Originally posted by Thequ1ck
But what is peace without turmoil?

Even a rock is in motion over time, it erodes and shuffles about.

The universe that we live in teaches us one thing for sure.
It is impossible for 'nothing' as us humans know it to exist.

Everything has a harmony. So in heaven there must be harmony
too. For every good there must be a bad.

So what distuinguish ...[text shortened]... l would have to
scrub my memory every so often.

I prefer the latter of the two solutions.

I hope you change your mind.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
I find Paul somewhat difficult (which I know makes me part of a majority 🙂 ), but his tendency to mix tenses, not only in the same section but sometimes the same sentence, is confusing to me. I know he's the one who said "absent from the body, persent with the Lord", but if we are already "present with the Lord", then the comfort of the thought loses something. At least it does to me.

It is a matter of degree. He means more present with the Lord.

He does not mean that the Christians is away from the Lord in life.

Originally posted by jaywill
It is a matter of degree. He means [b]more present with the Lord.

He does not mean that the Christians is away from the Lord in life.[/b]

Like many Christians, I find other writings much more uplifting and cohesive than those of Paul.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
Like many Christians, I find other writings much more uplifting and cohesive than those of Paul.

Doesn't it concern you when many Christians turn up their noses at the writings of a man whom God used to write 13 of the 27 New Testament books?

Originally posted by jaywill
Doesn't it concern you when many Christians turn up their noses at the writings of a man whom God used to write 13 of the 27 New Testament books?

Not really---since I don't turn my nose up at them. I just am careful to read them with discernment, realizing that
1--Paul was writing at and fir a different time and culture.
2--Paul is NOT Jesus and thus His mouth is not a prayer book, as me Mom used to say.
3--Paul said some controversial things that can be defined in a number of different ways, none of which should cause great consternation among Christians. After all, it's not Grace through faith and Perfect Doctrine that saves us--just Grace alone.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
I hope you change your mind.

If I were to describe a perfect eternity.

It would be a mixture of both pain and pleasure.
Death with reincarnation so that I don't remember previous
lives and am different each time so that I can experience more.

It would be pretty much as it is now with no afterlife. Just more
humans along the way.

Unfortunately that's not how religion sees it.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
Not really---since I don't turn my nose up at them. I just am careful to read them with discernment, realizing that
1--Paul was writing at and fir a different time and culture.
2--Paul is NOT Jesus and thus His mouth is not a prayer book, as me Mom used to say.
3--Paul said some controversial things that can be defined in a number of different ways, ...[text shortened]... After all, it's not Grace through faith and Perfect Doctrine that saves us--just Grace alone.

=======================================
1--Paul was writing at and fir a different time and culture.
=======================================

Every writer of the books of the Bible could be said to be writing at a diffrent time and culture. Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos were writing at a different time and culture.

Jesus was speaking at a different time and culture. And the writers of the New Testament were also doing so.

But the essential things of man's fallen nature do not change with time or culture. God's salvation is applicable to all times and culture. Time and culture have not changed the Spirit of Christ. Neither have they changed the power of the blood of Jesus to redeem us and shield us from self guilt and Satanic accusation. Time and culture have not changed the Christian's need to walk by the Spirit or put to death through the Spirit the practices of the body. Time and culture have no changed "righteous and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit" (Romans 14:17) which is the kingdom of God.

If time and culture effect the truth of Christ's apostles in the most essential matters of the Christian life, then we are in trouble. Then we might say that the resurrection is no longer for our modern time, or justification by faith is no longer for our time, or sanctification, transformation, conformation, peace, love, communion with God, fellowship in the Holy Spirit, gospel preaching, the second coming, eternal life are all no longer relevant in our time.

I think one has to discern which things in the New Testament are culture and time bound and which are the word of God that will out last physical universe - "Heaven and earth will pass away. But My words will not pass away."

You have to be careful. Could you tell me for example, in the 8h chapter of the book of Romans exactly what I should not pay attention to because of the change in culture and time?

==============================
2--Paul is NOT Jesus and thus His mouth is not a prayer book, as me Mom used to say.
===============================

That depends on your skill in praying. To me the whole Bible is a prayer book. But I excercise some insant wisdom as to what to petition or praise the Lord for.

You would find tremendous benefit in PRAYING over the epistles of Paul as you would over praying the Gospels. That is if your heart is truly turned toward God to touch God through His word.

We are told to "Receive ... the word of God by means of all prayer and petition praying at every time in spirit ..." (Eph. 6:18)

This means that the word of God is good for praying over for assimilation, to give ground to petition, praise and thanksgiving. I do so much pray over and with the words of the Bible including Paul's epistles. There is tremendous benefit in this.


==================================
3--Paul said some controversial things that can be defined in a number of different ways, none of which should cause great consternation among Christians. After all, it's not Grace through faith and Perfect Doctrine that saves us--just Grace alone.
========================================

I don't understand your problem here.

I cannot locate where the Apostle Paul wrote that "Perfect Doctrine" [apart from the PERSON of Christ as LIFE] saves us in any sense that I think you mean.

The final word of a writer is often the most important word. And Paul's last written words in the New Testament are about Grace -

"The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you." (2 Tim. 4:22)

He wants Timothy to remember at all costs that Christ the Lord is with his regenerated spirit. And because of that GRACE is with him. See also:

Philippians 4:23 - "The GRACE of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit."

Ephesians 6:24 - "GRACE be with all those who love our Lord Jesus Christ in incorruptibility."

Galatians 6:18 "The GRACE of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brothers. Amen."

Philemon 25 - "The GRACE of the Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit."


These concluding words are his final and most important summary. How could you possibly say that Paul does not teach about the Grace of God?

Who talks more about the grace of God besides Paul ?

Who was it that told that it is by grace through faith we are saved? "For by GRACE you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God." (Ephesians 2:8)

Who poisoned your mind against the Lord's faithful apostle ?

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]=======================================
1--Paul was writing at and fir a different time and culture.
=======================================

Every writer of the books of the Bible could be said to be writing at a diffrent time and culture. Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos were writing at a different time and culture.

Jes ]

Who poisoned your mind against the Lord's faithful apostle ?[/b]

===================================
3--Paul said some controversial things that can be defined in a number of different ways, none of which should cause great consternation among Christians. After all, it's not Grace through faith and Perfect Doctrine that saves us--just Grace alone.
============================================

I previously did not understand well this paragraph upon re-examining it.

I cannot edit my reply at this point in time. Some of the comments may be misdireced.

Anyway, excuses to discount Paul's labors and revelation ring very hollow to me. Even Peter said some things in Paul's writings were hard to understand. He still recommended Paul's writings and refered too them as Scripture.

Pater must have regarded at least some or all of Paul's letters to the churches as on the same level of authority as the Hebrew Bible.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
Not really---since I don't turn my nose up at them. I just am careful to read them with discernment, realizing that
1--Paul was writing at and fir a different time and culture.
2--Paul is NOT Jesus and thus His mouth is not a prayer book, as me Mom used to say.
3--Paul said some controversial things that can be defined in a number of different ways, ...[text shortened]... After all, it's not Grace through faith and Perfect Doctrine that saves us--just Grace alone.

==================================
After all, it's not Grace through faith and Perfect Doctrine that saves us--just Grace alone.
==================================

How do you feel about Jesus then, saying to someone "Your faith has saved you" (Luke 7:50)?

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]==================================
After all, it's not Grace through faith and Perfect Doctrine that saves us--just Grace alone.
==================================

How do you feel about Jesus then, saying to someone "Your faith has saved you" (Luke 7:50)? [/b]

I feel that Jesus is supernatural and can save people any way He chooses to, but the Scriptures give us the only way He promised to do so: Grace through faith alone. My comment about perfect doctrive was an attempt at a joke---a paraphrase on the preceding sentencce. You know--as if someone said "We are saved by God's grace alone, through faith, AND having perfect doctrine." Of course, I know no one who has perfect doctrine (aside from Christ), so the whole point is we must be saved through what Jesus did for us.
All Biblical writers wrote for a specific time and place, true enough. And all their writings can still be applied today (or most of them anyway). I simply prefer the writings of Peter and John to those of Paul. Paul strikes me as a very brusque, difficult man to worl with, who had a high opinion of himself. But he was Human, after all--and all of us have sinned. So my mind is not "poisoned" to Paul; it's open to allm in that I realize that none of us are perfect.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
I feel that Jesus is supernatural and can save people any way He chooses to, but the Scriptures give us the only way He promised to do so: Grace through faith alone. My comment about perfect doctrive was an attempt at a joke---a paraphrase on the preceding sentencce. You know--as if someone said "We are saved by God's grace alone, through faith, AND hav ...[text shortened]... s not "poisoned" to Paul; it's open to allm in that I realize that none of us are perfect.

=================================
I simply prefer the writings of Peter and John to those of Paul.
==================================

Oh, if it is a matter of personal preferences that's different.

Originally posted by PinkFloyd
I feel that Jesus is supernatural and can save people any way He chooses to, but the Scriptures give us the only way He promised to do so: Grace through faith alone. My comment about perfect doctrive was an attempt at a joke---a paraphrase on the preceding sentencce. You know--as if someone said "We are saved by God's grace alone, through faith, AND hav s not "poisoned" to Paul; it's open to allm in that I realize that none of us are perfect.

=============================
I know no one who has perfect doctrine (aside from Christ),
=============================

Amen! But you know, that sounds a lot like Paul ?

"It is not longer I who live, but Christ who lives within me"

And my goodness, Philippians. Forgetting the things that are behind and stretching forward to gain Christ, be found in Him, to know Him.

So I am surprised for one who recognizes that the perfect doctrine is the Person of Jesus Himself, WHY on earth you would not then appreciate Paul's letters.

In EVERY LETTER, what does Paul do? He turns the reader BACK to Christ, back to Christ, back, back, back to CHRIST.

Back from philosophy to Christ - Colossians.

Back from law keeping and Judaism to Christ - Galatians.

Back from division and so many things to Christ - First Corinthians.

Back from the Hebrew religion to Christ - Hebrews

Back from everything to Christ - Ephesians - "Grace be with all those who love our Lord Jesus Christ in incorrptibility" (Eph. 6:24)

Back from suspicion against the apostles to Christ - Second Cornthians

Back from spiritual gifts to Christ - First Corinthians

Back from cultural norms TO Christ - Philemon

Back from pagan idolatry TO Christ - Acts (Mars Hill)

Back from Judiazing TO Christ (Acts 15)

Back from sin and living in the flesh TO Christ (Romans)

I would say that if you believe that the only genuine doctrine is the living Person of Jesus Christ Himself, you should be very appreciative of Paul's contribution to the New Testament.

Peter is wonderful too. However the Holy Spirit had Paul write 13 books. Peter He used to write only 2 plus his few gospel messages in the book of Acts.

Do you like having a kind of elitest attitude towards God's apostle Paul? Does it make you feel kind of (not with the herd, a little "special" and particular)? Is that it? Kind of like "Well, I don't care for the Beatles."

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]=============================
I know no one who has perfect doctrine (aside from Christ),
=============================

Amen! But you know, that sounds a lot like Paul ?

"It is not longer I who live, but Christ who lives within me"

And my goodness, Philippians. Forgetting the things that are behind and stretching for ...[text shortened]... al" and particular)? Is that it? Kind of like "Well, I don't care for the Beatles."[/b]

heaven is coming down off the mountains after a beautiful walk with my wife, going into the pub and watching Scotland beat England at rugby while siting beside a huge log fire and having a wee dram of a single malt with friends....coming home, realizing that Andrew Hamilton has hung one of his pieces and i will eventually beat him....ahhhhhhh, luxury

Originally posted by Thequ1ck
If I were to describe a perfect eternity.

It would be a mixture of both pain and pleasure.
Death with reincarnation so that I don't remember previous
lives and am different each time so that I can experience more.

It would be pretty much as it is now with no afterlife. Just more
humans along the way.

Unfortunately that's not how religion sees it.

Sounds a lot like Buddhism to me.

--- Penguin