Paul was not qualified to be an apostle

[oldhermit]

Probably. But claiming you know something is true when you cannot know it is true, is not a truth. Paul is saying that he is quoting the Lord.

So does Peter.

Paul also says the Lord told him that women are to remain silent in church.

That is correct.

1 Cor 14: 34 Women[f] should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the law says.35 If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.[g]36 Or did the word of God originate with you? Or are you the only people it has reached? 37 If anyone thinks they are a prophet or otherwise gifted by the Spirit, let them acknowledge that what I am writing to you is the Lord’s command.

He does not say, as you said in a post to another that it only applies to the church in Cornith. "Women are to remain silent in the churches."

I never said it only applied to the Church at Corinth. I said that it applies to all the Church of every generation. Paul said that what he taught, he taught in ALL the Churches. He also gave this same instruction to the Church at Ephesus.

What Paul does not say in Acts 22:21 is that God titled him the 13th apostle.

What is does say is that the Lord did apostle him. Read it in the Greek. It is very clear.

I wish you would just tell me what you mean by that exactly. Are you saying that whatever Paul wrote comes from God,

YES!

or can his writing contain his own human understanding that includes human error, prejudices, and opinions that are not from God? Please answer directly.

Scripture is not the product of human intelligence or wisdom. That is the kind of nonsense that is found in the pseudo documents. There is no error found in scripture.

See how you word your argument that pits me, a mere person, against the holy sacred testimony of scripture. LOL.
My problem is heretical ways people use scripture as a club to beat people over the head to believe heretical doctrines that they don't obey in practice.

Perhaps you are starting from the wrong vantage point. Maybe I can help you with that.

 

[cfultz3]

The first 3 are Paul calling Paul an apostle, the fourth is an unknown writer, probably Luke, calling Paul an apostle (kinda, maybe, sort of), but none of these are God calling Paul an apostle.

Try again.

In fact, all 9 verses which say Paul is an apostle is him calling himself an apostle. And if we take the word 'apostle' for what it means "delegate, one who is sent, ambassador of the Gospel' then I am certain Scripture says that he was sent with a message to the Gentiles. And if luck will have it, someone will supply the verses.....

 

[Dwark]

So, are you saying that whatever is written in the bible is directly from God then?-Dwark

I cannot speak for 4enlightment but, this is precisely what I have been trying to get you to understand.

Oh, very good then.

God tells us that this is not true. This is the part of the reason why God was ripping on the Sadducees and Pharisees.

Moses, in "holy spirit inspired scripture from the mouth of God that does not error" Deut 24 wrote that a man can simply give his wife a writ for divorce if he finds something displeasing about her. Like, she aged, or burnt toast, or is not as pretty as that 20 something girl anymore. The way the Jews practiced this "from the mouth of God scripture" pretty much guaranteed a whole bunch of previously married, disgraced, unmarriable women were going to earn food by prostituing themselves. Which worked out great for traders a long way from home. But I digress.

Jesus tells them that what Moses said, and was observed as "from the mouth of God scripture" was not from God.

Matthew 19:3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” 4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.” 7 They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?” 8 He said to them, “For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity,[a] and marries another, commits adultery.”[b]

Okay, this is where it gets fun. The disciples are so upset by this they exclaim.

10 The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry.”

And then Paul changes it again. Where as God specifically states unchastity is the only grounds for divorce, Paul corrects God by saying 1 Cor 7:15 But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. For God has called us


Scripture is written by man about God and sometimes God interjects into that conversation with man that is our scripture. But, it is written by man. That does not make it bad. On the contrary, it frees us from the evils of men to abuse scripture to make man bend to their will.

 

[GISMYS]

PRAY FOR WISDOM AND UNDERSTANDING!!! OR DO YOU REALLY WANT TO ALLOW SATANTO USE YOU AS HIS TOOL AND FOOL???????????

 

[Dwark]

In fact, all 9 verses which say Paul is an apostle is him calling himself an apostle. And if we take the word 'apostle' for what it means "delegate, one who is sent, ambassador of the Gospel' then I am certain Scripture says that he was sent with a message to the Gentiles. And if luck will have it, someone will supply the verses.....

Different set of verses we were speaking of.

In the Jewish tradition a Rabbi selected from his group of disciples a few that he called apostle for a specific task. That is what the word means. Jesus, a Jew and Rabbi, followed that tradition, and ethnocentrism does not give us the right to change its meaning.

 

[oldhermit]

So, are you saying that whatever is written in the bible is directly from God then?-Dwark

Oh, very good then.

God tells us that this is not true. This is the part of the reason why God was ripping on the Sadducees and Pharisees.

Moses, in "holy spirit inspired scripture from the mouth of God that does not error" Deut 24 wrote that a man can simply give his wife a writ for divorce if he finds something displeasing about her. Like, she aged, or burnt toast, or is not as pretty as that 20 something girl anymore. The way the Jews practiced this "from the mouth of God scripture" pretty much guaranteed a whole bunch of previously married, disgraced, unmarriable women were going to earn food by prostituing themselves. Which worked out great for traders a long way from home. But I digress.

Jesus tells them that what Moses said, and was observed as "from the mouth of God scripture" was not from God.

Matthew 19:3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one’s wife for any cause?” 4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.” 7 They said to him, “Why then did Moses command one to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?” 8 He said to them, “For your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity,[a] and marries another, commits adultery.”[b]

Okay, this is where it gets fun. The disciples are so upset by this they exclaim.

10 The disciples said to him, “If such is the case of a man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry.”

And then Paul changes it again. Where as God specifically states unchastity is the only grounds for divorce, Paul corrects God by saying 1 Cor 7:15 But if the unbelieving partner desires to separate, let it be so; in such a case the brother or sister is not bound. For God has called us


Scripture is written by man about God and sometimes God interjects into that conversation with man that is our scripture. But, it is written by man. That does not make it bad. On the contrary, it frees us from the evils of men to abuse scripture to make man bend to their will.

No wonder you are having such a problem with scripture. "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God," 1 Peter 3:20-21.

 

[Dwark]

So, are you saying that whatever is written in the bible is directly from God then?-Dwark



No wonder you are having such a problem with scripture. "But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God," 1 Peter 3:20-21.

Are you going to turtle up and play Catholic on me?

That was one of the few good things about the reformation, each person can read it for themselves.

Moses said one thing, and that was practiced as "from the mouth of God" to the ruin and demise of many women.

Christ corrected Moses' teaching; to the shock of even the disciples who thought it would be better not to marry than to be stuck with the same women you married.

Then Paul said another thing, and that may be why Protestants have a higher divorce rate than Atheists.



Ironic that the Godless obey God in action more than the Protestants who have the "Holy inspired from the mouth of God without error" scripture; Well, the parts they have left, the parts they haven't taken out, and the parts that fit their heretical doctrines. And when the fragment that they have left doesn't conform to their heresies they can wash it away by claiming it is a "mystery" or let the other people interpret that for you because they will give an explanation that may not be what the words say, but they will conform to the "orthodox" way.

 

[zone]

so, the reformation was good because we can all read it, but the reformation was bad because some people are not honest and pure enough to obey the primitive law?

Moses said one thing, and that was practiced as "from the mouth of God" to the ruin and demise of many women.

Christ corrected Moses' teaching; to the shock of even the disciples who thought it would be better not to marry than to be stuck with the same women you married.

Then Paul said another thing, and that may be why Protestants have a higher divorce rate than Atheists.

Verse 8. - Moses because of (πρὸς, with a view to, to meet) the hardness of your hearts; your obstinacy, perverseness. You were not honest and pure enough to obey the primitive law. There was danger that you would ill treat your wives in order to get rid of them, or even murder them. The lesser evil was regular divorce.

But the enactment is really a shame and reproach to you, and was occasioned by grave defects in your character and conduct.

And it is not true to say that Moses commanded; he only suffered you to put away your wives. This was a temporary permission to meet your then circumstances. Divorce had been practised commonly and long; it was traditional; it was seen among all other Oriental peoples. Moses could not hope at once to eradicate the inveterate evil; he could only modify, mitigate, and regulate its practice.

The rules which he introduced were intended, not to facilitate divorce, but to lead men better to realize the proper idea of marriage. And Christ was introducing a better law, a higher morality, for which Mosaic legislation paved the way (comp. Romans 5:20; Romans 8:3; Hebrews 9:10).

From the beginning. The original institution of marriage contained no idea of divorce; it was no mere civil contract, made by man and dissoluble by man, but a union of God's own formation, with which no human power could interfere. However novel this view might seem, it was God's own design from the first. The first instance of polygamy occurs in Genesis 4:19, and is connected with murder and revenge. - Pulpit

 

[chilianman54]

I would like to put this all in perspective and add that whoever this person is, LovePink is her screen name, lacks understanding. Clearly the Apostle Paul sets forth in 1 Corinthians 15:8 that he was an eye witness to the risen Lord. This statement comes on the heels of his claim to the authenticity of the bodily resurrection of Christ. Paul states in another epistle, or it may be in Acts that he spent 14 years in the wilderness, and during that period of time scholars believe that the Apostle Paul was visited by the risen Lord and was given a complete Gospel from Sinai to the resurrection. For someone to come into this website and to make such outlandish statements with little or no Biblical support requires those with the proper response to speak up. I appreciate all of those who responded to this fallacious claim.

 

[2Thewaters]

You should change the title on this thread it is deceiving.

The only qualification you need is Jesus picking you.

 

[Dwark]

so, the reformation was good because we can all read it, but the reformation was bad because some people are not honest and pure enough to obey the primitive law?

I do not know what you mean by primitive law.

I would say that the reformation was bad because it changed Christianity from what God said to cherry picked verses of what Paul said, and the two are equally as incompatible as they are compatible.

This new "Christianity" is a perversion.

Verse 8. - Moses because of (πρὸς, with a view to, to meet) the hardness of your hearts; your obstinacy, perverseness. You were not honest and pure enough to obey the primitive law. There was danger that you would ill treat your wives in order to get rid of them, or even murder them. The lesser evil was regular divorce.

But the enactment is really a shame and reproach to you, and was occasioned by grave defects in your character and conduct.

And it is not true to say that Moses commanded; he only suffered you to put away your wives. This was a temporary permission to meet your then circumstances. Divorce had been practised commonly and long; it was traditional; it was seen among all other Oriental peoples. Moses could not hope at once to eradicate the inveterate evil; he could only modify, mitigate, and regulate its practice.

The rules which he introduced were intended, not to facilitate divorce, but to lead men better to realize the proper idea of marriage. And Christ was introducing a better law, a higher morality, for which Mosaic legislation paved the way (comp. Romans 5:20; Romans 8:3; Hebrews 9:10).

From the beginning. The original institution of marriage contained no idea of divorce; it was no mere civil contract, made by man and dissoluble by man, but a union of God's own formation, with which no human power could interfere. However novel this view might seem, it was God's own design from the first.

A rose by another name, is still a rose.

Got to love them spin Doctors.

It says what it says.

The first instance of polygamy occurs in Genesis 4:19, and is connected with murder and revenge. - Pulpit

BTW, Luther stated that there is nothing in scripture to prevent polygamy. He said this in a letter to a Nobel, benefactor, who wanted another wife and wanted Luther to ok it.

Luther was a very bad man, and it sends a shutter to see you name yourself as his follower.

 

[cfultz3]

Different set of verses we were speaking of.

In the Jewish tradition a Rabbi selected from his group of disciples a few that he called apostle for a specific task. That is what the word means. Jesus, a Jew and Rabbi, followed that tradition, and ethnocentrism does not give us the right to change its meaning.

the meaning I presented for 'apostle', as being: 'delegate, one who is sent, ambassador of the Gospel', is not what I have defined it as, but was taken from the Strong definition and is the same word which was used of the original 12 Apostles.

G652 ἀπόστολος apostolos ap-os'-tol-os

From G649; a delegate; specifically an ambassador of the Gospel; officially a commissioner of Christ (“apostle”), (with miraculous powers): - apostle, messenger, he that is sent.​

And if we would, let us go to G649 and see that Strong definition also.

G649 ἀποστέλλω apostellō ap-os-tel'-lo

From G575 and G4724; set apart, that is, (by implication) to send out (properly on a mission) literally or figuratively: - put in, send (away, forth, out), set [at liberty].​

I am certain that Paul was sent on a 'specific task' to the Gentiles by Christ Himself, starting from the meeting on the road. Therefore, by your very definition you have presented in the replied to post, Paul must have been made an apostle by that resurrected Jew and Rabbi. Correct?

There were no ethnocentric prejudices involved when I gave that definition, but simply went to Scripture and searched.

 

[LovePink]

You should change the title on this thread it is deceiving.

The only qualification you need is Jesus picking you.

Oh can I change the title? Because people don't seem to get the body of the subject, nor do they want to address or agree there were criteria set forth by Scripture for qualifying the ordained position Matthias filled, of which Paul did not qualify, even if we were just honest with the fact he was a blasphemer, as one point of truth.

Also, there is the fact, that from my first post I asked what did God do, in His wisdom, to make the Apostle Paul "meet" to be a partaker in the ministry of reconciliation. Well, as plainly set forth in Scripture, God changed the dispensation.

The book of Acts is a transitional book in the preserved arrangement. Paul is the Apostle chosen for the dispensation of the grace of God. Most churches don't teach this truth, the bible does. Most churches do teach and agree Paul is the aposle to the gentiles, but they don't teach the truth of the gospel message given to Paul for our salvation, because it conflicts with their theology and pet doctrines.

 

[Ariel82]

Paul is the Apostle chosen for the dispensation of the grace of God. Most churches don't teach this truth, the bible does. Most churches do teach and agree Paul is the aposle to the gentiles, but they don't teach the truth of the gospel message given to Paul for our salvation, because it conflicts with their theology and pet doctrines.

quite a few churches teach about dispensations....

what "truth of the gospel message given to Paul for our salvation" do you feel that most churches don't teach and how would it conflict with "their theology and pet doctrines"?


could you clarify what "their theology and pet doctrines" refers to?

 

[2Thewaters]

Quite a few churches .... they have to invent dispensationalism

which covers the fact they are tearing out parts of the bible they dont like.

Because their members would not stay with them if that doctrine werent removed from their creed

 

[2Thewaters]

Dispensationalism = Keep the sinners happy and blind.

 

[cfultz3]

Re: You Can Change it Like this

Oh can I change the title?

Everyone will have to change it until the posts replied to all have the desired title .....

 

[oldhermit]

Moses said one thing, and that was practiced as "from the mouth of God" to the ruin and demise of many women
Christ corrected Moses' teaching; to the shock of even the disciples who thought it would be better not to marry than to be stuck with the same women you married.No. Jesus never corrected anything that.

1. Jesus NEVER corrected anything Moses presented in the Law. What he often corrected was the Pharisee's misunderstanding and perversion of the things Moses wrote.
2. The Scripture always regards the Law of Moses as good, holy, pure, just, and right. Its origin was not the mind of Moses but the mouth of God.

It is very clear that your problem is simply that you do not know how to approach this book. I would like to try to help you with this, if you are not too proud.

 

[nathan3]

Quite a few churches .... they have to invent dispensationalism

which covers the fact they are tearing out parts of the bible they dont like.

Because their members would not stay with them if that doctrine werent removed from their creed

I'm not sure what people, do with the phrase dispensation, But it is mentioned in the Bible. There are times things take place, and to be observed.

People fall pray to muddying easily, for example:

The roman solders gambled for Christ clothing, Now most have read about this in God's words, but some have only heard about it from others. While you know, others will not have read for themselves, and fall victim to muddying of the word, it gos something like this, and this takes many forms :

The roman solders gabbing for clothing is a doctrine started by the Endorite peoples otherwise known as the Zonians, of south Hungary , they say its were the phrase "shirt off your back began ". For their practice was to strip people bare and sell the clothing off to fund their churches .

The church started in 1000 AD near Rome .In bid to win favor with the people and their monetary support often told the people to loose their sin, they must sell their food they grew ,often apples ( which they saw as symbolic of a snake, to expand their church) Most of the churches today recognize the Endorites started the teaching of the solders gambling for clothing. Today, the Endorite cult is part of many Christians today, and they dont even know it...


Now, Non of what I wrote there is true.... The Roman soldiers gambling for Christ clothing Is written. But what did the lie do, it muddied the water, and got people thinking something belonging in God's words; some how originated with a cult.
But they don't know the difference because they go off 2nd , 3rd , and 4th hand information regarding The word, they should have been studying and checking out rom the start.

Likewise people don't understand what dispensations of times are, even though its written , because its associated with a group, or something people don't like, so they in ignorance attack God's words, and ascribe it as a teaching out side of scriptures . There turning God's words to non effect to people that listen to the stories rather then knowing what the Bible really teaches for themselves .





Ephesians 1:10

King James Version (KJV)

10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:


1 Corinthians 9:17


The word "times" here means :

καιρός

kairos

kahee-ros'

Of uncertain affinity; an {occasion} that {is} set or proper time: - X {always} {opportunity} ({convenient} due) {season} ({due} {short} while) {time} a while. Compare G5550 .

G5550

χρόνος

chronos

khron'-os etc.



I just hope people dont go along with the crowed if it means that the water is going to get muddied .

 

[nathan3]

There is no such thing as the , Endorite peoples otherwise known as the Zonians, of south Hungary . But how would you know unless you stopped listening to everything people tell you and study God's words .