1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

pauls teaching false?

Discussion in 'Christian Theology Forum' started by Born2die, Jan 2, 2007.

  1. Born2die

    Born2die New Member

    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have just found this http://www.box.net/public/b1u2uep83p on my hard drive. It is in PDF format.In it they go to great lengths to discredit paul and his teachngs as the work of satan. I was just wondering what your views on this are as it is the first time that I have come across somthing like this.Its a small 250kb file so not too large. I love the way thay summerise Romans, Galatians etc. I would post it here but it is a fair few pages long.Thanks in advance as this is confusing the heck out of me.tristian :study:
     
  2. HammerStone

    HammerStone Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    Likes Received:
    250
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Well, Tristian, I have to be blunt and say that this essay/article is full of it for a multitude of reasons.Number one, it takes verses way out of context which is typical for such drivel. Take what was stated on #7 of the little list there about I Corinthians 5:4-5. Anyone who reads this is context can see it's not saying what this alleges and butchers the translation and context. In fact, this is a denial of a very important teaching which is very Christian:1 Corinthians 5It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you. For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: 8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.Here it's clearly and expression on the fact that Paul was not actually there and was passing down this information from afar. These guys butchered this completely. It's a gross perversion of God's Word. If they choose to deny this bit of Scripture, let them, but let me remind you no one stands between anyone of the day of Judgment.Let's continue on and put this to rest...#3 - If you go by this then you deny that God can talk to us and has talked to us as humans. Clearly this sets the stage to deny much of the Old Testament in which Jesus himself quoted from.#5 is laughable - comparing one Saul to another. Is this writer not familiar with the concept that Judas's name appeared multiple times and wasn't always bad? This is a reaching statementPhilemon is useless? I say the author is useless at this point to be blunt. There's a lesson to be taken from Philemon about how we are supposed to act and it agrees wholeheartedly with what Jesus told us.#9 is beyond ridiculous. Anyone, at this point, should see what the author is grasping for here by this statement. What does a Cathedral baring one's name have to do with anything? There are all sorts of would-be churches that bare Christ's name yet we know their teachings to be wrong, but does that mean Christ was wrong?This person denies a lot of Scripture, I stopped reading at this point because it's frankly not worth my time. I recommend staying very far away from this nonsense and sticking with the Scriptures that have been around for thousands of years and not some religious nut who wants to tell you the majority of the Bible doesn't count.
     
  3. KarenCharin0

    KarenCharin0 New Member

    Messages:
    21
    Likes Received:
    0
    Paul teaches on 3 levels at the same time so he is hard to understand for me at least at times, but I truly believe things happened as he said. Daniel had a similar encounter....Dan 10:7 And I Daniel alone saw the vision: for the men that were with me saw not the vision; but a great quaking fell upon them, so that they fled to hide themselves. Dan 10:8 Therefore I was left alone, and saw this great vision, and there remained no strength in me: for my comeliness was turned in me into corruption, and I retained no strength. Dan 10:9 Yet heard I the voice of his words: and when I heard the voice of his words, then was I in a deep sleep on my face, and my face toward the ground. Before Paul's conversionAct 7:58 And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul. Act 7:59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. Act 7:60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep. Imagin the impact this must of had on Paul/Saul...... our Father knows one's heart and knows how to get our attention when we are fallowing the wrong path. If Paul had no dubts about his actions then why did he just hold the coats and not join in.... ? Act 9:1 And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, Act 9:2 And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem. Act 9:3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: Act 9:4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? Act 9:5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. Act 9:6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. Act 9:7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. Act 9:8 And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus. Act 9:9 And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink. Act 9:10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord. Act 9:11 And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth, Act 9:12 And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight. Act 9:13 Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem: Act 9:14 And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name. Act 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: Act 9:16 For I will show him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake. Act 9:17 And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. Act 9:18 And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized. Act 9:19 And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus. Act 9:20 And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God. Act 9:21 But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests? Act 9:22 But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ. Act 9:23 And after that many days were fulfilled, the Jews took counsel to kill him: Act 9:24 But their laying await was known of Saul. And they watched the gates day and night to kill him. Act 9:25 Then the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a basket. Act 9:26 And when Saul was come to Jerusalem, he attempted to join himself to the disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple. Act 9:27 But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles, and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus. Act 9:28 And he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem. Act 9:29 And he spake boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus, and disputed against the Grecians: but they went about to slay him. Act 9:30 Which when the brethren knew, they brought him down to Caesarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus. Act 9:31 Then had the churches rest throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied. I don't think we can read that account and still have doubts about Paul or our Father's words. What would Paul have had for a motive to do this on his own ? What would of satan gained ? Nothing that I can see...... but look what a wonderful witness for Christ his conversion made. Why would satan want to convert people to Christ and His teaching by making a great witness of Paul ? In your own words......
    Thanks in advance as this is confusing the heck out of me.
    Now who likes to cause dubt and confusion ? Who gains by causing you to dubt God's word.....Gen 3:1 Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? Gen 3:2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: Gen 3:3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. Gen 3:4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: Gen 3:5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. Now who is using the same method of operation that satan does here...... Paul ? or the one who wrote that article ?
     
  4. snaggs

    snaggs New Member

    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is a prime example of the twisted compulsions of imaginative theology..Twisting the work of "Alasdair MacIntyre" into some focused expression of imoral behavior within the Doctrinal Root of our Christian hope...If that was directed to be a dissertation at the Moral conduct and atributes of St Paul, it fell far short of even coming close to summerizing the complete ignorance of some peoples attempts to anylize morality. Obviously an empty shell of a man..who at least had enough sence to remain anonymous. Alasdair.. could only refer to Alasdair Macintyre..
     
  5. Christina

    Christina New Member

    Messages:
    10,900
    Likes Received:
    88
     
  6. BernieEOD

    BernieEOD New Member

    Messages:
    374
    Likes Received:
    0
    The bottom line is this:Liberal theologians need to discredit Paul in order so that they can press ahead on the false teachings and doctrines that Paul rebuked in his Epistles.Liberal theologians will declare that because Christ never preached against homosexuality all OT Laws forbidding such behavior are now null & Void.Fogetting the Fact that Christ ministered to the Jews who knew and upheld the Law as humanly possible for the Law to be upheld, it would have been preaching to the chior. When Paul brought the Gospel to the gentiles who were caught up in sexual imorality, the Word of God did call them out of such behavior. The early Churches Paul seeded began to make many of the very mistakes that todays Liberal Theologians want to pass off as new revilation.Another example is the teaching that Grace is a license to sin.In order to advance the liberal aganda, Paul needs to be disredited.
     
  7. snaggs

    snaggs New Member

    Messages:
    54
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  8. Born2die

    Born2die New Member

    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    0
    thanks for all the replys they have helped sort this out.I was very skeptical as I had never heard these ideas before and as you said it is trash talk.I will now delete the file but I would still love to know where it came from though?Many thanks to all of you for all the helpmany thankstristian:angel9:
     
  9. LittleSister

    LittleSister New Member

    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    1
    Let no man deceive you. Satan has taken Gods word and twisted it from the Garden of Eden. However, The word tells us to let every matter be confirmed by the testimony of two or three witnesses. II Corin 13:1, I Timothy 5:19, Matt 18:16, John 8:17Deut 19:15 They were more then likely taking under consideration that Paul had a issue with pride. Jesus told us to follow Him, But Paul, instead of saying follow Jesus, he says ‘follow ME as I follow Christ"Because Paul tried to be all things to all people, he sometimes told them things he knew they wanted to hear. Women should not teach. Well, look at Debra, she was a prophetess, and judge. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to look at the grave. Jesus said to them Do not be afraid; go and take word. Hum wouldn’t that be evangelism? So, Paul was wrong when he said women should not teach. If he was correct then Jesus is out of line with Gods word. Always look for two or more witnesses when you study. When your praying ask God to give you a second witness before you act on it.
     
  10. HammerStone

    HammerStone Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    Likes Received:
    250
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    Actually it was Timothy who addressed women teaching in the church in I Timothy 2:11-12. Keep in mind, though, that this was addressed to a married woman and is telling her not to speak over her husband because the two become one when they marry. God called upon Prophetesses as you pointed out and there are a number of cases where they were consulted. Philip's virgin daughters all went on to teach, for example.Paul's sayings came in I Corinthians 14:34-35 is directed at women who like to gossip. Now, take this with a light heart because men can do it to, but what sex really likes to gossip about things? This goes for the men too; when someone is teaching you don't interrupt - this includes comments about what so-and-so is wearing or how bad the preacher's wife looked today at Sunday School. This is what is being addressed here. It all goes back to Genesis 3:16.Finally, I know Paul can be seen as downright cocky from what he says in the Bible. I for one admire it because Paul was humble ultimately in his own way; Paul knew his faith and knew it well. It's good to be humble, but you need not sit around and apologize for how bad of a person you are otherwise you'll never get any teaching done. Paul had his faults and he admitted that but he was confident. His inspired-by-God writings remain in the Bible because he knew what he was talking about.The problem with this essay is it presents Paul in a completely different light than even looking at him as being arrogant. This chips away at a large chunk of the Bible and opens up room to take away other chunks, particularly the Old Testament solely because set author doesn't agree. It's either God's Word or it isn't. One cannot just select the sections one likes and ignore the others. If God cared enough to send his only Son, he most certainly would make sure that His Word was passed down in the proper manner for understanding. This is all part of that New Age nonsense where Scripture is repeatedly taken and molded into something else. The ironic thing is, this was what was done thousands of years ago in Eden and it's been done ever since.
     
  11. servant_of_the_end

    servant_of_the_end New Member

    Messages:
    152
    Likes Received:
    1
    We have our brother Peter saying this in his epistle:2Pet 3:15b ...just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16 He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction...The writer of your paper would have to conclude that Peter was just as deceived as Paul for recognizing what Paul wrote as scripture. And Peter also, in these verses, concludes that some have a hard time understanding just what Paul is saying, and for it, then they twist his words to mean something they do not. The writer and his critique was predicted by Peter many years ago.
     
  12. HammerStone

    HammerStone Well-Known Member Staff Member

    Messages:
    5,110
    Likes Received:
    250
    Faith:
    Christian
    Country:
    United States
    This woman had an issue with interrupting other people, her being married had nothing to do with it. Yes, two become one, she doesn’t become him, a silent shadow, nor does she stop being an individual.
    Right. That's what I was saying - the letter in Timothy was addressed to a petulant woman(who was married) but it serves as an example to all. What this is addressing is women who gossip and speak out when they are part of the church. When the woman speaks out, what she says directly reflects on the husband. This can quickly become a problem if she's gossiping and telling lies in the process, it really hurts the credibility of the husband who might otherwise be a great man and a good teacher within the church. The converse of this is just true as well. The two become one because your actions will reflect on the other.
    **Men were not?
    Why would you infer this from what I said at all? I'm afraid you have lost me here, I'm specifically addressing the role of prophetesses in the Bible not the role of both prophets and prophetesses.
    Are you referring to the curse Jesus broke the cross? Gal. 3:13(2nd witness Deuteronomy 21:23) ‘Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us. – for it is written ‘CURSED IS EVERYONE HEO HANGS ON A TREE’ in order that in Christ the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith." If you are a child of God you are no longer under the curse. (But be it unto you according to your faith.) The blessings of Abraham are in Deuteronomy 28, and I see nothing concerning multiplied pain in childbirth, or the husband ruling over the wife.
    Hold your horses a moment here. When God spoke to Adam and Eve, this had nothing to do with the Law, you're confusing two entirely different concepts here.Genesis 3:14-19And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life: And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee. And unto Adam he said, Because thou hast hearkened unto the voice of thy wife, and hast eaten of the tree, of which I commanded thee, saying, Thou shalt not eat of it: cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee; and thou shalt eat the herb of the field; In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return.What was said above was fulfilled by Jesus but this was not at all to be confused with law. Satan is still cursed, that was certainly not changed. He stands, now, as the only one condemned to the lake of fire. Jesus was of the seed of Eve and he was fulfillment of the first spoken prophecy in the Bible. As for the rest, do we not still labor to get our food and when we die do not our physical bodies return to dust? That never changed and this should not be confused with the Law otherwise known as the Law of Moses.Christ's redeeming grace was in that he was our one and all sacrifice:Ephesians 5:2And walk in love, as Christ also hath loved us, and hath given himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweetsmelling savour.Meaning that we no longer have to offer up sacrifices to God when we sin. All we have to do is ask for forgiveness. Remember that Jesus himself said that:Matthew 5:17-19Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.All is not fulfilled because we have a whole lot of Scripture that awaits its time to be fulfilled in our time. Heaven and earth have yet to pass away. The commandments (think like the 10 Commandments) still stand by all means. What was done away with were the other 1000+ precepts of the ordinances and ceremonial law needed to cleanse ourselves. The curse of the law was than man worried more about fulfilling the law than they did about God. Hosea 6:6, he desires nothing but your love, not all the burnt offerings in the world mean anything if he doesn't have it.
    My point I was trying to make was that to understand what parts of the bible we should apply to our lives today, should be determined by two or more witnesses.
    Again, you're confusing this with an entirely different concept.The two or three witnesses verses come in Deut. 17:6, Deut. 19:5, and Matthew 18:6. All of which address specifically following God's law and establishing the consequences for someone (see the verses in context for proof of this). If you have one man make an accusation against another, then you have nothing but word against word. If you have two or more witnesses, then you have a sold degree of proof if the stories collaborate. This isn't anything to do with "validating" Scripture.I saved the other appearance of the phrase for a reason because it was a direct quote from previous Scripture. The quote also was made by none other than Paul himself. Why would he ever violate his own sayings and realization from Scripture? It just doesn't make sense. Man is man but Paul was no idiot.The rest can be summed up by this. The apostles were men, you and are of men(mankind), sure. However, you're leaving out a very big influence. God, and more specifically the Holy Spirit. He influences them in what they do and us in what we do. God warned us several times not to tamper with anything in His Word:Deuteronomy 4:2Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.Deuteronomy 12:32What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.Revelation 22:17-18For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.You either take it, or leave. It God cared enough to send us His son than you can rest assured that he cared enough to send you a letter (the Bible) that you can read without having to be concerned about picking through it to the find the right stuff. I am not a fan of this picking and choosing Scripture because it gets a little difficult to understand and doesn't seemingly agree with how we feel.I would like to point out that going on what you said above, there is a HUGE contradiction to be found. You said the the entire Law, lumping in what was said in Genesis 3 and making it a broad definition, was nailed to the cross. If that is what is the case, then what you quoted from Deut. would not hold water either. If that were the case, as you put forth, then why did Jesus quote it and then Paul quote it yet again? You can't have both. The thing is, with the verse you provided, it talks about the curse of the law which is manifest in the slavery to it before Christ came along. Christ himself told us he isn't here to change anything; He is here to serve as the one time sacrifice so that we have God's grace when we screw up.Paul was a servant of Christ and his writings were in there for a reason as the divinely inspired Word of God. Who are we to chose what should be in the Word of God?
     
  13. LittleSister

    LittleSister New Member

    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    1
    Well, I can see this conversation is going into to many different directions to keep up with. However, God said we are created in His image, and I DO NOT take a verse here and a verse there to make God into my image or what I want Him to be. God said 'If you seek Me, you will find Me, if you search for Me with all your heart' So, sooner or later we should all come down to the same belief because there is only ONE truth, and ONE ture God.
     
  14. ROS777

    ROS777 New Member

    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    3
    Not only was Paul's teaching 100% true and honest but he was one of the most admirable teachers in the Bible.He never begged for money.He always paid his own way and worked with his own two hands.( He was a tentmaker )He excepted donations but they were free will donations.He showed an incrediable amount of devotion and love for the Lord, his students and people in general.He was smart, acknowledgable and humble.He didn't have any gimmicks like a lot of preachers have today.Shyster preachers of today that rip people off, especially those on fixed incomes and the elderly.
     
Loading...