Paul's focus was not that of the gospel writers, such as Luke who wanted to make an orderly historical account of the life of Jesus, including stories of his birth and childhood or Matthew that wanted to present Jesus' parables and show how in his life he fulfilled Old Testament prophecies. In one of his letters to the Corinthians Paul specifically writes that in his ministry he decided to know nothing but Christ cruficied. His focus was the death and resurection of Jesus, something he claims to have personally witnessed. He is preaching about what he knew personally not so much about what he heard from others. I think this shows through in his letters and to be honest it isn't entirely out of harmony with what is presented in Acts, Peter, and the elder John. The importance of the death and resurrection of Jesus carries through there as well.
Paul, leading authority on Christianity, does NOT quote Jesus!
by Terry 204 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
PSacramento
It's a question of what is most probable. Take the expression at 1 Cor 2:8 for example. (Rulers of the age) It's an idiomatic expression in Greek that's usually reserved for the supernatural It's not likely that Paul would have used it for either a two-bit thug like Pilate or the Sanhedrin.
Indeed and since Paul had mentioned Satan as the ruler of this age, one can also deduce that "rulers of this age" probably meant the supernatural forces that Caused the crucifiction of Christ, quite possibly by manipultaing those directily involved.
Perhaps.
Like you said, we can coem up with many, many possiblitites to what Paul meant, but I am sure the Corinthians knew what Paul meant and so did Paul.
The fact that Paul was mentioned by Peter and by Luke shows that he was known to them and accepted as a brother, which wouldn't be the case if he had been preaching anything to the contrary to what they believed, Peter's opinion of Paul being difficult to understand at times not withstanding.
Fact is that IF Paul had been preaching anthing that was against the teachings of Jesus, the apostles would have made it clear not to listen to him.
And while there was friction and quite understandably so, there was no admonishment of Paul by the apostles.
-
TD
Fact is that IF Paul had been preaching anthing that was against the teachings of Jesus, the apostles would have made it clear not to listen to him.
Well, as I pointed out on the first page of this thread, there is the question of keeping the Law
-
PSacramento
Well, as I pointed out on the first page of this thread, there is the question of keeping the Law
Ah, but Jesus preached to the Jews and Paul to the Gentiles, to whom he saw the Law not being applicable.
Jesus himelf said that he came only for the Jews ( at that point) and that he came to fullfill the law.
Paul's view was that the Judiac Law was not applicable to the Gentiles and in particular the laws of the sabbath and circumcision if I recall correctly.
This was echoed by the apostles proclamation that they not hump hookers, not eat blood, don't get down with idols and what not.
Since the rest of the over 600 laws were "cast aside" by the apostles are we to say that they went beyond Jesus's teachinsg too?
-
jay88
DH-Paul's focus was not that of the gospel writers, such as Luke who wanted to make an orderly historical account of the life of Jesus, including stories of his birth and childhood or Matthew that wanted to present Jesus' parables and show how in his life he fulfilled Old Testament prophecies. In one of his letters to the Corinthians Paul specifically writes that in his ministry he decided to know nothing but Christ cruficied. His focus was the death and resurection of Jesus, something he claims to have personally witnessed. He is preaching about what he knew personally not so much about what he heard from others. I think this shows through in his letters and to be honest it isn't entirely out of harmony with what is presented in Acts, Peter, and the elder John. The importance of the death and resurrection of Jesus carries through there as well.
>>>>>>>>>>>
WTBTS makes the same claim as Paul,..... Paul has a personal revelation it's okay,.......the crown jewels in BK have a revelation it's an outrage.
Paul's new light on the Gospel is permitted
GB's new light on the Gospel is made fun of.
Are some Christians protecting Paul because they are trying to protect their own inner-revelation from Jesus,
and at the same time deny another of the same oppurtunity? Yes WTBTS is guilty of it, but that is their Gospel according to their revelation.
A question we hear often 'Can an Atheist truly be moral?'-----I ask,'Can any entity/person who claims divine inspiration be trusted?'
-
Midget-Sasquatch
The Ovious: If we quote something, its to make a point.
Paul quoted parts of the OT, early homilies, etc when it suited him but nary anything from the historical Jesus. Maybe almost all of the existing "Jesus Sayings" didn't suit his agenda. Isn't there a contrast between the role reversals that are thematic of the parables and Sayings attributed to Jesus, and Paul's urging to submit to the status quo?
-
tec
Yes WTBTS is guilty of it, but that is their Gospel according to their revelation.
No, that is their gospel according to their understanding of the bible, isn't it? There is no divine, direct revelation as far as I know with the GB, or WBTS.
But I know your discussion with me is not about Paul,.........
I thought it was. Did we get sidetracked somewhere? You said back a couple pages that Paul boasted that he was special because he was chosen, and that he was more favored than the other apostles. I understand now that you meant this is what you read into the things he said, and you are entitled to your thoughts. I don't read the same thing into his sayings, however, and I just thought I might have overlooked a scripture where he actually did say these things.
Tammy
-
tec
Terry - Yes, we know because he told us (though it would be odd that a Roman citizen and educated Jew would all of a sudden put himself on the line for those he once persecuted). But regardless, all I was saying is that this direct revelation could explain how he could have known Christ. And we are supposed to be able to learn from the Holy Spirit.
Tammy
-
jay88
tec-No, that is their gospel according to their understanding of the bible, isn't it? There is no divine, direct revelation as far as I know with the GB, or WBTS.
>>>>>>>>
WTBTS--Say they are anointed, thru Christ
No different than Paul claiming divine revelation.
But of course you claim your self-revelation (we are supposed to be able to learn from the Holy Spirit) is more legitimate than WTBTS claim of being anointed.
There is more proof that Paul was boastful towards the Apostles, than anyone claiming that Christ speaks to them directly.
-
AGuest
Paul provides the legalistic template for the cold authoritarianism and false humility of the Watchtower Society.
This is an interesting statement (may you all have peace!). So much is NOT included in the Bible canon... and for good reason. And I am not speaking of some 10 or so other writings that another poster claims to be missing. There are MANY writings that are not included in the Bible canon. One interesting thing: Luke wrote that MANY had undertaken to write an account of what had occurred in Jerusalem during my Lord's walk and death there. Yet, there are only 4 "gospel" accounts. And some believe that only ONE of them may have been written before Luke's account. Even so, three (i.e., the others besides Luke's) is not "many."
So what? So, first, there is the assumption that all that Paul wrote is included in the Bible canon. The FACT that his first letter to the Corinthian congregation is NOT included directly denies that "fact." Second, there is the assumption that Paul always knew what he was talking about from the start; the "progress" shown in the order of his letters... and his own self-acknowledgement of his errors... show that this wasn't the case.
My point? The "cold authoritarianism" and "false humility"... of the WTBTS... and ALL so-called "christian" religions... cannot be blamed on Paul... or on ANYONE other than those who deign to exercise such "authoritarianism" and false humility. Paul cannot be blamed any more than we who hold discussions about Paul here can.
Those who claim such authority are liars... and simply used Paul's infant understandings to push their own agendas. Which is one of the reasons the Bible canon is set out at it is: because those who decided KNEW that most of us are ignorant, lazy minded neanderthals who would take whatever it is they said at face value... rather than looking for ourselves. Did Paul say such and so? According to the Bible, it appears he did. BUT... did he say anything ELSE, anything AFTER, anything that shows the thinking THEN was wrong? According to the Bible, it appear he did that, as well.
Those who take Paul's ignorant statements as "proof" of his ultimate error are doing the SAME thing as those who use it to teach in contrast to Christ. As well as doing themselves... and those who "listen" to them... a huge disservice. As well as... possibly putting themselves in line to be hypocrites. We ALL misspeak. And some write things they later regret. It is not upon those who place themselves "in the seat of Moses," however, to tell us what it true... nor is it upon us to assume that what they say is truth actually IS.
Bottom line? None of us were alive during the days in which Paul wrote what he did. None of us can understand, 100%, what he, the Jews, the Jewish christians or the gentiles were experiencing... or doing... during that time. NONE of us walked even an inch... let alone a mile... in ANY of these' shoes. So, unless you're getting your information from someone who WAS there... your position, understanding, or opinion, is really impotent, isn't it? I think the truth is that it is.
Again, peace to you all!
A slave of Christ,
SA, who is NOT a fan of Paul's, and wished he had considered the effect his words would have on future generations, but understand how he could not have and that, as far as he knew, his words were for the day in which he existed and those who lived at during that time...