The Apostle, Paul.

[tosca1]

This thread was inspired by this statement:

Originally Posted by Captain Adverse

Well, in the first place I do not consider Paul of Tarsus an "apostle."

I don't think I'd ever encountered anyone who'd expressed that opinion, thus I'm very much interested to engage you on this. I have quite a few questions, but to start.....


Captain Adverse, why do you consider the others as Apostles of Christ, and yet not Paul?

 

[Unrepresented]

I agree with the good Captain: if you've never conversed with someone in their earthly body, it's hard to count you as an apostle.

 

[tosca1]

Paul was not an apostle in the traditional sense, nevertheless it appears from the book of Acts and 2 Peter 3 that he was accepted by the twelve as an apostle, even if not one in exactly the same way they were. As a matter of fact, they'd entrusted to him the ministry of the Gentiles!



Acts 15
The Council at Jerusalem

15 Certain people came down from Judea to Antioch and were teaching the believers: “Unless you are circumcised, according to the custom taught by Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 This brought Paul and Barnabas into sharp dispute and debate with them. So Paul and Barnabas were appointed, along with some other believers, to go up to Jerusalem to see the apostles and elders about this question. 3 The church sent them on their way, and as they traveled through Phoenicia and Samaria, they told how the Gentiles had been converted. This news made all the believers very glad. 4 When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and elders, to whom they reported everything God had done through them.

5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”

6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

12 The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul telling about the signs and wonders God had done among the Gentiles through them. 13 When they finished, James spoke up. “Brothers,” he said, “listen to me. 14 Simon[a] has described to us how God first intervened to choose a people for his name from the Gentiles. 15 The words of the prophets are in agreement with this, as it is written:

16
“‘After this I will return
and rebuild David’s fallen tent.
Its ruins I will rebuild,
and I will restore it,
17
that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord,
even all the Gentiles who bear my name,
says the Lord, who does these things’—
18
things known from long ago.[c]

19 “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood. 21 For the law of Moses has been preached in every city from the earliest times and is read in the synagogues on every Sabbath.”
The Council’s Letter to Gentile Believers

22 Then the apostles and elders, with the whole church, decided to choose some of their own men and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas. They chose Judas (called Barsabbas) and Silas, men who were leaders among the believers. 23 With them they sent the following letter:

The apostles and elders, your brothers,

To the Gentile believers in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia:

Greetings.

24 We have heard that some went out from us without our authorization and disturbed you, troubling your minds by what they said. 25 So we all agreed to choose some men and send them to you with our dear friends Barnabas and Paul— 26 men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27 Therefore we are sending Judas and Silas to confirm by word of mouth what we are writing. 28 It seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us not to burden you with anything beyond the following requirements: 29 You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood, from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality. You will do well to avoid these things.

Farewell.

30 So the men were sent off and went down to Antioch, where they gathered the church together and delivered the letter. 31 The people read it and were glad for its encouraging message. 32 Judas and Silas, who themselves were prophets, said much to encourage and strengthen the believers. 33 After spending some time there, they were sent off by the believers with the blessing of peace to return to those who had sent them. [34] [d] 35 But Paul and Barnabas remained in Antioch, where they and many others taught and preached the word of the Lord.

 

[tosca1]

2 Peter 3 supports Acts 15.




2 Peter 3
14 So then, dear friends, since you are looking forward to this, make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with him. 15 Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, 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.

17 Therefore, dear friends, since you have been forewarned, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of the lawless and fall from your secure position. 18 But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever! Amen.

 

[tosca1]

I agree with the good Captain: if you've never conversed with someone in their earthly body, it's hard to count you as an apostle.

Please review your statement. It doesn't sound right - at least, not in the biblical sense.
Perhaps you need to expand on it?

 

[Gardener]

I agree with the good Captain: if you've never conversed with someone in their earthly body, it's hard to count you as an apostle.

I agree. Paul the usurper was no apostle.


But Mary Magdaline, on the other hand, WAS an apostle who wasn't credited as such.

 

[tosca1]

I agree. Paul the usurper was no apostle.

Without providing any explanation as to how you came to that conclusion - I cannot accept that as an argument.

I'm not interested to hear any opinion that are not supported by anything!
I'm here to engage in a discussion - serious discussion/debate.

 

[tosca1]

Who wrote the Book of Acts?

Captain Adverse and all the rest who share the same view regarding Paul, kindly answer - who wrote the Book of Acts?

 

[Gardener]

Without providing any explanation as to how you came to that conclusion - I cannot accept that as an argument.

I'm not interested to hear any opinion that are not supported by anything!
I'm here to engage in a discussion - serious discussion/debate.

You are not interested in any opinion that diverges from your own, true.

That tends to eliminate serious discussion instead of fostering it, however.

 

[Goshin]

Acts chapter 9...

And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,
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.

And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:
And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
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.
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.

And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
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.
And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.
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.

And the Lord [said] unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for [one] called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth,
And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting [his] hand on him, that he might receive his sight.
Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.
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:

For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
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.
And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.
And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.
And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God....




Frankly, I think that if you are at all inclined to believe in the Bible, the above is pretty clear: Paul was called upon by God to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. Ignoring his writings as non-scriptural is pretty thin ice.

 

[Captain Adverse]

This thread was inspired by this statement:



I don't think I'd ever encountered anyone who'd expressed that opinion, thus I'm very much interested to engage you on this. I have quite a few questions, but to start.....


Captain Adverse, why do you consider the others as Apostles of Christ, and yet not Paul?

First I want to correct myself by stating that I misspoke when I listed "Luke" as one of the 12 Apostles. I meant to state that the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, and John provide the direct Word of God. That Luke, who has been ascribed as the author of the two books of Luke and Acts, was Luke the Evangelist. He was a disciple of Paul, and wrote what he had been told of Jesus by those who knew him, and what he observed while traveling with Paul. He never actually met Jesus.

Paul put himself forward as an Apostle, claiming that his encounter with the Light and Voice of Christ while traveling the road to Damascus entitled him to that privilege. He was in constant conflict with the surviving original Apostles, both for this claim and his efforts to convert gentiles without requiring they adhere to Jewish law, especially as it applied to the covenant which required circumcision.

It took the support of Peter to overcome the circumcision requirement; as Peter allowed that Jesus wanted his message spread to all, not just the Jews.

Recall, Paul's claim to have encountered Jesus is first described in Acts 9:3-9;

3 As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"

5 "Who are you, Lord?" Saul asked.

"I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting," he replied. 6 "Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do."

7 The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. 8 Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. 9 For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything.

Then Jesus uses Ananias of Damascus to heal Paul and "instruct him." (Act 9:11-19).

HOWEVER, in Acts 26:9-18 Paul himself tells a somewhat different story:

12 Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests,

13 At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me.

14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.

16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; 17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, 18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Notice the underlined portions in each description? That in the first description Paul is merely told the light is Jesus, that he would be told later what his instructions would be, and is then struck blind for three days. Jesus then uses Ananias to instruct Paul on his duties.

Not so in the second description that Paul gives to King Agrippa per Acts 26.

Why would the incident have two different descriptions? Surely a direct encounter with the Lord would be seared into the mind of Paul such that only one description, the CORRECT one, would appear in Acts?

This is one reason I doubt.

 

[Goshin]

First I want to correct myself by stating that I misspoke when I listed "Luke" as one of the 12 Apostles. I meant to state that the Gospels according to Matthew, Mark, and John provide the direct Word of God. That Luke, who has been ascribed as the author of the two books of Luke and Acts, was Luke the Evangelist. He was a disciple of Paul, and wrote what he had been told of Jesus by those who knew him, and what he observed while traveling with Paul. He never actually met Jesus.

Paul put himself forward as an Apostle, claiming that his encounter with the Light and Voice of Christ while traveling the road to Damascus entitled him to that privilege. He was in constant conflict with the surviving original Apostles, both for this claim and his efforts to convert gentiles without requiring they adhere to Jewish law, especially as it applied to the covenant which required circumcision.

It took the support of Peter to overcome the circumcision requirement; as Peter allowed that Jesus wanted his message spread to all, not just the Jews.

Recall, Paul's claim to have encountered Jesus is first described in Acts 9:3-9;

3 As he neared Damascus on his journey, suddenly a light from heaven flashed around him. 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice say to him, "Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?"

5 "Who are you, Lord?" Saul asked.

"I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting," he replied. 6 "Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do."

7 The men traveling with Saul stood there speechless; they heard the sound but did not see anyone. 8 Saul got up from the ground, but when he opened his eyes he could see nothing. So they led him by the hand into Damascus. 9 For three days he was blind, and did not eat or drink anything.

Then Jesus uses Ananias of Damascus to heal Paul and "instruct him." (Act 9:11-19).

HOWEVER, in Acts 26:9-18 Paul himself tells a somewhat different story:

12 Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests,

13 At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me.

14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 15 And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.

16 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; 17 Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, 18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Notice the underlined portions in each description? That in the first description Paul is merely told the light is Jesus, that he would be told later what his instructions would be, and is then struck blind for three days. Jesus then uses Ananias to instruct Paul on his duties.

Not so in the second description that Paul gives to King Agrippa per Acts 26.

Why would the incident have two different descriptions? Surely a direct encounter with the Lord would be seared into the mind of Paul such that only one description, the CORRECT one, would appear in Acts?

This is one reason I doubt.

You've never told someone about an incident and maybe told it a little differently to two different people at different times, different circumstances and places?

The second is almost exactly like the first, except it seems a bit "summarized" and kind of mashes the original encounter together with what was soon after revealed to be Paul's mission from God. A paraphrase of sorts, but very similar to Acts 9 in toto.


It seems to me if you're going to discount Paul using this line of argument, then you're going to need to throw out Acts and Luke too. NT is getting threadbare and thin...

 

[Unrepresented]

Please review your statement. It doesn't sound right - at least, not in the biblical sense.
Perhaps you need to expand on it?

The historical figure named Jesus lived and died without encountering Paul.

 

[Captain Adverse]

First of all, meeting GOD would not be the same as meeting some random person.

Second of all, you missed the intro. Read it again and you will see I corrected my errors and "threw out Luke and Acts" in the original reply you just quoted.

 

[X Factor]

Acts chapter 9...

And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,
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.

And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:
And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
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.
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.

And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
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.
And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.
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.

And the Lord [said] unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for [one] called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth,
And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting [his] hand on him, that he might receive his sight.
Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem:
And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.
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:

For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
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.
And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.
And when he had received meat, he was strengthened. Then was Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.
And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God....




Frankly, I think that if you are at all inclined to believe in the Bible, the above is pretty clear: Paul was called upon by God to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. Ignoring his writings as non-scriptural is pretty thin ice.

The Apostle Paul was always one of my favorites. We Gentiles would have been screwed without him.

 

[Goshin]

The historical figure named Jesus lived and died without encountering Paul.

Do you believe Jesus arose from the dead? Straight up question. yes or no.

 

[Captain Adverse]

...We Gentiles would have been screwed without him.

Pretty much what I said in the thread that caused Tosca to start this one:

I never said I discarded Paul entirely. Without his good works in expanding the Church I don't think organized Christianity would be what it is today. That said, I still think he was merely a man and some of his words were based, as with many fellow Christians today, on what he thought best reflected his understanding of the teachings of Christ.

What more can one ask of a fellow Christian?

 

[Captain Adverse]

Do you believe Jesus arose from the dead? Straight up question. yes or no.

That's an easy one. YES! Of course!

 

[Goshin]

First of all, meeting GOD would not be the same as meeting some random person.

Second of all, you missed the intro. Read it again and you will see I corrected my errors and "threw out Luke and Acts" in the original reply you just quoted.

Ok. So you have no interest in the writings of any but the original 12 then? Makes for a short NT.


Edit: scratch that, I see your post above.

 

[Unrepresented]

Do you believe Jesus arose from the dead? Straight up question. yes or no.

I do not.

 

[Goshin]

Okay, let me back up and re-start from here:

I never said I discarded Paul entirely. Without his good works in expanding the Church I don't think organized Christianity would be what it is today. That said, I still think he was merely a man and some of his words were based, as with many fellow Christians today, on what he thought best reflected his understanding of the teachings of Christ.

What more can one ask of a fellow Christian?

Ok, that's sort of a more reasonable position that tossing Paul out entirely.

In an above post though, you seem to cast doubt on whether Saul/Paul actually encountered Jesus (in his post-incarnate spiritual form) on the road to Damascus at all, due to a second description of the encounter being somewhat different from the first.

Erm... so what exactly DO you think of Paul? Was he a liar? Was he a sincere and genuine but flawed preacher of the Word? The two seem incompatible...

 

[X Factor]

Pretty much what I said in the thread that caused Tosca to start this one:

I also identify with a lot he struggled with. That's pretty bold or perhaps arrogant, on your part, to be throwing stuff out that you, what, don't like? Disagree with? You're saying that Paul was not actually inspired by God so he's just getting it wrong left and right?

 

[Goshin]

I do not.

Thank you. Just wondered where you stand.


Now we know where you're coming from.

 

[X Factor]

Okay, let me back up and re-start from here:





Ok, that's sort of a more reasonable position that tossing Paul out entirely.

In an above post though, you seem to cast doubt on whether Saul/Paul actually encountered Jesus (in his post-incarnate spiritual form) on the road to Damascus at all, due to a second description of the encounter being somewhat different from the first.

Erm... so what exactly DO you think of Paul? Was he a liar? Was he a sincere and genuine but flawed preacher of the Word? The two seem incompatible...

I think he's calling him a braggart.

 

[Unrepresented]

Thank you. Just wondered where you stand.


Now we know where you're coming from.

I say that hoping that I won't be viewed as simply "trolling" for having a different perspective.

Paul is obviously central to the formation and maintenance of the early church, but I see the inclusion of him as an apostle as more an honorary title intended to bolster his credibility, not entirely unlike knighthood or doctorates.