Paul never met Jesus (just claimed to have hallucinated him); yet he wrote a large chunk of the New Testament.
How do Christians know that Paul was actually preaching Jesus' word, and not turning Jesus' reformist Judaism into an entirely new religion?How do Christians know that Paul wasn't a false prophet?
Paul admits he was not taught my men what he preaches but by divine revelation. What if this divine revelation was wishful thinking? Everyone that questioned Paul was branded a heretic
(Galatians 1:12) For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.How do Christians know that Paul wasn't a false prophet?
If you're referring to the dispute Paul had with Peter, go read it again. It was not a theological dispute. Paul chastised Peter for hypocricy--Peter was not acting consistently with the theology they both agreed on.
Report Abuse
He was the greatest of the Apostles.
His insights into the Lord were phenomenal. Way beyond what the other Apostles saw.
What he saw was not to be released to our understanding for 1900 years. The depth of Grace verses the law.
Truly chosen of God to Great works.
A great instrument in God's hands.
Showing me How Great the Lord is.
They didn't, and they don't know, people will believe just about anything today just because of their own fear of the unknown, It really is a sad day for humanity to see people becoming fanatically insane over something that just is not true, It comes from a book that simply has no credibility behind It, I am catholic, and know where can I see God lending his hand to any of it, May God Bless.
Paul was the second most prolific contributor to the New Testament, after Luke the Evangelist. Thirteen letters are attributed to him, with confidence. The undisputed Pauline epistles contain the earliest systematic account of Christian doctrine, and provide information on the life of the infant Church.
They are arguably the oldest part of the New Testament. Paul also appears in the pages of the Acts of the Apostles, attributed to Luke, so that it is possible to compare the account of his life in the Acts with his own account in his various letters.
Good question.
Let's see................
Actually,Paul is more like the false prophet that Bible describe.
';They (false prophet) will probhite marriage and required abstinence from food that god created.......................
(1Timothy 4:1-3)
';Now for the matter you wrote about:It is good for a man not to marry';
(1Corinthians 7:1)
Whether Paul is a false prophet or not,let the reader's decide for themselves.
Most of his writings ring true to me..
because everything he said came to pass.
the 12 apostles accepted him.and his testimony as true.
Paul also was very careful to properly interpret scriputres.....he was a bible scholar himself before his conversion.
because the other apostles didn't refute his authority or deny that what he preached were the commandments of the Lord. They received him gladly
Because when Paul defended himself (especially in books like Galatians), those he defended himself were never the original apostles themselves. In fact, Paul seemed to think so highly of them that he went to Jerusalem to meet them, and he appealed to their right hand of fellowship to prove his own authenticity. He did not dispute what the apostles themselves were saying, but he DID dispute what some of those who CAME from the apostles were saying. With that being the case, he clearly thought that some of the followers of the apostles were teaching something different than the apostles themselves were teaching, and Paul sided with the apostles against those people.
No comments:
Post a Comment