In this thread I would like to discuss the biblical and extra-biblical evidence that examines who Paul is and whether as it states in the new testament (in the words of Paul)
But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile
2Co 12:16 KJV
Any discussion on the TOPICwould be greatly appreciated.
Feivel
Originally posted by PhlabibitWould that make him 'The First Christian'???
I've seen a lot of posts talking about Paul... one being he started the Christian Religion? Would that make him 'The First Christian'???
Where else might this topic go? What is there to debate about Paul?
P-
Well it could be said that way and that is my opinion. but that is reaching a conclusion before looking at any evidence (or arguments if you prefer) that is either pro or con. Since you brought up the first christian idea let's look at Paul's first christian experience which the new testament says took place on the road to Damascus. My first question is why was Paul there?
Feivel
Originally posted by FeivelYour FIRST question ..... oops.
[b]Would that make him 'The First Christian'???
Well it could be said that way and that is my opinion. but that is reaching a conclusion before looking at any evidence (or arguments if you prefer) that is either pro or con. Since yo ...[text shortened]... ad to Damascus. My first question is why was Paul there?
Feivel[/b]
I thought you wanted to discuss things (see first post) or do you want to examine people's knowledge about the subject instead of the thread's subject itself, because you assume to know everything about it and we don't ?
Originally posted by elvendreamgirlWas Martin Luther the first Lutheran?
Wouldn't Christ be the first Christian?
I guess it depends on whether you are discussing
the religion in the sense of it being a social phenomenon,
or in the sense of it being a personal set of beliefs
that guides one's thoughts and actions.
Consider Newton, for example. He was not the first
Newtonian physicist in the first sense, but he may
have been in the second sense. (There could have
been one before him in the second sense, but all
must come after him in the first sense.)
Same with Luther and Christ, in my view.
Dr. Cribs
Originally posted by rapalla7It could be said that Christianity started at the descent of the Holy ghost upon the apostles, fifty days after the resurrection of Christ, on the ancient Jewish festival called the "feast of weeks" or Pentecost.
By definition Christians are the followers of the teachings of Christ.
Mike
Mike
2Co 12:16 KJV
2 Corinthians 12:16
16 But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.
17 Did I make a gain of you by any of them whom I sent unto you?
18 I desired Titus, and with him I sent a brother. Did Titus make a gain of you? walked we not in the same spirit? walked we not in the same steps?
19 Again, think ye that we excuse ourselves unto you? we speak before God in Christ: but we do all things, dearly beloved, for your edifying.
Ver. 16. But be it so, I did not burden you,.... These words are not spoken by the apostle in his own person of himself, but in the person of his adversaries, and contain a concession and an objection of theirs, but be it so; they granted that he had not burdened the Corinthians, that he had took nothing of them himself for preaching the Gospel; they owned that he had preached it freely; this was so clear a point, and so flagrant a case, that they could not deny it; yet they insinuated to the Corinthians, and objected to the apostle, that though he did not receive anything from them with his own hands, yet he craftily and cunningly made use of others to drain their purses, and receive it for him; and which is suggested in the next clause:
nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile; so say the false apostles of me; for these are not the words of the apostle in his own person; nor to be understood of any spiritual craft, or lawful cunning and prudent artifices used by him, to allure and draw the Corinthians into a good liking and opinion of the Gospel and of his ministry, and so caught them, and was the happy means of their conversion; but they are spoken in the person of the false apostles, charging him with a wicked and criminal craftiness, by making use of other persons in a sly underhanded way, to get this church's money, when he pretended to preach the Gospel freely; to which he answers in the next verse.
2 Corinthians 12:17
Ver. 17. Did I make a gain of you,.... He appeals to the Corinthians against such calumnies and false insinuations, whether ever he had circumvented them in such a manner, or had ever used such artful methods to pillage them; or whether ever he had discovered any covetous disposition towards anything of theirs; or had employed any persons to draw out their substance from them, and get it for himself: he owns he had sent some persons to them on different errands, and asks if he had dealt fraudulently with them,
by any of them whom, says he,
I have sent to you: he desires them to name one single person of the many who came to them from him, that had received any money from them for him; or that they had any reason to believe he had employed for such purposes; and if they could not pitch on a single instance, they ought therefore to look upon this as a downright slander and calumny.
2 Corinthians 12:18
Ver. 18. I desired Titus, and with him I sent a brother,.... The apostle proceeds to mention one or two persons that he had sent unto them, and desires to know whether they could charge them with any such practices. He had desired, exhorted, and encouraged Titus to go unto them, and collect money from them; but not for either of themselves, but for the poor saints at Jerusalem; and he sent another brother along with him, who is by some supposed to be Luke, to be a companion of him, and an assistant to him; and who was a witness of what he did, and for what purpose he was sent, and how he behaved:
did Titus make a gain of you? did he greedily desire your substance? did he show an avaricious temper, or a covetous inclination after your money? did he by any methods extort it from you? say if Titus, or the brother with him, received anything from you, either on their own, or my account?
walked we not in the same Spirit? in the same Spirit of God, being directed and influenced by him; or in the same disposition of mind, being agreed and determined to preach the Gospel freely, and receive nothing for it:
walked we not in the same steps? took the same methods, lived the same course of life, working with their own hands to supply their wants, rather than be burdensome to others: the apostle suggests, that where are the same Spirit, temper, disposition, and principles, there will be the same works and actions; and as for covetousness, it is neither agreeable to the Spirit of God, nor to the spirit of a Christian.
2 Corinthians 12:19
Ver. 19. Again, think you that we excuse ourselves to you?.... The apostle would not have the Corinthians imagine, that by what he had said once and again in this epistle, he meant to excuse himself from coming to them, for he really and sincerely intended it; or that by this long defence of himself against the false apostles, he designed so much an apology for himself, or that he used any feigned words, or artful methods, to exculpate himself from any charge against him, particularly that of covetousness just mentioned; for he had no view to cover himself by studied apologies, and set orations, and evade anything exhibited against him, and make himself look innocent when guilty; it was not with any such intention he had dwelt so long on this subject:
we speak before God in Christ; in all sincerity and uprightness of soul, without colour, guile, or deceit, calling God and Christ to witness the truth of what was said; the apostle spoke all he did, as in the presence of the omniscient God; and as one in Christ, and a preacher of his Gospel, that would not deliver an untruth knowingly, for the whole world:
but we do all things, dearly beloved, for your edification; it was not for himself so much, for his own credit, reputation, and glory, he did what he did; had this been the case, he would not have said the half part of what he had; but it was for their sake, out of love to them, that they might be built up and established in the faith of the Gospel, and not be carried away with the error of the wicked.
http://www.freegrace.net/gill/
Originally posted by ivanhoe" I caught you with guile; so say the false apostles of me; for these are not the words of the apostle in his own person; nor to be understood of any spiritual craft, or lawful cunning and prudent artifices used by him, to allure and draw the Corinthians into a good liking and opinion of the Gospel and of his ministry, and so caught them, and was the happy means of their conversion; but they are spoken in the person of the false apostles, charging him with a wicked and criminal craftiness, by making use of other persons in a sly underhanded way, to get this church's money, when he pretended to preach the Gospel freely; to which he answers in the next (=2 Corinthians 12:17 ) verse.
2Co 12:16 KJV
2 Corinthians 12:16
16 But be it so, I did not burden you: nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile.
17 Did I make a gain of you by any of them whom I sent unto you?
18 I desired Titus, and with him I ...[text shortened]... he Gospel, and not be carried away with the error of the wicked.
Feivel you are accusing Paul of the same things the "false apostles" accused him of.
Apparently there were allready "Feivels" in the early Christian times.
Originally posted by rapalla7From what I understand reading the Home page this site is about a book (?) written by someone who has very particular stances on Christian faith. You could call him a christian who rejects Paul as an apostle. He calls Paul a liar etc etc. However I'm not assuming this man's stances are Feivel's stances. It would only create more confusion as to where Feivel stands in all these issues. He himself (Feivel) is not willing to give any relevant information about his religious stances. Unfortunately this is just one of the problems debating him.
Ivanhoe,
Here is some light reading that may shed some light "perhaps" as to what he may be questioning. It is a fairly interesting read.
Mike
http://www.judaismvschristianity.com/paulthe.htm
Originally posted by ivanhoeIvanhoe,
From what I understand reading the Home page this site is about a book (?) written by someone who has very particular stances on Christian faith. You could call him a christian who rejects Paul as an apostle. He calls Paul a liar etc etc. ...[text shortened]... . Unfortunately this is just one of the problems debating him.
The artical I gave was just one of many, I don't know the source of Feivels.
Would it be relevant to the Bible if paul could be discredited as an "Apostle". Even if he did it for his own gain, be it vanity or status?
It would seem more of the point of that particular article that it would be pointing out Pauls own personal sin. Even if he was false witnessing he was still spreading the word and getting ready the way, right?
Anyway I don't think discrediting paul would bring Christianity to it's knees. It is however an interesting subject.
I don't know what Feivels religious feelings are, maybe like me he is just exploring and questioning his faith or maybe he is just cementing lack of it.
Mike
Originally posted by rapalla7Yes he was there to persecute christians but I wanted a "deeper" answer. Why was Paul going to Damascus to persecute christians (the answer is in the bible)? Not only that but why did he expect to persecute anyone in an are that was under King Aretas (an Arab not under Roman nor Jewish rule)?
Paul was there to persecute the christians, when approached by the lord.
Acts 9
Feivel