is inspired by The Holy Spirit directly from God Himself through His servants, then what are you doing put the label Christian on your Faith space? You are a Christian, right?

I don't think everything Paul said in the Bible was inspired by God. For instance, telling a woman she can't speak in a church - even ask questions - doesn't sound like something God would say. Paul said this was the law - what law was he referring to?

 

[Bob Estey]

Those “ direct quotes” could be in error according to your “ take” on things.....it’s All or Nothing....

No, I have maintained all along the Bible is an accurate account of the events it witnesses to.

 

[Bob Estey]

Also to @Bob Estey

What do you say, how should we treat the Bible we now have, at least those which are said to be written by Paul? Are they to be all taken as “scriptures”? Take for consideration the following passages, for example in Romans:

Romans 1:7-15; 9:1-5;10:1;15:14-19, 22-32; 16:1-16, 21-23

Tong
R4803

I think Paul was a great preacher, no more, no less.

 

[TEXBOW]

I don't think everything Paul said in the Bible was inspired by God. For instance, telling a woman she can't speak in a church - even ask questions - doesn't sound like something God would say. Paul said this was the law - what law was he referring to?

Your mistake is that you rely on your own understanding to discount Paul or any of the inspired words of God. Your understanding falls way short, as do all men. Our default should not be that we discount the scripture, our default should be " we simply do not understand".

Let's start with your example of women not speaking in the church. We see in other scriptures that women are very active in the Gospel and Paul acknowledges that in Philippians 4:3. In 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 you must understand the context of these verses. You must understand what issue Paul is addressing in these verses. It helps if you understand the culture and customs of the times and the structure and formalities of the church during this period. It was customary for the women to set on one side of the synagogues and the men on the other side. Paul is saying that the women should not be speaking across the synagogue seeking clarification from their husbands regarding the message, that they should wait until they get home to ask their questions. In these verses context and culture clears this up. Do the work, study, your understanding of the scriptures will be rich.

 

[Davy]

I don't think everything Paul said in the Bible was inspired by God. For instance, telling a woman she can't speak in a church - even ask questions - doesn't sound like something God would say. Paul said this was the law - what law was he referring to?

Then you're saying God's Word is not inspired, and it shows you have 'doubts' about the Witness of The Gospel from Christ's Apostles, of which Paul was one, yet a later one which Jesus chose also.

 

[Tong2020]

I think Paul was a great preacher, no more, no less.

Sorry, but that is not the issue in what I’ve written in my post.

Let me repost my question:

What do you say, how should we treat the Bible we now have, at least those which are said to be written by Paul? Are they to be all taken as “scriptures”? Take for consideration the following passages, for example in Romans:

Romans 1:7-15; 9:1-5;10:1;15:14-19, 22-32; 16:1-16, 21-23

Tong
R4804

 

[Davy]

I think Paul was a great preacher, no more, no less.

And I think you are a great doubter. So there's not much about The Bible from you that I would heed. That's why you are now on my IGNORE LIST.

 

[TEXBOW]

And I think you are a great doubter. So there's not much about The Bible from you that I would heed. That's why you are now on my IGNORE LIST.

I'm trying to have patience with those with limited capacity. Not always easy.

 

[Bob Estey]

Your mistake is that you rely on your own understanding to discount Paul or any of the inspired words of God. Your understanding falls way short, as do all men. Our default should not be that we discount the scripture, our default should be " we simply do not understand".

Let's start with your example of women not speaking in the church. We see in other scriptures that women are very active in the Gospel and Paul acknowledges that in Philippians 4:3. In 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 you must understand the context of these verses. You must understand what issue Paul is addressing in these verses. It helps if you understand the culture and customs of the times and the structure and formalities of the church during this period. It was customary for the women to set on one side of the synagogues and the men on the other side. Paul is saying that the women should not be speaking across the synagogue seeking clarification from their husbands regarding the message, that they should wait until they get home to ask their questions. In these verses context and culture clears this up. Do the work, study, your understanding of the scriptures will be rich.

The Bible isn't God. God is God. You treat the Bible as if it were God.

 

[Bob Estey]

Sorry, but that is not the issue in what I’ve written in my post.

Let me repost my question:

What do you say, how should we treat the Bible we now have, at least those which are said to be written by Paul? Are they to be all taken as “scriptures”? Take for consideration the following passages, for example in Romans:

Romans 1:7-15; 9:1-5;10:1;15:14-19, 22-32; 16:1-16, 21-23

Tong
R4804

It depends on what you mean by "scripture." If you mean it isn't in error, then I would say Paul's writings aren't scripture, but that isn't my definition of "scripture." Indeed, I'm not sure the Old Testament doesn't have an error or two. What about that Psalm that speaks of dashing someone's children against the rocks?

 

[Bob Estey]

And I think you are a great doubter. So there's not much about The Bible from you that I would heed. That's why you are now on my IGNORE LIST.

Doubter? There's nothing that says I need to have faith in Paul. There's nothing that says have to have faith in the Bible. It's God we need to have faith in.

 

[amadeus]

Doubter? There's nothing that says I need to have faith in Paul. There's nothing that says have to have faith in the Bible. It's God we need to have faith in.

Amen!

You my friend caught my favorable attention from the time I first saw you arrive here. It is not that I agree with you on every point. Rather it is that you sincerely stand where you do even if no one else seems to be on your side. Is that not the stand Jesus was taking?

"From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?" John 6:66-67

 

[TEXBOW]

The Bible isn't God. God is God. You treat the Bible as if it were God.

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

 

[TEXBOW]

Amen!

You my friend caught my favorable attention from the time I first saw you arrive here. It is not that I agree with you on every point. Rather it is that you sincerely stand where you do even if no one else seems to be on your side. Is that not the stand Jesus was taking?

"From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?" John 6:66-67

John 1:1
In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

2 Timothy 3:16-17
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

I suggest he gives HIS attention to the scriptures.

 

[amadeus]

I suggest he gives HIS attention to the scriptures.

I really believe that he @Bob Estey does... give attention to scripture that is. It is just that apparently what you call scripture or what I call scripture may be different than what he calls scripture:

It depends on what you mean by "scripture." If you mean it isn't in error, then I would say Paul's writings aren't scripture, but that isn't my definition of "scripture."...

So then since we do live for God by faith, "the substance of thing hoped for and the evidence of things not seen", who can fairly judge and definitely be correct always in the eyes of God other than God Himself?

You might disagree with someone and even be right while the other fellow is wrong, but only God and you know that. Who else believes you? Is the truth decided by the majority?

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
Sorry, but that is not the issue in what I’ve written in my post.

Let me repost my question:

What do you say, how should we treat the Bible we now have, at least those which are said to be written by Paul? Are they to be all taken as “scriptures”? Take for consideration the following passages, for example in Romans:

Romans 1:7-15; 9:1-5;10:1;15:14-19, 22-32; 16:1-16, 21-23

It depends on what you mean by "scripture." If you mean it isn't in error, then I would say Paul's writings aren't scripture, but that isn't my definition of "scripture." Indeed, I'm not sure the Old Testament doesn't have an error or two. What about that Psalm that speaks of dashing someone's children against the rocks?

<<<It depends on what you mean by "scripture.">>>

What I mean by “scriptures” is what the Bible meant by it. It refers to the writings of holy men, chosen of God, as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

<<<If you mean it isn't in error, then I would say Paul's writings aren't scripture, but that isn't my definition of "scripture.">>>

What is your definition of “scriptures”?

Tong
R4805

 

[Tong2020]

The Bible isn't God. God is God. You treat the Bible as if it were God.

Do you believe in what is written in the “scriptures”?

Who do you believe is the author of “scriptures”, who caused it to be written?

*see post #805 for what I refer to “scriptures”.

cc @amadeus

Tong
R4806