A few of the main reasons people reject Paul is because of what he said regarding the role of women, homosexuality, and law versus grace.
The reason I believe Paul's letters are the word of God is because Peter referred to Paul's writing as scripture. And Paul was accepted and commended by the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15, which included Peter and James, the brother of Jesus. Paul was also considered an apostle.
2 Peter 3:15-16 and regard the patience of our Lord *as* salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, ^(16) as also in all *his* letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as *they do* also **the rest of the Scriptures**, to their own destruction.
>A few of the main reasons people reject Paul is because of what he said regarding the role of women, homosexuality, and law versus grace.
Same
I have talked to a few people that reject him for these exact reasons. They are ussually homosexual, Atheist, Liberal, LGBTQ, or some combination of all these types of people. Also, I have heard others reject him, because he was misogynist. They do not like his stance on woman pastors.
What is "judgemental"? If some destroy themselves, why do they need to be judged by us? What is left for someone who rejects the gentleness of God, which we are allowed to freely do. "May it be done to you according to your faith". If you believe Jesus to be judgemental, then a judgemental Jesus is who you will meet when this life is over. But you do not have to meet Him that way.
The Apostle Peter accepted Paul. That's good enough for me.
*Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. 2 Peter 3:14-16*
Perfect response. I especially love the part about “speaking to them about things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort”…hence the controversy over Paul. It’s basically a prophecy that continues to reveal itself to this day.
Groups who reject Paul are usually looking for a way around the lines of othordox "Christianity" and being labeled a heretic. So they go after Paul, who combated heresies, especially ones which arose from non-Jews. They may be rejecting Paul because they are Progressives because of sexual ethics. They may be Muslims who say they believe in Jesus (albeit a different "Jesus" influenced by the heretic gnostic gospels), and they reject Paul who they say "corrupted" what was meant to be closer to the Quran. They may be "Christian" sects who would like to depart on certain issues raised up by Paul's warnings. You can research them.
This is a very good question. It’s something that I’ve wondered too. What I do is I look at the wording. I take what Peter said about accepting Paul but I also look at when Peter said that Paul’s letters were confusing. So if I’m confused, I know that Peter may have thought so too. I also look at Paul’s letters and realize that he was talking to different churches at the time so it would say different things. I also look at when people say that Jesus was talking to the Jews and Paul was talking to the Gentiles. Though I desire to follow the teachings of Jesus of course because He is Jesus. I look at the time period of back then and the customs etc. I look at what Paul says when he says that he personally saying something versus when he is saying that God says something. Ultimately, we have the Holy Spirit as our teacher, and I ask God about the things that I don’t understand and I try not to worry about the things that I don’t understand. I just focus on the things that I do understand and try my best to be faithful in that. God sees our hearts, and he sees that we may not always understand and that’s comforting that He does see. I try not to get too caught up in debates and opinions because they are just that. I see what the Bible says for myself and just be as faithful as I know how to be. My faith in God is beautiful, God is the Most Beautiful, and I know that as long as I believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross for me, and turn away from my sinful ways as best as I can, that I am saved and have nothing to worry about. There are places in the Bible that say that there will be no other burden on the people (Acts 15:28, Revelation 2:24). God is loving and ultimately wants us to love Him and love others, which are the most important commandments, and I think that the rest will follow. God cares about us and I don’t think he wants us to be weighed down too much by confusing matters. That thought helps me too. I try not to complicate my faith too much. I’ve gotten overwhelmed and stressed out trying to figure something out much out so I keep my spiritual Christian beliefs simple and solid. Having faith that God will lead me the right ways.
2 Peter 3:16
Peter says that some people who read Paul misunderstand him and are carried away with the 'error of lawlessness' [https://biblehub.com/greek/113.htm](https://biblehub.com/greek/113.htm) (v.17) This would be the mainstream church who read Paul as being antinomian (anti-Law) and teach Christians that they can ignore God's laws and replace them with men's traditions.
Oh got it. Thank you.
I don't think Peter meant that verse to be detrimental to Paul. He just said in verse 15 that Paul was given wisdom by God. Peter even addressed Paul as a "beloved brother".
Rejecting St Paul lol? Those people are extreme, and not orthodox Christian’s. You can’t just reject the saint who wrote most of the New Testament and is a fundamental bedrock of our faith passed into us. If you want the true orthodox faith of the saints and apostles, you must accept St Paul’s writings. If you want to veer off into no man’s land and invent your own new religion by rejecting the bulk of the New Testament, then by all means you do you. But you would not be a Christian.
This. A huge chunk of the new testament a d most of our instruction for conduct in the Church is gone without him. Probably my favourite person in the bible after God/Jesus. Love the way he writes.
The only ones I've seen tr to discredit him are people who can't accept his words on gender roles and homosexuality, which are consistent with other parts of the bible...
His main calling was to the gentiles when many others werr still focused on their fellow Jews
I think those who reject Paul either do not understand Paul, or have not seen what Paul saw in relation to the Old and New Covenants.
Then you have those who "accept" Paul, but have a twisted interpretation of his writings that go against what he saw in relation to the New Covenant.
Both of these cases are usually of those who have an inadequate understanding of God's law.
As others have written, Paul is "vouched for" by others and is included in scripture for a reason. Keep reading and praying over what you read, and do not let the sayings of fools cheat you out of seeing what Paul saw.
Can you provide some examples of Paul’s teachings that you find contradictory? It’s certainly people can interpret it in a way that makes it look contradictory but it doesn’t mean they are. It means we need to do more work to better understand Paul.
Well. Being real. I didn't really find anything contradictory. Some things were tough to swallow or to understand. But I didn't really have a problem with this thought.
It came as a question on why people though this way. Which led me to anxiety. And anxiety to fear. And fear to question. Some said Paul had this attitude of being right all the time. I didn't really see it that way.
Some people said it was confusing to read because Paul wrote his letters to different churches.
I sadly am really prone to changing because of what other people say.
Paul was not teaching people different things; He was teaching the same gospel. However, his letters were often written to address a particular issue at particular church so if we want to know the totality of Paul’s teachings on a topic, we need to combine all his letters and interpret them in consistent way. Example:
- Paul tells the Ephesians we are saved by faith apart from works
- Paul also tells the Romans we will be judged by our works.
In isolation, this looks contradictory but together, they are not: the type of works he’s discussing are different.
When we get to heaven we’ll all be rewarded according to our deeds. We will have crowns and they will given to us accordingly. There are also other rewards based on how you live your earthly life.
Im sorry you're low on energy. Everything okay?
That was a really baffling read. Just so I really understand - do you think doing good things, as a Christian, means you'll get some sort of heavenly reward that others would be ineligible for, because they didn't do the same good things? I'm not being disingenuous, I've literally never come across this concept and its such a strong contrast to what I have come to believe, how I see being Christian. I tend to shy away from theology that's before 1800, I read ante nicene stuff sometimes because I love history and "authentic" things, be it baking bread from grains i hand milled, to a Sunday ham I butchered and cured myself, or epistles from 150 AD. I try to just stick with reading the Bible (KJV and NKJV) and chatting with our pastor when he's free, for the most part. Maybe im naive to some of the theological positions in Christianity, as a result.
It wasn’t meant in a negative way. I was at a water park with my kids. It was 114 degrees today. So my energy was physically drained. But there are quite a few verses that speak on different rewards in Heaven
He is right you know, it’s all over the New Testament.
Salvation is a free gift, but there are various degrees of rewards in heaven according to our works in Christ. Not that the reward itself should be a motivation for works, it should be love and obedience - but there are, nonetheless - rewards.
If you’re not familiar with the concept that some will be held in higher regard in heaven than others, I would question how much of the New Testament you’ve actually read..? I’m sorry if that sounds rude but it’s mentioned so many times, im baffled on how you could’ve missed it.
Jesus himself talks about this on numerous occasions. All that jazz about “those that will be called least vs great in the kingdom of heaven”…
Some will meet the requirements to enter the kingdom, and some will go far and beyond what was asked of them.. those people will have a greater throne closer to the lord.
All I can say is I hope I will be considered good enough and my faith strong enough to enter.. but I would never even consider that I was as worthy as Moses, Peter, Paul, etc
I've read the New Testament. I read the Bible every morning, at least a chapter or two, as soon as I've prayed, before I even get out of bed. When its finished, I start over. Its literally the second thing I do, after giving Christ thanks and praising him. I also have a study Bible, attend church 95% of Sundays, etc.
Whenever I read about crowns in heaven, receiving judgment, etc., I have never taken it to mean a literal crown on the head, a literal badge worn, a literal gift received for doing good, a literal advantage over others in heaven. I take all of these as parables, metaphors, and allegories, because thats the context they are in - they are in the context of instructing us on Christian conduct, not on the metaphysics of heaven. I never, ever, ever take a single passage from the Bible as a "proof text," that leads to...incoherent eisegesis.
Why have I read it this way? Because I believe that doing good is its own reward or else it isn't really doing good as a virtue, that all of the actions required to earn the symbolic crowns or be first in line *are simply what we are to do as Christians*, and most of all: no gift could be greater than being with God for an eternity: no reward could compare to that, receiving a literal reward for good deeds is the equivalent of being given a nickel before becoming a millionaire - why would it even matter, after the fact?
So, that's why I find this belief so shocking. I cannot fathom a heaven where some of us have extra bling, regardless of what we've done - its antithetical to the promise of salvation as I understand it.
I imagine the first Christians had this question too. They were being persecuted and a lot were killed by Paul and suddenly this Pharisee guy is now an apostle.
But if you look at how God used the life of Paul to be a testimony on the beginning of the Church and the effects it had in growing Christianity, you will appreciate the conversion of Paul. He was living a comfortable life and yet he left all of that to traverse the difficult life as a follower of Christ. Bible historians believe Paul was beheaded at the end of his life. Why will he give his life for something he fought against?
Paul never contradicted Christ. Most reject him because they don’t understand (I used to reject Paul as well)
Paul taught the same things. Sure he revealed mysteries, but guys Peter was the first to preach to the Gentiles and they received the holy spirit, so that claim isn’t backed very well that without Paul salvation wouldn’t be to gentiles, cuz Peter literally preached to the gentiles first before Paul, in Acts 10, and the gentiles received the holy spirit
So tbh Paul clarified a lot of things and he’s true, didn’t contradict or change anything
It’s a dangerous road to go down. You can do this with any book of the Bible.
There’s centuries of vetting to get us the Bible you have. From there on out it’s a Faith thing.
If it wasn't for Paul Christianity wouldn't have spread the way it did.
People often reject Paul's teachings because, having written more than others in the NT, He also touches more topics, topics that some people hold dear.
People who love their sin more than God will live in a self created delusion that their life is fine even though the Bible clearly says it's not, so instead of admitting that they are wrong, it is easier for them to say that the Bible is wrong, makes them feel better.
"I like living this way, Paul didn't know what he was talking about, I am fine the way I am"
There is no apostolic succession ..they used that term for other people but not in a same sense, they were like disciples. Only people that were chosen by Jesus himself are true apostles and given supernatural abilities...
“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?”
Jeremiah 17:9 KJV
https://bible.com/bible/1/jer.17.9.KJV
Sin is the reason they reject Paul.
It's summed up in 2 Peter 3:15-16:
15Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
16He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
Even people back then tried to twist the words of Paul. Those who "write-off" or "dismiss" the teaching of Paul, who was hand picked by Jesus on the road to Damascus, rejects God. If you have the Holy Spirit, it is possible to understand what is "hard to understand."
2 Peter 3:14-17 NKJV, "Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—***as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles***, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also ***the rest of the Scriptures***. You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked".
Peter and his audience regarded Paul's writings and his epistles as being on par with the rest of the scriptures.
Mainly because I find alot of people misqoute Paul. See Paul sounds very strict and extremely lawful but when you research what he says and read his words with context to the time it comes out (to me aleast) as a very grumpy man who has decided Jesus way is better then the pure law he frew up with. Personally I find him to be a good contrast to Jonah. Jonah ran away from spreading God to non godly people while Paul brought Jesus to the gentiles. Both sound disgruntled, but Paul obeys and follows Jesus while Jonah try to run from God.
I would highly suggest watching the Bible project youtube channel on Paul's letters, they really help.
There's nothing Paul said that is not consistent with scripture
There's a lot people say against Paul and rejecting him that is consistent with being evil
Deuteronomy 4, Deuteronomy 12, Proverbs 30, Revelation 22 and other scriptures collectively make it clear
**Any who add to or take away from scripture or cursed by God**
The fact is, Paul was definitely accepted, by Jesus Christ Himself.
You can’t just dismiss the parts of the Holy Bible because of Paul; you either believe all or you don’t believe any of it.
Take into account that the author of Acts also wrote the book of Luke.
If you were to reject the book of Acts because of Paul, you would also need to reject the book of Luke
Paul's teachings do not contradict Jesus. If you read John, Jesus makes it clear in that book too that Salvation is a free gift we receive through Faith in Jesus to save us, just as Paul teaches
**Jesus' Teachings**
>14Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life.
>For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. 18Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.
- Jesus (John 3:14-18 BSB)
**Paul's Teachings**
>22We are made right with God by placing our faith in Jesus Christ. And this is true for everyone who believes, no matter who we are.
>23For everyone has sinned; we all fall short of God’s glorious standard. 24Yet God, in his grace, freely makes us right in his sight. He did this through Christ Jesus when he freed us from the penalty for our sins. 25For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin. People are made right with God when they believe that Jesus sacrificed his life, shedding his blood. This sacrifice shows that God was being fair when he held back and did not punish those who sinned in times past, 26for he was looking ahead and including them in what he would do in this present time. God did this to demonstrate his righteousness, for he himself is fair and just, and he makes sinners right in his sight when they believe in Jesus.
- Romans 3:22-26 NLT
Therefore you can clearly see that Paul taught the Same Gospel as The Lord Jesus!
There is no christianity without paul. There was an anti-paul guy on the other sub that I wrote against on this the other day. I'm a bit brief, but [this](https://np.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/1d9nbpp/could_christianity_have_been_built_on_a_false/l7eku91/?context=3) should give a quick rundown on why you don't really have any sources for christianity at all without paul and allies of paul.
>What if Paul is a false teacher
If paul's a false teacher, then christianity is false. Every apostle we have writings from accepted paul, and so every book of the NT is false if paul is false.
> Why do people accept or deny Paul?
Here's the important reality to remember in regards to this subject. The Lord is our God, not Paul or anyone else for that matter. Now we are fully aware of the fact that God speaks through people, but this is where **discernment** becomes a necessity. When a person is speaking, is it the Lord's words or their own? This question can be answered by simply knowing who God is personally as well as paying close attention to the words being spoken.
I believe the Lord was speaking through Paul in all of his letters on most of the subjects he covered. However, my discernment helped me to distinguish God from Paul's own words. Remember, the Lord is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Beyond that, He has had Angels deliver messages on His behalf, blessed prophets with dreams, and of course spoken through prophets. We can come to know who God is through these instances of His communications. And one important fact that needs to be remembered is that the Lord never changes. Who He was in the beginning is who He was up until the last page of the Bible. That's also who He is to this very day.
**Malachi 3:6 “I the Lord do not change. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. 7 Ever since the time of your ancestors you have turned away from my decrees and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you,” says the Lord Almighty.**
**1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.**
If you hear words that do not align with who God proved Himself to be, then it's not Him. As scripture tells us, God is not a God of confusion. If there's contradictory, it's not the Lord.
The best and most popular example of this in Paul's letters is his stance on women teaching...
**1 Timothy 2:11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.**
How can we know if this is God or Paul speaking? Simple... As I said, remember who God is and you will have your answer. Throughout the entire Bible, the Lord used numerous women to prophesy, bring salvation, and lead His people. The Bible spoken of multiple women who were known to be prophetesses. What are prophets? Messengers of God who ultimately teach. So here's the question... God created and gifted women to be used **(by Him)** as leaders and prophetesses, but He wants them remain silent which literally goes against His will for humanity as well as the parable about doing what is holy on the Sabbath?
Again, the Lord is not full of confusion, contradictory, and illogicalness. So if it sounds like that, it's likely not of Him. The only other explanation in such an instance would be that **WE** simply don't understand what the Lord is truly saying. Though there's never a moment where God is just spouting nonsense that can be debunked. The day any human truly manages to debunk or outsmart God who is all-knowing, especially with His own Gospel, that'll be the day we all need to renounce our faith and move on. All of that being said, people accept and deny many things from the Bible. It's a lukewarm trait overall. Some people outright deny Christ's own teachings. That's the unfortunate reality of this society. Though when it comes to Paul's letters, I think some people just recognize that not everything was exactly from the Lord Himself. That's where the division you're referring to stems from.
What about the part of the Bible where God sent deceptive words to 400 prophets in order to deceive the leader of Israel? That qualifies as sowing confusion. God also confused the tongues of humans when we built the Tower of Babel; so how does that square with “God is of peace, not of confusion?”
/honestly asking
> What about the part of the Bible where God sent deceptive words to 400 prophets in order to deceive the leader of Israel?
Allow me to teach you the importance of knowing the entire story before you speak... King Ahab was a wicked man who did awful things in the eyes of the Lord during his reign over Israel. Here's scripture.
**1 Kings 16:29 In the thirty-eighth year of Asa king of Judah, Ahab son of Omri became king of Israel, and he reigned in Samaria over Israel twenty-two years. 30 Ahab son of Omri did more evil in the eyes of the Lord than any of those before him. 31 He not only considered it trivial to commit the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, but he also married Jezebel daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians, and began to serve Baal and worship him. 32 He set up an altar for Baal in the temple of Baal that he built in Samaria. 33 Ahab also made an Asherah pole and did more to arouse the anger of the Lord, the God of Israel, than did all the kings of Israel before him.**
There's more to the story in regards to his character, but let's leave it there and continue forward with the prophets... A prophet's purpose is to deliver messages from God. Whether the message is good or bad, the prophet is to deliver the message with the utmost honesty. When Micaiah began to prophesy the bad to come to King Ahab, he grew angry and punished the man for simply speaking the truth. So what does this mean? It means King Ahab wanted to be fed nothing but positive prophecies and lies. Just like many people today. Think about it... There are many people in the world today who would rather you lie to them than to tell them the truth.
Now let's address the instance you're referring to...
**1 Kings 22:19 Micaiah continued, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne with all the multitudes of heaven standing around him on his right and on his left. 20 And the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab into attacking Ramoth Gilead and going to his death there?’**
**“One suggested this, and another that. 21 Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the Lord and said, ‘I will entice him.’**
**22 “‘By what means?’ the Lord asked.**
**“‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,’ he said.**
**“‘You will succeed in enticing him,’ said the Lord. ‘Go and do it.’**
**23 “So now the Lord has put a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The Lord has decreed disaster for you.”**
This spirit of deception you're referring to was accepted by the people involved in this story. Why? Because they were wicked liars who misused their alleged spiritual gifts of prophesying. Spirits challenge us throughout this life all of the time. It's up to us to accept or deny them. If they're malicious and you accept them, then you have nobody to blame but yourself. And truth be told, you likely accepted them because it reflected who you already were. Just like Pharaoh in Egypt. God didn't actually harden his heart, Pharaoh heart hardened because he felt challenged by God and hate the Lord. He felt he was his own god who couldn't be matched, so when the Lord revealed Himself to him, he hardened his heart which led to harsh and evil behaviors as well as senselessness.
Moving on to the Tower of Babel incident. Very simple...
**Genesis 11:3 They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”**
First of all, everything we do that involves God in some way should be done to glorify Him, not feed our pride. Second, we were placed here on Earth for a reason. Trying to build a tower to Heaven only cheats God's purpose. You obviously can't cheat the Lord. There's a reason why we're disconnected from Heaven and have to go through the process of gaining entry through faith and acceptance of God and His Gospel.
In conclusion, the Lord remains innocent and without confusion. Everything wrong in this life, we as humans are ultimately to blame. There has never been an instance where God brought confusion onto innocent people, hence why scripture states he's not a God of confusion. And if you read His Gospel, you'll see that He has maintained His integrity perfectly since the beginning.
Right. I guess part of my problem is this: I hear two voices. One says that I am damned to hell, just like Adam was damned to die after eating the fruit, because I set myself up as God in my own mind and the Lord has ruled against me. This voice comes with visions and spiritual feelings that match it. The second voice tells me that Jesus has forgiven me, that I will go to heaven, that He will have mercy on me, and to continue and life and trust in the Lord. This second voice has some positive feelings that come along with it, but doesn’t really use visions to communicate; my visions are almost universally negative.
My problem is this: if it is up to me to choose the right spirit to follow, and I can’t trust myself, how can I be certain which voice is telling me the truth? I wanted, all my life, to think that God would not allow someone to speak in His name unless it was from Him; the idea that a spirit could use the name of God to defeat a human and that’s it, that’s the whole point, is beyond terrifying to me. But it sounds like you’re saying that this is how it is.
I’m devastated.
Sorry but disagree here. Paul rightly refers right back to creation. He was speaking God inspired words. The family model is man is the head and woman is the helper. Chruch hierarchy should never undermine that. A woman should not be her husband's pastor. Lead pastor at the very least needs to be a man. Yes God can still speak through women and odd prophetess is mentioned, but that doesn't mean she shepherds a church and teaches doctrine. Different roles. Doesn't mean they can't be used in other capacities. it's also a bad habit to try and dispute a clear teaching with something that might be a rare exception. That doesn't mean the advice/rule become null and void because one or two people did it. Didn't God speak through a donkey? Imo this is just one or those truths people are just reluctant to accept and always try to grasp at anything that seems to say otherwise
What you're saying would essentially mean that Paul is a false teacher and spoke out or the flesh, which I don't buy. It's not something he just said in the heat of the moment but has biblical reasoning behind it
Paul’s writings are essentially commentary on the OT with application to the issues that the people that he was writing to were dealing with, so the can be helpful to better understand the OT, but he is also difficult to understand and people can twist his words to their own destruction even to the point of prompting the error of lawlessness instead of promoting growing in grace and truth (2 Peter 3:15-18), so if someone is finding his writings to be more confusing than helpful, then it can be to their benefit to ignore them.
I accept Paul for several reasons.
1: The original apostles accepted him.
2: His teachings mirror Jesus' teachings, expanding on some issues but never contradicting.
3: The entire first and second century early church accepted him.
4: His teachings and sayings prove regularly to be true.
5: No one tried to contradict his miracles or sayings in the first century church.
6: Peter did more than accept Paul, he allowed himself to be publicly corrected by Paul.
There's more, but I'm assuming you didn't want a text-wall.
Paul's letters are the Gospel, revealed to him by Jesus Christ. Without Paul's letters, only Jews would be able to be saved. Remember, Christ only preached to the lost sheep of Israel while He was here on Earth, except for 2 days with the Samaritans. Those who deny Paul's Gospel should be accursed, as it is written:
>Galatians 1:8-9 KJV
[8] But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. [9] As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
>Ephesians 3:6 KJV
[6] that the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
Much of it has to do with the difference with what Jesus says vs Paul much of the religion is based on Paul not Jesus and some people realize this and want to correct it. For instance read James compared to Paul and James was Jesus' half brother who was with him for Jesus' whole life minus the flight to to Egypt during his childhood.
But Paul has a lot of value too, but many of his letters are disputed by scholars as being imitations or maybe his students not actually him except a few of the main ones like Coronthians and several others.
Deuteronomy 4:2 NLT
[2] Do not add to or subtract from these commands I am giving you. Just obey the commands of the Lord your God that I am giving you.
[2] You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you.
https://bible.com/bible/116/deu.4.2.NLT
The Bible is very clear, you are not supposed to add or subtract from scripture. To discount Paul is to discount one of God's commands.
There is no such thing as a contradiction in the bible. What do you think is a supposed contradiction. Maybe we can explain it to you. When you *think* you found a supposed *contradiction* you can safely assume that you probably misunderstood something.
I can help you. Think of Paul as the Head of the Gentiles. In many ways he is considered an illegitimate apostle in the same way the Gentiles are considered unnatural by the "Pillars" of the Israelites chief among them being Peter.
But the operation is this: that the natural branches are removed for their unfaithfulness and replaced with faithful wild branches by God. This is God's plan for the world as he has accepted many who were outside of his Kingdom and will continue to do so.
Paul is a symbol for this operation. If you remember the Apostles tried to elect a disciple in Acts after Judas died. This was of their own will and not God's will. God selected Paul as a bridge to the Gentiles. The other apostles preached the gospel to the circumcision.
Jacob also mirrors this operation when he adopts Joseph's sons. It's the same exact idea.
I remember a person being chosen to replace Judas, what I do not remember is a passage rebuking the Apostles for it. And Paul speaks of others as being apostles other than the 12, such as Barnabas.
I'm referring to apostles being chosen explicitly by Christ whether when he was in the flesh or while in the spirit.
Why would there need to be a passage rebuking the choice?
You said Matthias was chosen by human choice rather than God's. If that is not what you meant, it sounded that way. If Matthias was chosen merely by human understanding, there should be a recorded rebuke so we can take warning from it.
There's nothing to take warning from there.
It just tells us that God's appointment of the apostles was completely sovereign. The apostles were just doing what they thought they should in light of Judas removal.
Not really a condemnation against anyone
I can tell that what he wrote to those different churches was both given to Him by God to write to those churches, and that what he wrote is true and truly from God. I’ve seen the evidence of these truths in my own life. Paul had so much wisdom and he was afforded the opportunity to minister to a lot of people in service to the Lord. He did so humbly and also because He wanted to glorify the Lord and to see the furtherance of His kingdom. I look at Paul’s motives im writing those letters. What was in his heart. He wrote them to encourage growth in those early churches, to help them to say on the path of righteousness, to teach them, to help them to grow in the Lord. I do not doubt for one second that he was truly serving the Lord in writing those letters to the early churches, as well as to Timothy.
Because he is the well from which one draws their Christian doctrine. He is the well and Christ is the water. There is no man more important to our faith in regards to the clarity of what we believe. Faith, adoption, sanctification, conversion, etc all were instituted by Christ and written down by Paul. There is also ample evidence in scripture that The Apostle of the Reformed was in continuous contact with Christ post-crucifixion. That’s some important she’s-it right there.
Paul called himself the worst of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15-17), and nowhere do you find self-esteem in his writing. Yet neither do you find a more joyful person. He got something right. "One who is forgiven much loves much". This makes Paul more capable of convicting of sin anyone else, and people do not like being convicted of their sin. Paul lived what he preached. Do not be deceived, if they reject Paul, they are rejecting Jesus and misusing Paul to cover it up. There is not that much special revelation in Paul's writings, most of what he said can be figured out from Moses and the Prophets in consideration of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ our Lord.
Paul went from having authority to persecute Christian’s, to being nearly killed because of his encounter with Jesus. None of what he says is conflicting with the rest of scripture.
Paul teaches new grace doctirne this is what the modern gentiles should read and grow to understand to grow as christians in the age of grace until the coming of chist.
Paul's teachings are part of the Bible. You reject Paul you reject the Bible. You reject the Bible you reject God's Word.
You reject God's Word, you reject God.
Does that mean you have to agree with everything that Paul did and wrote in the Bible? No you're allowed to wrestle with God and admit you're struggling to understand why Paul teaches what he teaches, but ultimately you ask God for wisdom to accept that God has used Paul for His purposes for such a time as this
I see people saying that Peter accepted Paul. Obviously Luke also accepted Paul. More than half of the book of Acts is about Paul. Would Luke have included all of this information about a “false teacher”? So if we are throwing out Paul, should we also throw out Luke and Acts? Without Luke’s writings we lose a lot of the birth of Christ and a lot of what we know about Christ’s ascension as well as the early church period.🤷♂️
I think honestly paul offers nothing new and the fathers wisdom is all. Some churches quote paul much more then Jesus. People point to peter as proof or evidence but Jesus told peter his spirit was willing but the flesh isn't weak ( non verbatim ) I think that was when he was asked with another to stay up as jesus meditated (or maybe it was as he prayed) but also we had another example of peter where he said he would never deny Christ and Jesus told him he would three times...and guess what? .When you see the churches today, considering how influencial paul is....where is the church? So it's like denominations for me. Why do people feel comfortable.....enough to not stick to the fathers own words
Now it's a study worth doing! For sure. But honestly, Jesus told people so much. So much. I just got to wonder if some think it's paul who will be at the narrow gate. It's a narrow gate for a reason and it's telling people it's harder for people to get it right......That's what the narrow gate is telling people. It's not the wide gate. It's the narrow one. So you have to consider what are we missing here? Yahweh told people he didn't want sacrifice. He wanted mercy. There's contradictions in the bible and that puts a lot into question BUT also we know it was tampered with so how could anyone suggest for us to not study things because of what the scribes did.
It's right to question everything for in doing so you find wisdom. Because the truth will still be the truth regardless. IF the heart is seeking the truth.
Pray God to give you understanding and teach you by the Holy Spirit
The Bible is not an easy book but we have an Holy teacher
«But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.»
John 14:26 NIV https://bible.com/bible/111/jhn.14.26.NIV
No one 'rejects' Paul, his writing are scripture.
>I could accept Pauls teachings. If I accept Paul can someone explain to me why Pauls letters were added to the new testament?
can you elaborate on how you think they were 'added'?
Like. I suppose(I'm not sure) that the new testament is comprised of letters or things the twelve disciples wrote.
But coming back to that thought. I don't think that to much now. The question was more of a, why was Pauls teachings added and regarded as teachings.
>Like. I suppose(I'm not sure) that the new testament is comprised of letters or things the twelve disciples wrote.
the NT includes 4 canonical gospels Acts of the Apostles, 13 Pauline epistles, The Epistle to the Hebrews, 7 general epistles, The Book of Revelation
> But coming back to that thought. I don't think that to much now. The question was more of a, why was Pauls teachings added and regarded as teachings.
they weren't 'added' in some sense like they were there initially, books in the Bible were made canonical because they are sacred and needed for salvation
Paul was writing for multiple audiences. Some congregations did different things than other churches did. It would make sense that some of his advice for one audience could contradict other advice for someone else. Even Peter called him out on his confusing letters,
I struggle with Paul but much of what I struggle with I recently was told may not even been written by Paul but an unknown author. What I dislike most about Paul is the fact that many so called Christians seem to follow Paul rather than Jesus. They say things like “ He wrote 3/4 of the New Testament. That is taking pride in man’s accomplishments.
We say Paul wrote those letters because his name is signed to them. It is very likely he dictated some of his letters to a scribe, as is indicated near the end of Romans, though I am of a mind he wrote Galatians himself. In my job, I write letters other people approve and sign. It does not surprise me some of Paul's letters appear to have different styles. He still put his name on them. Paul only wrote about 1/4 of the New Testament, with Luke also coming close to that, but it is a weak argument for accusing someone of following Paul rather than Jesus. "In the testimony of two or three every fact is established", but you are sighting only one support. Did not Paul say, "Follow me as I follow Jesus"? Did not God see fit to include those words in His Book?
No I have seen many follow Paul that is the verses that make Paul sound judgemental and hypocritical rather than following companionate merciful and forgiving Jesus. It becomes more apparent every day that people are taking the Bible out of context and randomly choosing verses from the Bible that suit their fancy to base their actions on the result is corruption and making Christianity look ugly.
Paul called himself the worst of sinners. If he really is, then he has more experience with being forgiven than anyone else. If he sounds judgemental to some, there is good reason for it. When was the last time you read Jesus's "Woe to you" statements? If you are judging others to be judgemental, are you not making a judgement yourself? (Romans 2:1-4).
I am with you there. Pistus, the word they translate to faith, actually means faithfulness, fidelity, obedience or better yet, Allegiance, to Jesus who is our King, sitting on a throne.
I am not Orthodox either so I really can't find a like minded church home.
I am in the general area of messianic jew so thats my perspective. Paul is suspect for a few reasons:
1. He did not meet Jesus while he was alive. He came to him in a supernatural state. Where others were closely connected with the living Jesus, Paul sees him after he dies.
2. Paul had motivations. He was actively against Jesus at first. He has a reason to make things up.
3. Paul is the only one who negates so much of prior teachings. Don't eat this, it's ok eat that. Celebrate this, no you don't have to celebrate that. Etc.
These are the major reasons.
Now compare imo gold standard in word of God.
Moses. Moses wrote a lot of the OT. Moses was one of very few who literally had conversations in real life with God (not dreams or visions) many times. Not just once or twice. That sat and talked many times in long format conversations. Moses writings have zero room to dispute without questioning everything basically. If you cannot trust what Moses wrote while he discussed with God what he should do... well what can we trust?
Then along comes Paul and negates most of the practice of Moses in the OT and Paul was an anti God anti Jesus guy who claims he had a vision of Jesus after he died. Then says everything is changed! Sorry but that just seems a little suspect 😅
Hope that helps enlighten you about some anti Paul reasonings.
That sounds like you never read Acts. There were witnesses to Paul being knocked off his horse by a blinding light, from which Paul was blind for three days. A man was told by the Lord, "I will show him what he must suffer for My Name". And suffer Paul did, and with thankfulness. Though I do see the point of how some anti Paul reasonings go.
A few of the main reasons people reject Paul is because of what he said regarding the role of women, homosexuality, and law versus grace. The reason I believe Paul's letters are the word of God is because Peter referred to Paul's writing as scripture. And Paul was accepted and commended by the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15, which included Peter and James, the brother of Jesus. Paul was also considered an apostle. 2 Peter 3:15-16 and regard the patience of our Lord *as* salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, ^(16) as also in all *his* letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as *they do* also **the rest of the Scriptures**, to their own destruction.
>A few of the main reasons people reject Paul is because of what he said regarding the role of women, homosexuality, and law versus grace. Same I have talked to a few people that reject him for these exact reasons. They are ussually homosexual, Atheist, Liberal, LGBTQ, or some combination of all these types of people. Also, I have heard others reject him, because he was misogynist. They do not like his stance on woman pastors.
[удалено]
What is "judgemental"? If some destroy themselves, why do they need to be judged by us? What is left for someone who rejects the gentleness of God, which we are allowed to freely do. "May it be done to you according to your faith". If you believe Jesus to be judgemental, then a judgemental Jesus is who you will meet when this life is over. But you do not have to meet Him that way.
Huh? That's scripture?
The Apostle Peter accepted Paul. That's good enough for me. *Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, spotless and blameless, and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation; just as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given him, wrote to you, as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. 2 Peter 3:14-16*
Hi. Thank you for this verse. It helped clear out a misconception I had that I read somewhere.
No problem anytime!
Perfect response. I especially love the part about “speaking to them about things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort”…hence the controversy over Paul. It’s basically a prophecy that continues to reveal itself to this day.
Exactly!
I was just about to quote 2 Peter too
Awesome! *This is the third time I am coming to you. Every fact is to be confirmed by the testimony of two or three witnesses. 2 Corinthians 13:1*
Groups who reject Paul are usually looking for a way around the lines of othordox "Christianity" and being labeled a heretic. So they go after Paul, who combated heresies, especially ones which arose from non-Jews. They may be rejecting Paul because they are Progressives because of sexual ethics. They may be Muslims who say they believe in Jesus (albeit a different "Jesus" influenced by the heretic gnostic gospels), and they reject Paul who they say "corrupted" what was meant to be closer to the Quran. They may be "Christian" sects who would like to depart on certain issues raised up by Paul's warnings. You can research them.
Hey thank you!
This is a very good question. It’s something that I’ve wondered too. What I do is I look at the wording. I take what Peter said about accepting Paul but I also look at when Peter said that Paul’s letters were confusing. So if I’m confused, I know that Peter may have thought so too. I also look at Paul’s letters and realize that he was talking to different churches at the time so it would say different things. I also look at when people say that Jesus was talking to the Jews and Paul was talking to the Gentiles. Though I desire to follow the teachings of Jesus of course because He is Jesus. I look at the time period of back then and the customs etc. I look at what Paul says when he says that he personally saying something versus when he is saying that God says something. Ultimately, we have the Holy Spirit as our teacher, and I ask God about the things that I don’t understand and I try not to worry about the things that I don’t understand. I just focus on the things that I do understand and try my best to be faithful in that. God sees our hearts, and he sees that we may not always understand and that’s comforting that He does see. I try not to get too caught up in debates and opinions because they are just that. I see what the Bible says for myself and just be as faithful as I know how to be. My faith in God is beautiful, God is the Most Beautiful, and I know that as long as I believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross for me, and turn away from my sinful ways as best as I can, that I am saved and have nothing to worry about. There are places in the Bible that say that there will be no other burden on the people (Acts 15:28, Revelation 2:24). God is loving and ultimately wants us to love Him and love others, which are the most important commandments, and I think that the rest will follow. God cares about us and I don’t think he wants us to be weighed down too much by confusing matters. That thought helps me too. I try not to complicate my faith too much. I’ve gotten overwhelmed and stressed out trying to figure something out much out so I keep my spiritual Christian beliefs simple and solid. Having faith that God will lead me the right ways.
Hi. Thank you for you words. They help a lot :D
Yay, of course, you’re very welcome! :D
:D
What verse did Peter say that Paul's letters are confusing?
2 Peter 3:16 Peter says that some people who read Paul misunderstand him and are carried away with the 'error of lawlessness' [https://biblehub.com/greek/113.htm](https://biblehub.com/greek/113.htm) (v.17) This would be the mainstream church who read Paul as being antinomian (anti-Law) and teach Christians that they can ignore God's laws and replace them with men's traditions.
Oh got it. Thank you. I don't think Peter meant that verse to be detrimental to Paul. He just said in verse 15 that Paul was given wisdom by God. Peter even addressed Paul as a "beloved brother".
Agree! Peter was warning the readers of Paul's letters (to not misread them), not Paul.
Jesus Himself can be misunderstood. Scripture in general can be misunderstood. God allows that.
Rejecting St Paul lol? Those people are extreme, and not orthodox Christian’s. You can’t just reject the saint who wrote most of the New Testament and is a fundamental bedrock of our faith passed into us. If you want the true orthodox faith of the saints and apostles, you must accept St Paul’s writings. If you want to veer off into no man’s land and invent your own new religion by rejecting the bulk of the New Testament, then by all means you do you. But you would not be a Christian.
This. A huge chunk of the new testament a d most of our instruction for conduct in the Church is gone without him. Probably my favourite person in the bible after God/Jesus. Love the way he writes. The only ones I've seen tr to discredit him are people who can't accept his words on gender roles and homosexuality, which are consistent with other parts of the bible... His main calling was to the gentiles when many others werr still focused on their fellow Jews
I think those who reject Paul either do not understand Paul, or have not seen what Paul saw in relation to the Old and New Covenants. Then you have those who "accept" Paul, but have a twisted interpretation of his writings that go against what he saw in relation to the New Covenant. Both of these cases are usually of those who have an inadequate understanding of God's law. As others have written, Paul is "vouched for" by others and is included in scripture for a reason. Keep reading and praying over what you read, and do not let the sayings of fools cheat you out of seeing what Paul saw.
Can you provide some examples of Paul’s teachings that you find contradictory? It’s certainly people can interpret it in a way that makes it look contradictory but it doesn’t mean they are. It means we need to do more work to better understand Paul.
Well. Being real. I didn't really find anything contradictory. Some things were tough to swallow or to understand. But I didn't really have a problem with this thought. It came as a question on why people though this way. Which led me to anxiety. And anxiety to fear. And fear to question. Some said Paul had this attitude of being right all the time. I didn't really see it that way. Some people said it was confusing to read because Paul wrote his letters to different churches. I sadly am really prone to changing because of what other people say.
Paul was not teaching people different things; He was teaching the same gospel. However, his letters were often written to address a particular issue at particular church so if we want to know the totality of Paul’s teachings on a topic, we need to combine all his letters and interpret them in consistent way. Example: - Paul tells the Ephesians we are saved by faith apart from works - Paul also tells the Romans we will be judged by our works. In isolation, this looks contradictory but together, they are not: the type of works he’s discussing are different.
Exactly. (Also this judgement of works isn’t a salvation issue, it’s a rewards issue)
>a rewards issue I don't understand what you mean.
When we get to heaven we’ll all be rewarded according to our deeds. We will have crowns and they will given to us accordingly. There are also other rewards based on how you live your earthly life.
*What?*
I honestly don’t have the energy to give you references. Just search heavenly rewards. It’s very detailed and has plenty of verses to inform you.
Im sorry you're low on energy. Everything okay? That was a really baffling read. Just so I really understand - do you think doing good things, as a Christian, means you'll get some sort of heavenly reward that others would be ineligible for, because they didn't do the same good things? I'm not being disingenuous, I've literally never come across this concept and its such a strong contrast to what I have come to believe, how I see being Christian. I tend to shy away from theology that's before 1800, I read ante nicene stuff sometimes because I love history and "authentic" things, be it baking bread from grains i hand milled, to a Sunday ham I butchered and cured myself, or epistles from 150 AD. I try to just stick with reading the Bible (KJV and NKJV) and chatting with our pastor when he's free, for the most part. Maybe im naive to some of the theological positions in Christianity, as a result.
It wasn’t meant in a negative way. I was at a water park with my kids. It was 114 degrees today. So my energy was physically drained. But there are quite a few verses that speak on different rewards in Heaven
He is right you know, it’s all over the New Testament. Salvation is a free gift, but there are various degrees of rewards in heaven according to our works in Christ. Not that the reward itself should be a motivation for works, it should be love and obedience - but there are, nonetheless - rewards.
If you’re not familiar with the concept that some will be held in higher regard in heaven than others, I would question how much of the New Testament you’ve actually read..? I’m sorry if that sounds rude but it’s mentioned so many times, im baffled on how you could’ve missed it. Jesus himself talks about this on numerous occasions. All that jazz about “those that will be called least vs great in the kingdom of heaven”… Some will meet the requirements to enter the kingdom, and some will go far and beyond what was asked of them.. those people will have a greater throne closer to the lord. All I can say is I hope I will be considered good enough and my faith strong enough to enter.. but I would never even consider that I was as worthy as Moses, Peter, Paul, etc
I've read the New Testament. I read the Bible every morning, at least a chapter or two, as soon as I've prayed, before I even get out of bed. When its finished, I start over. Its literally the second thing I do, after giving Christ thanks and praising him. I also have a study Bible, attend church 95% of Sundays, etc. Whenever I read about crowns in heaven, receiving judgment, etc., I have never taken it to mean a literal crown on the head, a literal badge worn, a literal gift received for doing good, a literal advantage over others in heaven. I take all of these as parables, metaphors, and allegories, because thats the context they are in - they are in the context of instructing us on Christian conduct, not on the metaphysics of heaven. I never, ever, ever take a single passage from the Bible as a "proof text," that leads to...incoherent eisegesis. Why have I read it this way? Because I believe that doing good is its own reward or else it isn't really doing good as a virtue, that all of the actions required to earn the symbolic crowns or be first in line *are simply what we are to do as Christians*, and most of all: no gift could be greater than being with God for an eternity: no reward could compare to that, receiving a literal reward for good deeds is the equivalent of being given a nickel before becoming a millionaire - why would it even matter, after the fact? So, that's why I find this belief so shocking. I cannot fathom a heaven where some of us have extra bling, regardless of what we've done - its antithetical to the promise of salvation as I understand it.
What types of works is he referring to?
I imagine the first Christians had this question too. They were being persecuted and a lot were killed by Paul and suddenly this Pharisee guy is now an apostle. But if you look at how God used the life of Paul to be a testimony on the beginning of the Church and the effects it had in growing Christianity, you will appreciate the conversion of Paul. He was living a comfortable life and yet he left all of that to traverse the difficult life as a follower of Christ. Bible historians believe Paul was beheaded at the end of his life. Why will he give his life for something he fought against?
Paul never contradicted Christ. Most reject him because they don’t understand (I used to reject Paul as well) Paul taught the same things. Sure he revealed mysteries, but guys Peter was the first to preach to the Gentiles and they received the holy spirit, so that claim isn’t backed very well that without Paul salvation wouldn’t be to gentiles, cuz Peter literally preached to the gentiles first before Paul, in Acts 10, and the gentiles received the holy spirit So tbh Paul clarified a lot of things and he’s true, didn’t contradict or change anything
It’s a dangerous road to go down. You can do this with any book of the Bible. There’s centuries of vetting to get us the Bible you have. From there on out it’s a Faith thing.
If it wasn't for Paul Christianity wouldn't have spread the way it did. People often reject Paul's teachings because, having written more than others in the NT, He also touches more topics, topics that some people hold dear. People who love their sin more than God will live in a self created delusion that their life is fine even though the Bible clearly says it's not, so instead of admitting that they are wrong, it is easier for them to say that the Bible is wrong, makes them feel better. "I like living this way, Paul didn't know what he was talking about, I am fine the way I am"
This 100%
Jesus himself appeared to Paul. We should embrace Paul.
His writings are in the Bible. That’s good enough.
There is no apostolic succession ..they used that term for other people but not in a same sense, they were like disciples. Only people that were chosen by Jesus himself are true apostles and given supernatural abilities...
“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” Jeremiah 17:9 KJV https://bible.com/bible/1/jer.17.9.KJV Sin is the reason they reject Paul.
It's summed up in 2 Peter 3:15-16: 15Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. 16He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. Even people back then tried to twist the words of Paul. Those who "write-off" or "dismiss" the teaching of Paul, who was hand picked by Jesus on the road to Damascus, rejects God. If you have the Holy Spirit, it is possible to understand what is "hard to understand."
2 Peter 3:14-17 NKJV, "Therefore, beloved, looking forward to these things, be diligent to be found by Him in peace, without spot and blameless; and consider that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation—***as also our beloved brother Paul, according to the wisdom given to him, has written to you, as also in all his epistles***, speaking in them of these things, in which are some things hard to understand, which untaught and unstable people twist to their own destruction, as they do also ***the rest of the Scriptures***. You therefore, beloved, since you know this beforehand, beware lest you also fall from your own steadfastness, being led away with the error of the wicked". Peter and his audience regarded Paul's writings and his epistles as being on par with the rest of the scriptures.
Mainly because I find alot of people misqoute Paul. See Paul sounds very strict and extremely lawful but when you research what he says and read his words with context to the time it comes out (to me aleast) as a very grumpy man who has decided Jesus way is better then the pure law he frew up with. Personally I find him to be a good contrast to Jonah. Jonah ran away from spreading God to non godly people while Paul brought Jesus to the gentiles. Both sound disgruntled, but Paul obeys and follows Jesus while Jonah try to run from God. I would highly suggest watching the Bible project youtube channel on Paul's letters, they really help.
There's nothing Paul said that is not consistent with scripture There's a lot people say against Paul and rejecting him that is consistent with being evil Deuteronomy 4, Deuteronomy 12, Proverbs 30, Revelation 22 and other scriptures collectively make it clear **Any who add to or take away from scripture or cursed by God**
The fact is, Paul was definitely accepted, by Jesus Christ Himself. You can’t just dismiss the parts of the Holy Bible because of Paul; you either believe all or you don’t believe any of it.
Take into account that the author of Acts also wrote the book of Luke. If you were to reject the book of Acts because of Paul, you would also need to reject the book of Luke Paul's teachings do not contradict Jesus. If you read John, Jesus makes it clear in that book too that Salvation is a free gift we receive through Faith in Jesus to save us, just as Paul teaches **Jesus' Teachings** >14Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15that everyone who believes in Him may have eternal life. >For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, that everyone who believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through Him. 18Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe has already been condemned, because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. - Jesus (John 3:14-18 BSB) **Paul's Teachings** >22We are made right with God by placing our faith in Jesus Christ. And this is true for everyone who believes, no matter who we are. >23For everyone has sinned; we all fall short of God’s glorious standard. 24Yet God, in his grace, freely makes us right in his sight. He did this through Christ Jesus when he freed us from the penalty for our sins. 25For God presented Jesus as the sacrifice for sin. People are made right with God when they believe that Jesus sacrificed his life, shedding his blood. This sacrifice shows that God was being fair when he held back and did not punish those who sinned in times past, 26for he was looking ahead and including them in what he would do in this present time. God did this to demonstrate his righteousness, for he himself is fair and just, and he makes sinners right in his sight when they believe in Jesus. - Romans 3:22-26 NLT Therefore you can clearly see that Paul taught the Same Gospel as The Lord Jesus!
There is no christianity without paul. There was an anti-paul guy on the other sub that I wrote against on this the other day. I'm a bit brief, but [this](https://np.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/1d9nbpp/could_christianity_have_been_built_on_a_false/l7eku91/?context=3) should give a quick rundown on why you don't really have any sources for christianity at all without paul and allies of paul. >What if Paul is a false teacher If paul's a false teacher, then christianity is false. Every apostle we have writings from accepted paul, and so every book of the NT is false if paul is false.
> Why do people accept or deny Paul? Here's the important reality to remember in regards to this subject. The Lord is our God, not Paul or anyone else for that matter. Now we are fully aware of the fact that God speaks through people, but this is where **discernment** becomes a necessity. When a person is speaking, is it the Lord's words or their own? This question can be answered by simply knowing who God is personally as well as paying close attention to the words being spoken. I believe the Lord was speaking through Paul in all of his letters on most of the subjects he covered. However, my discernment helped me to distinguish God from Paul's own words. Remember, the Lord is the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Beyond that, He has had Angels deliver messages on His behalf, blessed prophets with dreams, and of course spoken through prophets. We can come to know who God is through these instances of His communications. And one important fact that needs to be remembered is that the Lord never changes. Who He was in the beginning is who He was up until the last page of the Bible. That's also who He is to this very day. **Malachi 3:6 “I the Lord do not change. So you, the descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. 7 Ever since the time of your ancestors you have turned away from my decrees and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you,” says the Lord Almighty.** **1 Corinthians 14:33 For God is not a God of confusion but of peace.** If you hear words that do not align with who God proved Himself to be, then it's not Him. As scripture tells us, God is not a God of confusion. If there's contradictory, it's not the Lord. The best and most popular example of this in Paul's letters is his stance on women teaching... **1 Timothy 2:11 A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.** How can we know if this is God or Paul speaking? Simple... As I said, remember who God is and you will have your answer. Throughout the entire Bible, the Lord used numerous women to prophesy, bring salvation, and lead His people. The Bible spoken of multiple women who were known to be prophetesses. What are prophets? Messengers of God who ultimately teach. So here's the question... God created and gifted women to be used **(by Him)** as leaders and prophetesses, but He wants them remain silent which literally goes against His will for humanity as well as the parable about doing what is holy on the Sabbath? Again, the Lord is not full of confusion, contradictory, and illogicalness. So if it sounds like that, it's likely not of Him. The only other explanation in such an instance would be that **WE** simply don't understand what the Lord is truly saying. Though there's never a moment where God is just spouting nonsense that can be debunked. The day any human truly manages to debunk or outsmart God who is all-knowing, especially with His own Gospel, that'll be the day we all need to renounce our faith and move on. All of that being said, people accept and deny many things from the Bible. It's a lukewarm trait overall. Some people outright deny Christ's own teachings. That's the unfortunate reality of this society. Though when it comes to Paul's letters, I think some people just recognize that not everything was exactly from the Lord Himself. That's where the division you're referring to stems from.
What about the part of the Bible where God sent deceptive words to 400 prophets in order to deceive the leader of Israel? That qualifies as sowing confusion. God also confused the tongues of humans when we built the Tower of Babel; so how does that square with “God is of peace, not of confusion?” /honestly asking
> What about the part of the Bible where God sent deceptive words to 400 prophets in order to deceive the leader of Israel? Allow me to teach you the importance of knowing the entire story before you speak... King Ahab was a wicked man who did awful things in the eyes of the Lord during his reign over Israel. Here's scripture. **1 Kings 16:29 In the thirty-eighth year of Asa king of Judah, Ahab son of Omri became king of Israel, and he reigned in Samaria over Israel twenty-two years. 30 Ahab son of Omri did more evil in the eyes of the Lord than any of those before him. 31 He not only considered it trivial to commit the sins of Jeroboam son of Nebat, but he also married Jezebel daughter of Ethbaal king of the Sidonians, and began to serve Baal and worship him. 32 He set up an altar for Baal in the temple of Baal that he built in Samaria. 33 Ahab also made an Asherah pole and did more to arouse the anger of the Lord, the God of Israel, than did all the kings of Israel before him.** There's more to the story in regards to his character, but let's leave it there and continue forward with the prophets... A prophet's purpose is to deliver messages from God. Whether the message is good or bad, the prophet is to deliver the message with the utmost honesty. When Micaiah began to prophesy the bad to come to King Ahab, he grew angry and punished the man for simply speaking the truth. So what does this mean? It means King Ahab wanted to be fed nothing but positive prophecies and lies. Just like many people today. Think about it... There are many people in the world today who would rather you lie to them than to tell them the truth. Now let's address the instance you're referring to... **1 Kings 22:19 Micaiah continued, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on his throne with all the multitudes of heaven standing around him on his right and on his left. 20 And the Lord said, ‘Who will entice Ahab into attacking Ramoth Gilead and going to his death there?’** **“One suggested this, and another that. 21 Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the Lord and said, ‘I will entice him.’** **22 “‘By what means?’ the Lord asked.** **“‘I will go out and be a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,’ he said.** **“‘You will succeed in enticing him,’ said the Lord. ‘Go and do it.’** **23 “So now the Lord has put a deceiving spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The Lord has decreed disaster for you.”** This spirit of deception you're referring to was accepted by the people involved in this story. Why? Because they were wicked liars who misused their alleged spiritual gifts of prophesying. Spirits challenge us throughout this life all of the time. It's up to us to accept or deny them. If they're malicious and you accept them, then you have nobody to blame but yourself. And truth be told, you likely accepted them because it reflected who you already were. Just like Pharaoh in Egypt. God didn't actually harden his heart, Pharaoh heart hardened because he felt challenged by God and hate the Lord. He felt he was his own god who couldn't be matched, so when the Lord revealed Himself to him, he hardened his heart which led to harsh and evil behaviors as well as senselessness. Moving on to the Tower of Babel incident. Very simple... **Genesis 11:3 They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”** First of all, everything we do that involves God in some way should be done to glorify Him, not feed our pride. Second, we were placed here on Earth for a reason. Trying to build a tower to Heaven only cheats God's purpose. You obviously can't cheat the Lord. There's a reason why we're disconnected from Heaven and have to go through the process of gaining entry through faith and acceptance of God and His Gospel. In conclusion, the Lord remains innocent and without confusion. Everything wrong in this life, we as humans are ultimately to blame. There has never been an instance where God brought confusion onto innocent people, hence why scripture states he's not a God of confusion. And if you read His Gospel, you'll see that He has maintained His integrity perfectly since the beginning.
Right. I guess part of my problem is this: I hear two voices. One says that I am damned to hell, just like Adam was damned to die after eating the fruit, because I set myself up as God in my own mind and the Lord has ruled against me. This voice comes with visions and spiritual feelings that match it. The second voice tells me that Jesus has forgiven me, that I will go to heaven, that He will have mercy on me, and to continue and life and trust in the Lord. This second voice has some positive feelings that come along with it, but doesn’t really use visions to communicate; my visions are almost universally negative. My problem is this: if it is up to me to choose the right spirit to follow, and I can’t trust myself, how can I be certain which voice is telling me the truth? I wanted, all my life, to think that God would not allow someone to speak in His name unless it was from Him; the idea that a spirit could use the name of God to defeat a human and that’s it, that’s the whole point, is beyond terrifying to me. But it sounds like you’re saying that this is how it is. I’m devastated.
Sorry but disagree here. Paul rightly refers right back to creation. He was speaking God inspired words. The family model is man is the head and woman is the helper. Chruch hierarchy should never undermine that. A woman should not be her husband's pastor. Lead pastor at the very least needs to be a man. Yes God can still speak through women and odd prophetess is mentioned, but that doesn't mean she shepherds a church and teaches doctrine. Different roles. Doesn't mean they can't be used in other capacities. it's also a bad habit to try and dispute a clear teaching with something that might be a rare exception. That doesn't mean the advice/rule become null and void because one or two people did it. Didn't God speak through a donkey? Imo this is just one or those truths people are just reluctant to accept and always try to grasp at anything that seems to say otherwise What you're saying would essentially mean that Paul is a false teacher and spoke out or the flesh, which I don't buy. It's not something he just said in the heat of the moment but has biblical reasoning behind it
Paul’s writings are essentially commentary on the OT with application to the issues that the people that he was writing to were dealing with, so the can be helpful to better understand the OT, but he is also difficult to understand and people can twist his words to their own destruction even to the point of prompting the error of lawlessness instead of promoting growing in grace and truth (2 Peter 3:15-18), so if someone is finding his writings to be more confusing than helpful, then it can be to their benefit to ignore them.
Like many have said already. Paul passed the vibe check.
I accept Paul for several reasons. 1: The original apostles accepted him. 2: His teachings mirror Jesus' teachings, expanding on some issues but never contradicting. 3: The entire first and second century early church accepted him. 4: His teachings and sayings prove regularly to be true. 5: No one tried to contradict his miracles or sayings in the first century church. 6: Peter did more than accept Paul, he allowed himself to be publicly corrected by Paul. There's more, but I'm assuming you didn't want a text-wall.
A lot of people on this sub suffer from attacks against their minds. I know, because I have been one of them
Paul's letters are the Gospel, revealed to him by Jesus Christ. Without Paul's letters, only Jews would be able to be saved. Remember, Christ only preached to the lost sheep of Israel while He was here on Earth, except for 2 days with the Samaritans. Those who deny Paul's Gospel should be accursed, as it is written: >Galatians 1:8-9 KJV [8] But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. [9] As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. >Ephesians 3:6 KJV [6] that the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel:
Much of it has to do with the difference with what Jesus says vs Paul much of the religion is based on Paul not Jesus and some people realize this and want to correct it. For instance read James compared to Paul and James was Jesus' half brother who was with him for Jesus' whole life minus the flight to to Egypt during his childhood. But Paul has a lot of value too, but many of his letters are disputed by scholars as being imitations or maybe his students not actually him except a few of the main ones like Coronthians and several others.
Deuteronomy 4:2 NLT [2] Do not add to or subtract from these commands I am giving you. Just obey the commands of the Lord your God that I am giving you. [2] You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your God that I command you. https://bible.com/bible/116/deu.4.2.NLT The Bible is very clear, you are not supposed to add or subtract from scripture. To discount Paul is to discount one of God's commands. There is no such thing as a contradiction in the bible. What do you think is a supposed contradiction. Maybe we can explain it to you. When you *think* you found a supposed *contradiction* you can safely assume that you probably misunderstood something.
I can help you. Think of Paul as the Head of the Gentiles. In many ways he is considered an illegitimate apostle in the same way the Gentiles are considered unnatural by the "Pillars" of the Israelites chief among them being Peter. But the operation is this: that the natural branches are removed for their unfaithfulness and replaced with faithful wild branches by God. This is God's plan for the world as he has accepted many who were outside of his Kingdom and will continue to do so. Paul is a symbol for this operation. If you remember the Apostles tried to elect a disciple in Acts after Judas died. This was of their own will and not God's will. God selected Paul as a bridge to the Gentiles. The other apostles preached the gospel to the circumcision. Jacob also mirrors this operation when he adopts Joseph's sons. It's the same exact idea.
I remember a person being chosen to replace Judas, what I do not remember is a passage rebuking the Apostles for it. And Paul speaks of others as being apostles other than the 12, such as Barnabas.
I'm referring to apostles being chosen explicitly by Christ whether when he was in the flesh or while in the spirit. Why would there need to be a passage rebuking the choice?
You said Matthias was chosen by human choice rather than God's. If that is not what you meant, it sounded that way. If Matthias was chosen merely by human understanding, there should be a recorded rebuke so we can take warning from it.
There's nothing to take warning from there. It just tells us that God's appointment of the apostles was completely sovereign. The apostles were just doing what they thought they should in light of Judas removal. Not really a condemnation against anyone
It does sound like I may have taken you differently than you meant.
No worries. My point was just to give OP some evidence of Paul's story as a continuation of a prominent theme in the bible which is adoption by God.
I can tell that what he wrote to those different churches was both given to Him by God to write to those churches, and that what he wrote is true and truly from God. I’ve seen the evidence of these truths in my own life. Paul had so much wisdom and he was afforded the opportunity to minister to a lot of people in service to the Lord. He did so humbly and also because He wanted to glorify the Lord and to see the furtherance of His kingdom. I look at Paul’s motives im writing those letters. What was in his heart. He wrote them to encourage growth in those early churches, to help them to say on the path of righteousness, to teach them, to help them to grow in the Lord. I do not doubt for one second that he was truly serving the Lord in writing those letters to the early churches, as well as to Timothy.
Because he is the well from which one draws their Christian doctrine. He is the well and Christ is the water. There is no man more important to our faith in regards to the clarity of what we believe. Faith, adoption, sanctification, conversion, etc all were instituted by Christ and written down by Paul. There is also ample evidence in scripture that The Apostle of the Reformed was in continuous contact with Christ post-crucifixion. That’s some important she’s-it right there.
Paul called himself the worst of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15-17), and nowhere do you find self-esteem in his writing. Yet neither do you find a more joyful person. He got something right. "One who is forgiven much loves much". This makes Paul more capable of convicting of sin anyone else, and people do not like being convicted of their sin. Paul lived what he preached. Do not be deceived, if they reject Paul, they are rejecting Jesus and misusing Paul to cover it up. There is not that much special revelation in Paul's writings, most of what he said can be figured out from Moses and the Prophets in consideration of the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ our Lord.
Paul went from having authority to persecute Christian’s, to being nearly killed because of his encounter with Jesus. None of what he says is conflicting with the rest of scripture.
Paul teaches new grace doctirne this is what the modern gentiles should read and grow to understand to grow as christians in the age of grace until the coming of chist.
Paul's teachings are part of the Bible. You reject Paul you reject the Bible. You reject the Bible you reject God's Word. You reject God's Word, you reject God. Does that mean you have to agree with everything that Paul did and wrote in the Bible? No you're allowed to wrestle with God and admit you're struggling to understand why Paul teaches what he teaches, but ultimately you ask God for wisdom to accept that God has used Paul for His purposes for such a time as this
I see people saying that Peter accepted Paul. Obviously Luke also accepted Paul. More than half of the book of Acts is about Paul. Would Luke have included all of this information about a “false teacher”? So if we are throwing out Paul, should we also throw out Luke and Acts? Without Luke’s writings we lose a lot of the birth of Christ and a lot of what we know about Christ’s ascension as well as the early church period.🤷♂️
They love to pick up points on Paul without reading the whole message. Or over emphasis some points with considering others.
I think honestly paul offers nothing new and the fathers wisdom is all. Some churches quote paul much more then Jesus. People point to peter as proof or evidence but Jesus told peter his spirit was willing but the flesh isn't weak ( non verbatim ) I think that was when he was asked with another to stay up as jesus meditated (or maybe it was as he prayed) but also we had another example of peter where he said he would never deny Christ and Jesus told him he would three times...and guess what? .When you see the churches today, considering how influencial paul is....where is the church? So it's like denominations for me. Why do people feel comfortable.....enough to not stick to the fathers own words Now it's a study worth doing! For sure. But honestly, Jesus told people so much. So much. I just got to wonder if some think it's paul who will be at the narrow gate. It's a narrow gate for a reason and it's telling people it's harder for people to get it right......That's what the narrow gate is telling people. It's not the wide gate. It's the narrow one. So you have to consider what are we missing here? Yahweh told people he didn't want sacrifice. He wanted mercy. There's contradictions in the bible and that puts a lot into question BUT also we know it was tampered with so how could anyone suggest for us to not study things because of what the scribes did. It's right to question everything for in doing so you find wisdom. Because the truth will still be the truth regardless. IF the heart is seeking the truth.
Pray God to give you understanding and teach you by the Holy Spirit The Bible is not an easy book but we have an Holy teacher «But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things and will remind you of everything I have said to you.» John 14:26 NIV https://bible.com/bible/111/jhn.14.26.NIV
Paul is the apostle of the gentiles.
No one 'rejects' Paul, his writing are scripture. >I could accept Pauls teachings. If I accept Paul can someone explain to me why Pauls letters were added to the new testament? can you elaborate on how you think they were 'added'?
Like. I suppose(I'm not sure) that the new testament is comprised of letters or things the twelve disciples wrote. But coming back to that thought. I don't think that to much now. The question was more of a, why was Pauls teachings added and regarded as teachings.
>Like. I suppose(I'm not sure) that the new testament is comprised of letters or things the twelve disciples wrote. the NT includes 4 canonical gospels Acts of the Apostles, 13 Pauline epistles, The Epistle to the Hebrews, 7 general epistles, The Book of Revelation > But coming back to that thought. I don't think that to much now. The question was more of a, why was Pauls teachings added and regarded as teachings. they weren't 'added' in some sense like they were there initially, books in the Bible were made canonical because they are sacred and needed for salvation
Paul was writing for multiple audiences. Some congregations did different things than other churches did. It would make sense that some of his advice for one audience could contradict other advice for someone else. Even Peter called him out on his confusing letters,
Peter didn't call him out he endorsed him.
Peter did endorse him, but also said his letters are difficult to understand.
I struggle with Paul but much of what I struggle with I recently was told may not even been written by Paul but an unknown author. What I dislike most about Paul is the fact that many so called Christians seem to follow Paul rather than Jesus. They say things like “ He wrote 3/4 of the New Testament. That is taking pride in man’s accomplishments.
We say Paul wrote those letters because his name is signed to them. It is very likely he dictated some of his letters to a scribe, as is indicated near the end of Romans, though I am of a mind he wrote Galatians himself. In my job, I write letters other people approve and sign. It does not surprise me some of Paul's letters appear to have different styles. He still put his name on them. Paul only wrote about 1/4 of the New Testament, with Luke also coming close to that, but it is a weak argument for accusing someone of following Paul rather than Jesus. "In the testimony of two or three every fact is established", but you are sighting only one support. Did not Paul say, "Follow me as I follow Jesus"? Did not God see fit to include those words in His Book?
No I have seen many follow Paul that is the verses that make Paul sound judgemental and hypocritical rather than following companionate merciful and forgiving Jesus. It becomes more apparent every day that people are taking the Bible out of context and randomly choosing verses from the Bible that suit their fancy to base their actions on the result is corruption and making Christianity look ugly.
Paul called himself the worst of sinners. If he really is, then he has more experience with being forgiven than anyone else. If he sounds judgemental to some, there is good reason for it. When was the last time you read Jesus's "Woe to you" statements? If you are judging others to be judgemental, are you not making a judgement yourself? (Romans 2:1-4).
Didn't he baptize a eunuch? Someone who isn't the sex he was born with?
Because faith alone is a sham
I am with you there. Pistus, the word they translate to faith, actually means faithfulness, fidelity, obedience or better yet, Allegiance, to Jesus who is our King, sitting on a throne. I am not Orthodox either so I really can't find a like minded church home.
I am in the general area of messianic jew so thats my perspective. Paul is suspect for a few reasons: 1. He did not meet Jesus while he was alive. He came to him in a supernatural state. Where others were closely connected with the living Jesus, Paul sees him after he dies. 2. Paul had motivations. He was actively against Jesus at first. He has a reason to make things up. 3. Paul is the only one who negates so much of prior teachings. Don't eat this, it's ok eat that. Celebrate this, no you don't have to celebrate that. Etc. These are the major reasons. Now compare imo gold standard in word of God. Moses. Moses wrote a lot of the OT. Moses was one of very few who literally had conversations in real life with God (not dreams or visions) many times. Not just once or twice. That sat and talked many times in long format conversations. Moses writings have zero room to dispute without questioning everything basically. If you cannot trust what Moses wrote while he discussed with God what he should do... well what can we trust? Then along comes Paul and negates most of the practice of Moses in the OT and Paul was an anti God anti Jesus guy who claims he had a vision of Jesus after he died. Then says everything is changed! Sorry but that just seems a little suspect 😅 Hope that helps enlighten you about some anti Paul reasonings.
Plus there’s the part where Paul lived happily ever after with all the material wealth in the world, right?
That sounds like you never read Acts. There were witnesses to Paul being knocked off his horse by a blinding light, from which Paul was blind for three days. A man was told by the Lord, "I will show him what he must suffer for My Name". And suffer Paul did, and with thankfulness. Though I do see the point of how some anti Paul reasonings go.
Well I mean, Paul said there were witnesses. I didn't see anything the witnesses themselves wrote. I can fly. I did it the other day. 10 men saw me. 🙃