BSBKJVWEBYLTASVBBEWMBT4TDBY|HymnsMusicDonate
Menu
Theology

Those who say Paul lied ...

D
DHuff Aug 27, 2010

I had an opportunity recently to share my faith with a gentleman who, while he professed faith in Christ, was completely persuaded that many of the things Paul wrote in his epistles were just not true. For starters, he denied Paul's claims to be an apostle -- and it went on from there. This fellow had a dog-eared, well-marked Bible, attends a Messianic congregation, and evidently feels he has looked into this subject in great detail. It was quite perplexing talking with him, and he seemed to be beyond dogmatic about his beliefs -- in fact, almost angry at times.

Having never encountered this viewpoint before, I did some research and found some internet sites promoting this type of teaching. I would like to continue the dialog with this man, and am wondering if there are any threads on SI concerning this, and/or if anyone could point me in a helpful direction?

Thanks!
David

sermonindex Aug 27, 2010

My first reaction to this post is "Where do you begin?" If Paul is a liar, then reason stands that the entirety of his revelation is tainted with deception, and must be discarded. So, let us begin with his testimony and the stoning of Stephen, and all of the rest of the book of Acts where he is mentioned. This is most of that book, then the entirety of the Pauline Epistles, and Peter also, for Peter endorsed Paul in his epistles.

Remember also that the Church at Jerusalem , with the elders and apostles must also be included in the apostasy, for they received Paul and his testimony, and counsel.

If this was done, then the apostle John, and His book would have to be removed, Luke also, as a witnessing companion and author of the book of Acts, and Mark also, a fellow worker of Paul, and witness of his deeds and testimony. This would possibly leave Matthew in the Gospels, that is if he were not in Jerusalem when Paul visited.

So, what does that leave of the New Testament? Jude? He may have known Paul also, and Philemon must also be removed, as a dedicated witness to Paul's integrity. Oh, Revelation also written by a "false witness" by John.

Absolutely ludicrous.

D
DHuff Aug 27, 2010

Thanks for the reply, and I agree, it is definitely ludicrous. At one point in the discussion, I asked him and his wife to show me which pages they thought I should rip out of my Bible. It gave them pause, and made them think a bit (and hopefully, repent), but they seem very committed to their erroneous view.

On the positive side, the whole encounter just stirred me to share the truth all the more. In my years of following Christ, I had just never come across this view before.

K
KingJimmy Aug 27, 2010

I've run into some "Christians" who believe Paul to have been a false apostle. They are rare, so I can't say I've had the chance to sit down and get a systematic understanding of them. But basically most of these guys are individuals who are extremely "Messianic Jewish," and view Paul as a traitor to the Torah, and interpret him to be anti-nomian. If memory serves me correct, these individuals also denied the Diety of Christ, and basically charge most Christians as being "Paulists" instead of followers of Christ.

G
ginnyrose Aug 27, 2010

My first reaction is what are they running away from? What are they trying to hide?

A
Areadymind Aug 28, 2010

There was a sermon here on SI by Art Katz that I listened to once where he talked a lot about this issue. Do you remember which one it was Jimmy?

K
KingJimmy Aug 28, 2010

I think he talks about it in one of the prophtetical school tapes. But not for certain. I've not listened to him much in about a year.

sermonindex Aug 28, 2010

by ginnyrose on 2010/8/27 16:41:23 My first reaction is what are they running away from? What are they trying to hide?

my guess is deep down its sin.

D
DHuff Aug 28, 2010

I appreciate everyone's insights. While this fellow does attend a Messianic congregation, he clearly affirmed the Deity of Christ in our conversation. In fact, other than (1) his way off views of Paul and (2) his contentious attitude about it, we had no other glaring disagreements. Of course, this was just one chat.

He was bogged down in "supposed" inconsistencies, for instance, in the different Scriptural accounts of Paul's Damascus Road experience (Luke's, Paul's, etc.), but yet doesn't deny everything Paul writes. When I asked him if perhaps he was usurping the place of God, in deciding which passages were true or not, he had no answer.

I hope to talk with him some more; in my view, he has a issue with submission, teachability, and likely, pride. I'm praying the Lord might give him a doctrinal Damascus Road experience of his own.

Thanks for the feedback!

A
Areadymind Aug 28, 2010

This kind of deception is rampant in more areas than one would quickly recognize. There are all sorts of ways that this leaven of questioning the word of God swells men with pride. The congregation of believers I attend recently told a brother he could not teach that the book of James was uninspired because of his ultra-dispensational beliefs. As a result he went out from us...

The bible tells us to not be ignorant of Satan's devices, and the very first device he used was, "Hath God really said?" One of the most dangerous pills a man can imbibe is one that grants him authority over that which is written.

Every word of scripture is God-breathed.

I would also point out to this individual that if he is going to claim that Paul taught Anti-Nomianism from a Jewish point of view, he will also have to accuse Peter of the same, since He was the one whom received the vision to abrogate dietary laws. He will also have to accuse all the apostles whom confirmed the same in Acts 15, when they excused all the gentiles from the vast array of Mosaic Law.

Because Scripture is indeed inspired, with patience and love you ought to be able to win this brother. There will always be scripture that will shed light upon falsehood.

As a side note, I have heard that there are a lot of Messianic Jew's whom are very uncomfortable with Paul's writings.

sermonindex Aug 28, 2010

I have came across this spirit also, in "Messianics", and some Charismatic Catholics that seem offended at Paul's freedom.[WAY]

Remember Paul's struggle with the Judiazers? This is that; IE, that Jewish Born Christians effectively must have the Law and the Christ to be fullfilled.

In Israel, there is extreme persecution for those Jewish Christians who refuse to keep the Holy Days, the feasts, head coverings etc. that is demanded under Moses. If a Jewish Christian chooses to obey these institutions, he will generally be left alone. You can see why Judaism wanted to murder Paul. It stripped them of their place, position, and power.

Galatians 5:3-5 (King James Version)

3 "For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

5 For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith."

It is difficult to say to a person, that he or she is fallen from grace, but by adhering to these doctrines of keeping the law, we could be judged eternally. There is no Salvation through the keeping of the Law; no Heaven, for there is no Blood, no cleansing, no forgiveness, no holy fruit.

This , as I see it, is the primary reason these congegations reject, or minimize Paul, because he is so adamant as to Grace and the Blood alone; walking and living in the Spirit, as to attaining Heaven. Remember, that it was this very spirit that crucified Jesus, assasinated Him, and plagued Paul everywhere he went. They [Pharissees and Judiaizers] realized that they must do so, to keep their power. Sadly, it is the same as we see today in Messianics.

John Hagee has taken up their mantra, stating that there are even two gospels and two Messiahs, and many Christian Jews surely believe that there are two gospels; One for them including their heritage with Moses, and one for the goyim; Non-Jews. It is weird, and tragic, but it is surely a reality that we are facing.

The Catholics I confronted seemed to want to claim Peter as having the keys to the Kingdom, and be able to minimize Paul on a variety of issues;...[holy days, morality, Mariology, the authority of the Pope, etc. etc.].

Where would the Church be today without the recorded and inspired Word of God from our brother Paul. Probably we would not be here, if it were possible; The most significant man, outside of Jesus himself, in the New Testament, and right up there with the seated 24...!

C
Christinyou Aug 30, 2010

This is the reason Paul is so chastised and even beaten and ultimately killed. For putting Grace above the Law. This is the greatest statement I have found in the bible about Grace, without it we have no Grace.

Hebrews 1:5 For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?

By the full Grace of the Father the Son is Grace to His won Body the Church and The Son is pure Grace in presenting this Body to the Father that He might have son's in His house.

God to the Son is a Father and God to the Father is a Son.

This is our all in salvation, even before the foundation of the world. Ephesians 1:2-6 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

And then even making it happen in the Good pleasure of His will. Ephesians 2:1-10 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

What Grace this is and it must be revealed by the Holy Spirit by the revelation of Christ in the believer and us being recipients of us able to walk in the Spirit in Christ and Him being able to come through us as He is. For in this world, "as Christ is so are we".

How can a Messianic Jew come to this great revelation which stretches everything they have been taught to the breaking point where they must denounce all of their Jewish all, and accept Jesus as their all and their life with the life of the Son of God now living in them.

They are no longer Jews, but Messiah birth Christ-ones; Christians as all Gentiles in Christ are the same. None other can claim any preference before God, It is "Christ in you the Hope of Glory."

In Christ: Phillip

sermonindex Aug 30, 2010

Men today question the validity of Pauls messages for us today. This is really the heart of the issue.

Paul seems to be an Old Testament law giver in that he has so much do's and dont's that is pretty scary. On one hand he speaks about the grace of God and on the other a list of do's and dont's. Peter and James do the same thing and John seems to be a lover of love that one who really loves Jesus tends to lean towards than what Peter Paul and James is saying.

We have to stick with what has been done on the cross first and foremost. Much of what Paul spoke of concerning grace is explained in much detail in Romans, Galations and Ephesian and Hebrews.

Anything that the Apostle speaks of beyond grace I would have to take with a grain of salt, that is, as an observation only not as a command from our Lord that we should obey the actual letter, unless of course the holy Spirit has directly commanded that you should for your individual life.

I can understand the anger, the anger is more frustration. When you read the salvation to which Jesus offers and then you move into Pauls writings, one would tend to have never read beyond Romans there seems to be a lot of confusion beyond that.

Some of it is historical writings and meant only for the persons he was writing to as they were asking the questions.

We certainly can glean from it but again from an observation stand point.

D
DHuff Aug 30, 2010

Hi Snufalapagus: Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying we can take portions of Scripture, at our choosing, "with a grain of salt", deciding for ourselves which portions we are to obey, and which portions are merely historical? And that everything beyond Romans is confusing?

The fellow I mentioned at the start of this thread basically has that same view -- that he can decide which portions of God's Word are applicable and relevant, and which aren't. Personally, that would cause me great fear and trembling.

It was Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, who said (2 Tim 3:16) "all Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteouness, that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work"

That seems like much safer ground to me.

sermonindex Aug 31, 2010

Hi Snufalapagus: Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying we can take portions of Scripture, at our choosing, "with a grain of salt", deciding for ourselves which portions we are to obey, and which portions are merely historical? And that everything beyond Romans is confusing?

Yes!!

Unbelievably we all do it. That is why we have different camps called denominations. The Pentecostals have their take, the Baptists have their take and so on.

Myself, for me, I personally would rather have the inspiration of the Holy Spirit to reveal to me what Paul is saying than to read it in a commentary. I take what Paul said with a grain of salt until I hear a much more clearer understanding from God Himself who inspired him to write it. It is my belief that Paul never meant to bring anyone into bondage over his writings. Therefore, if he never meant that to happen, it has to be the lack of understanding on our part that is the problem and the reason why other men reject his writings as confusing. I am convinced that what Paul wrote was never meant for the ears of human flesh but for those who have ears to hear, let him hear what the Spirit is saying.

M
Miccah Aug 31, 2010

Snuf.

Careful brother. This is how cults start. When someone is unwilling to listen to godly brothers and sisters around him, and thinks that God talks "the truth" directly to them.

Not saying this is what you believe, but only to "test the spirit" when hearing.

Praise God that you have an ear to hear the Lord!

This discussion is locked.

Archived
1 of 16 posts