Was Paul a false apostle?

[derekkye]

I Kings 14:29
Now the rest of the acts of Rehoboam, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?

why the question? this happens a few times when other books reference Chronicles. you'll notice a common denominator when things don't seem to "add" up - that common denominator being Chronicles for the most part

Chronicles also has David as the seventh son of Jesse when in fact in Samuel it is strongly suggested David is the eighth son of Jesse;

my conclusion: the book of Chronicles is corrupt - cannot be trusted;

I include Chronicles with Paul's writings...before you unleash on me please read Revelation 2:2

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I Kings 14:29
Now the rest of the acts of Rehoboam, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah?

why the question? this happens a few times when other books reference Chronicles. you'll notice a common denominator when things don't seem to "add" up - that common denominator being Chronicles for the most part

Chronicles also has David as the seventh son of Jesse when in fact in Samuel it is strongly suggested David is the eighth son of Jesse;

my conclusion: the book of Chronicles is corrupt - cannot be trusted;

I include Chronicles with Paul's writings...before you unleash on me please read Revelation 2:2

Hey derekkye,

Don't worry ... I don't want to "unload" on you.

But now I am very curious - which books of the Bible do you accept as the Word of God? Any of them?

Here's the verse you wanted me to read:

Revelation 2:2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:

I take it that you are saying that this verse applies to the Apostle Paul. If so, do you have any evidence to support that idea?

Richard

[derekkye]

II Corinthians 12:16
But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.

John 5:43
I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

At first I was seduced by Paul's writings - I thought that the commandments did not need to be kept.

From the new testament I adhere to the gospel of John, and the book of Revelation.

There are numerous internet sites that make the case against Paul. Although I do not agree with all these sites have to say I do agree that Paul is a false apostle. After all there are only 12 apostles of the lamb - Paul is not counted as one of them

[Richard Amiel McGough]

II Corinthians 12:16
But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.

John 5:43
I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

At first I was seduced by Paul's writings - I thought that the commandments did not need to be kept.

From the new testament I adhere to the gospel of John, and the book of Revelation.

What makes you think those two books are valid?

Why do you accept any of them if you reject 25 out of 27 books? If the vast majority of NT books are corrupt, why believe any of them?

There are numerous internet sites that make the case against Paul. Although I do not agree with all these sites have to say I do agree that Paul is a false apostle. After all there are only 12 apostles of the lamb - Paul is not counted as one of them

How do you know that there were only 12 Apostles? Sure, Revelation speaks of "the twelve apostles" but it does not say that there were not others that came after. And besides that, Revelation does not list the names of the 12, so you don't know if Paul was or was not included.

Richard

[derekkye]

Revelation 21:14
And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

it's quite clear there are only twelve apostles of the Lamb

so you believe Paul's name will be one of them? If not then Paul is not an apostle of the Lamb. If so then who have you eliminated?

To me it's obvious Paul is a false apostle. I don't need to debate it nor convince you. Most "Christians" seem to disagree with me on this matter, but then again most "Christians" don't keep God's commandments.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Revelation 21:14
And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.

it's quite clear there are only twelve apostles of the Lamb

so you believe Paul's name will be one of them? If not then Paul is not an apostle of the Lamb. If so then who have you eliminated?

To me it's obvious Paul is a false apostle. I don't need to debate it nor convince you. Most "Christians" seem to disagree with me on this matter, but then again most "Christians" don't keep God's commandments.

Hey derekkye,

I move this to its own thread because it was way off-topic in the original thread.

You did not give any support to your statement that "it's quite clear there are only twelve apostles of the Lamb." I already explained that Revelation does not say there were only 12 apostles. The phrase "the 12 apostles" could simply refer to the original 12. And since the names were not listed, we don't know if Judas was left out (as he obviously should have been) or who may have been added.

We also know that the list of 12 tribes leaves out Dan and this means that we can not simply "assume" anything about the names of the 12 apostles.

If this is the kind of logic used to reject Paul as an apostle, then Paul's position as a true apostle is totally secure.

The question I am most interested in is how you could convince yourself that only two of the 27 NT books are valid, and the rest corrupt. That seems like an impossible position to support with any logic or facts.

Richard

[derekkye]

II Corinthians 12:16
But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.

Who uses guile? Answer: the devil, and his servants

looks like you're caught - hook, line, and SINKER

bee seeing you

[Richard Amiel McGough]

II Corinthians 12:16
But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.

Who uses guile? Answer: the devil, and his servants

looks like you're caught - hook, line, and SINKER

bee seeing you

That is extremely faulty logic. Paul was using a rhetorical device in the specific context of what he had written earlier in the same letter:

2 Corinthians 11:1 Would to God ye could bear with me a little in my folly: and indeed bear with me. 2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. 3 But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.

The Apostle Paul knew precisely what he meant when he used the word "guile" in 2 Cor 12:6, and it was nothing like what you suggest.

To be frank, such arguments appear to me to be utterly moronic. No offense intended, but since you feel comfortable telling me what you think, as when you said I have been "caught hook, line, and SINKER," I figure you deserve an equally honest response.

See ya! (or not),

Richard

PS: If you want to pursue this topic, I would be most interested in your answer to the question I asked in Post #6:

The question I am most interested in is how you could convince yourself that only two of the 27 NT books are valid, and the rest corrupt. That seems like an impossible position to support with any logic or facts.

[CWH]

II Corinthians 12:16
But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.

Who uses guile? Answer: the devil, and his servants

looks like you're caught - hook, line, and SINKER

bee seeing you

Hi derekkye,

I agree with Richard that it is an extremely false logic. I have no doubt that Paul is a true apostle. This is based on the following:

1. It is the Lord who issue Paul a calling. God would not be so foolish or careless to recruit a false apostle to be among the 12 apostles. Why would God want to test the 12 apostles and causing discord and confusion among them when the goal was to preach the Kingdom of God throughout the world? God himself appointed Paul to preach to the Gentiles, see below passage, verse 15 (in bold):

Act: 9:4He 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."

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

10In Damascus there was a disciple named Ananias. The Lord called to him in a vision, "Ananias!"
"Yes, Lord," he answered.

11The Lord told him, "Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying. 12In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight."

13"Lord," Ananias answered, "I have heard many reports about this man and all the harm he has done to your saints in Jerusalem. 14And he has come here with authority from the chief priests to arrest all who call on your name."

15But the Lord said to Ananias, "Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel. 16I will show him how much he must suffer for my name."

17Then Ananias went to the house and entered it. Placing his hands on Saul, he said, "Brother Saul, the Lord—Jesus, who appeared to you on the road as you were coming here—has sent me so that you may see again and be filled with the Holy Spirit." 18Immediately, something like scales fell from Saul's eyes, and he could see again. He got up and was baptized, 19and after taking some food, he regained his strength.

2. Paul was appointed the apostle for the Gentiles. He is not in the 12 apostles judging over the 12 tribes of Israel but he certainly is an apostle judging over the Gentiles in the Kingdom of God. The clues lie in that Paul self proclaimed to be the apostle to the Gentiles. Paul would not dare to offend God by self-proclaiming as apostle to the Gentiles unless he was ordained by God as stated in 1 Timothy 2:7 (in bold):

Romans 1:5
Through him and for his name's sake, we received grace and apostleship to call people from among all the Gentiles to the obedience that comes from faith.

Romans 11:13
I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I make much of my ministry

Galatians 2:8
For God, who was at work in the ministry of Peter as an apostle to the Jews, was also at work in my ministry as an apostle to the Gentiles.

1 Timothy 2:7
And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.


I believe Paul was not given the task to Revelation was because he had done many crimes in the persecution of Christians. They were crying for their revenge as in Seal 5 of revelation and I believe Paul will have to account for that even though the Lord may have forgiven Paul:

9When he opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of those who had been slain because of the word of God and the testimony they had maintained. 10They called out in a loud voice, "How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?" 11Then each of them was given a white robe, and they were told to wait a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and brothers who were to be killed as they had been was completed.


The discussions in the internet teaching that Paul is a false apostle is a last minute attempt to accuse the whole new testement as false so as to undermine the plan of God.
PS: http://alt.nntp2http.com/religion/je...bc1a429c8.html



Many Blessings to you

[joel]

Paul said that he was persuaded that nothing is unclean of itself......this persuasion, he said, came from the Lord.......but,......if a person "logics" himself to think of a particular thing as unclean.....to him,.....that particular thing is unclean. (Romans 14:14).

How do you persuade such a person otherwise, knowing that their "logic" is flawed?

Case in point......the "preterists" see the logic of the "futurists" as flawed, and so do the "futurists" see the "preterists".

The answer to the one who sees something as unclean, the one in the first example, is to refrain from partaking of the unclean thing in their presence. Otherwise, the work of God in that "weak" one's faith, weak as it may be, may be further impaired by your lack of love.

This is a constant "sticking point" in the forum. Certain ones who have, by their logic, come to a place where they stand separated from others who have not arrived at the same conclusion, may depart from "love" by insisting on their views. After all, aren't they saying, in effect, that the other is weaker because of their alleged faulty views?

Paul, when encountering such ones, reminded them that he only preached Christ, and Him crucified. That is good advice indeed.

Joel