A Question about Paul

[Hawkins]

Hello everyone.

I am a Christian, with tremendous faith, who has been throught a lot, and I know that Jesus (Yashua) has carried me through all of it, and taught me a lot.

Recently, however, I have been having some questions about Paul.

One thing I am wondering, is how we can reconcile Paul's vision and conversion, with what Christ said, in JOHN 20:29, when he said:
From the NIV:
"Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."
From the New Living Translation:
Then Jesus told him, "You believe because you have seen me. Blessed are those who believe without seeing me."


Paul never believed in Christ until he had "seen" him. Paul was persecuting and even killing Christians before his supposed conversion.

Christ also has an amazing track record with predicting and calling out the ones who would be against him, such as Judas, and the fact that Peter would deny him.

Does anyone have any comments on this?

First, prophets are supernatually called upon, such as Paul but not Peter and other disciples of Christ. They are not prophets and are not supernatually summoned.

Second, Paul is a prophet ranked as an apostle. It is a servant title, and a servant is not necessarily considered to be one more important than a usual Christian in terms of God's sons and daughters.

Actually, Jesus Christ doesn't usually weigh who is greater than who, only His disciples sometimes would like to know who is greater. The Bible mentioned the John the Baptist is the greatest on earth. We don't know how the ranking works. It is possible that "you believed without seeing Him" may be somehow ranked "greater". And prophets and apostles are not necessarily 'greater' than others.

Now who's greater or more important, your housemaid/servant or your own sons and daughters?

 

[handy]

And now I have a confession to make, and I hope you will forgive me..because I have only done this to be of service.

I am writing a book...and in it will be a chapter on Paul. I have visited anti-Paul websites before, and I have also read the epistles for myself...and reread them...but I felt I needed help to sort through some of the tougher issues that I could not find an answer to.

Ahhh, OK...not sure why you couldn't have just come forth with that in the first place......but no matter.

The part of the Bible that the opponents of Paul are going to mention regarding this is Revelation 21:14 where it reads "And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb"

Paul was not one of the "Twelve apostles of the Lamb"...but just as there were more than 12 disciples, there were also more than 12 apostles.

Apostle means "delegate", "messenger" or "one sent forth".

Barnabas was also considered one of the apostles:
But when the apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it, they tore their robes and rushed out into the crowd, crying out and saying, “Men, why are you doing these things? We are also men of the same nature as you, and preach the gospel to you that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, WHO MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM. Acts 14:14-15

Silvanus and Timothy are also considered apostles:

Paul, Silvanus and Timothy are the three who went to Thessalonica and in the epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul (speaking of all three) writes: For we never came with flattering speech, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed—God is witness— nor did we seek glory from men, either from you or from others, even though as apostles of Christ we might have asserted our authority. 1 Thess 2:5-6

As for writing a book, while it's good to give answer for the faith that is within us, keep in mind that no matter how well you put forth the truth skeptics will reject what you have to say.

Hey, they reject the Bible and that was written by the Holy Spirit, so don't let it discourage you too much.

Also, if I might add my own Keep in mind what James, the brother of the Lord (who is also considered an apostle, see Galatians 1:19) said regarding being a teacher: Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment. James 3:1

I'm not trying to discourage you from writing your book, but just be very careful about how you present your information...for those who read it will be "taught" by you, for better or for worse. However, writing a book is a noble endeavor and I can see that you are trying to get good information.

So, why the doubts about the book of Acts?

 

[TheRealTruth777]

Just a word of advice and you can do with it as you see fit. WIP and Handy are always solid with their biblical doctrine. There others on the forum, such as myself, who's scriptural knowledge is not quite as sound. Just because you read it on a Christian Forum, the answer is not necessarily solid biblically. Read, and then see
if the answers agree with scripture.:2cents
Westtexas

That's what's so great about starting a heated thread. The ones who are the most qualified will come out and defend the faith. I love this board by the way..and I truly appreciate the effort that's been given here. I want to defend Paul and the Christian doctrine with everything I have...but admittedly..I have a lot of information to go through and I wouldn't feel qualified to fully address all the questions about Paul myself. There are still more questions...and I will get to them soon!

The book itself is actually about the subject of Good and Evil...but I do not want to give away the title. There are going to be at least 2 Christian chapters...and I want to present the True message of Christianity...but the book will also cover aspects of Quantum Physics, Psychology, Philosophy, Mysticism, History and Sociology. Quite an endeavor.

 

[TheRealTruth777]

Silvanus and Timothy are also considered apostles:

Paul, Silvanus and Timothy are the three who went to Thessalonica and in the epistle to the Thessalonians, Paul (speaking of all three) writes: For we never came with flattering speech, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed—God is witness— nor did we seek glory from men, either from you or from others, even though as apostles of Christ we might have asserted our authority. 1 Thess 2:5-6

As for writing a book, while it's good to give answer for the faith that is within us, keep in mind that no matter how well you put forth the truth skeptics will reject what you have to say.

Hey, they reject the Bible and that was written by the Holy Spirit, so don't let it discourage you too much.

Also, if I might add my own Keep in mind what James, the brother of the Lord (who is also considered an apostle, see Galatians 1:19) said regarding being a teacher: Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment. James 3:1

I'm not trying to discourage you from writing your book, but just be very careful about how you present your information...for those who read it will be "taught" by you, for better or for worse. However, writing a book is a noble endeavor and I can see that you are trying to get good information.

Thanks Dora! That answers my question very well about the number of Apostles.

As far as the skeptics rejecting what I have to say...well they might actually kill me because of it! lol! just kiddin.

I know that many will try to reject it..but it is my hope that by including the various branches of study listed in the previous post, that I can dovetail all these and really drive my point home regarding the subject of the book (Good and Evil). I also believe that I can prove that Christian Theology is perfectly sound...and do it from several angles, though many will still be "willfully ignorant" no matter what I say. We are in an age where many will start "turning away" and indeed very many already have.

One thing that I would like to do soon is a complete commentary on one or more of the Gospels...which I would love to share with you! And I will comment soon on Paul's letters also. These Christian parts of the book are (as you said) the parts that I must be very very careful with.

As for all of my remaining questions, and those questions about the Book of Acts...I will have to compile these in this thread soon. I will also compile and review the questions I have already presented about the book, and the answers given.

Before I get into the complete questions about Acts though (some of which I have already presented), I need to do a bit more research...which will probably take another week or so.

 

[TheRealTruth777]

First, prophets are supernatually called upon, such as Paul but not Peter and other disciples of Christ. They are not prophets and are not supernatually summoned.

Second, Paul is a prophet ranked as an apostle. It is a servant title, and a servant is not necessarily considered to be one more important than a usual Christian in terms of God's sons and daughters.

Actually, Jesus Christ doesn't usually weigh who is greater than who, only His disciples sometimes would like to know who is greater. The Bible mentioned the John the Baptist is the greatest on earth. We don't know how the ranking works. It is possible that "you believed without seeing Him" may be somehow ranked "greater". And prophets and apostles are not necessarily 'greater' than others.

Now who's greater or more important, your housemaid/servant or your own sons and daughters?

Very cool and interesting. Yes, I think the only instance where Christ rings in on this one, is when he responds to the disciples' question about who is greatest by saying "those who can accept the Kingdom of Heaven like a small child." (with purity, innocence and wonder). It is not for us to say or necessarily know who is greatest among us or to judge...as only God and the Holy Spirit which searches the hearts and minds knows this...but at least our Lord gives us a very clear concept of what it means to be great to God.

 

[TheRealTruth777]

One of the next steps regarding Paul, will be to hit a couple of the anti-Paul boards and start a big inferno over there...with whatever new ammunition I have.

But I will have to get all the way through the problems with Acts first. If I can still prove Paul's apostleship without the Book of Acts that would be great...though I'm sure many of you wouldn't like that approach.

I am wondering sometimes, if the book of Acts - with it's conflicting accounts, and the account of the Jewish (believer) Priest who was overcome by the demon, and the other issues that I have yet to mention - was tampered with somehow to actually try to discredit Paul intentionally. That might seem far out...but once I present all of the information on that you can let me know what you think.

For whatever reason, The Holy Spirit allowed the conflicts to be in there. Paul's own account of what happened doesn't seem to really coincide with Acts either...but we can get into that soon enough.

 

[theLords]

This thread moved so fast, that I neglected to comment on this directly until now! Sorry about that!

This is very great information, and I will research this kind of phenomenon to see what the evidence is on it. I think in Paul's case, it may be quite possible that the Lord chose him in order to give him a chance to make up for his sins, among lots of other reasons.

I still have some problems with the Book of Acts.,...which I will start a separate thread on.

But if we look at Paul's case, and compare that to what Christ said, and interpret Christ's statement as really meaning "especially blessed are those who believe without seeing," then Paul really should not have considered himself The Greatest Apostle in that sense. Maybe as far as the amount of work he did, you could say that.

You should read Esther Gulshan's book "The Torn Veil" she had a "road to Damascus experience" as well. I'm not familiar with Paul calling himself the "greatest apostle" though. Could you share a Biblical reference?

And as far as God choosing Paul so he could "make up for his sins" that's rather dangerous theological thinking. I would re-examine this line of reasoning. None of us "make up for our sins" and God knows that. It's why He sent His Son to cover our sins (making up for them). My own personal view would be that God chose Paul because of his zeal. Many men and women who were the worst persecutors of the ekklesia and haters of God, turn out to be the most zealous for Him (because "he who is forgiven much, loveth much). Those who grow up in the Church trying to live a godly life from childhood into adulthood seem not to understand what it's like to be "forgiven much" in the sense that an unbeliever (who spent his entire life sinning) does.

Just read the testimony of any ex-Muslim turned follow of Christ. Most of them come to Christ because of special visions and dreams (because the Middle East is so closed off to the Gospel of Christ). They go on to suffer so much (like the Apostles of the NT) and many times they are martyred for His Sake.

 

[handy]

But I will have to get all the way through the problems with Acts first. If I can still prove Paul's apostleship without the Book of Acts that would be great...though I'm sure many of you wouldn't like that approach.

I wouldn't and I'll tell you why....you can't be a contender for the faith, if you are walking around without the Spirit's armor.

Accept the rejection of Acts as inspired Scripture, and you reject Scripture. Reject Scripture and you have no sword.

I wouldn't advise going to battle without a sword.

For whatever reason, The Holy Spirit allowed the conflicts to be in there. Paul's own account of what happened doesn't seem to really coincide with Acts either...but we can get into that soon enough.

Frankly, I think they are only conflicts for those who wish to reject the Spirit's work. I really don't see any substantial conflicts with Acts...or any of the other books for that matter.

For instance, a very popular "conflict" that appears on a lot of anti-Christian boards is the "conflict" between Acts 9 and Acts 22 regarding Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus.

However, I don't think there is anything substantial about the differences between what Luke recorded that was spoken to him (by whomever) and Paul's first-person account. The differences are just the ordinary differences that crop up with eye-witness accounts of transpired events. At the core of the issue seems to be these two texts:

The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. 9:7

Now those who were with me saw the light but did not understand the voice of the one who was speaking to me. 22:9

So, did they or did they not hear a voice, see a person, see light, understand a voice.

Well, the others with Paul heard and saw something...a voice and a light...but they couldn't understand what the voice was saying, nor could they see who was speaking because of the bright light. Not really a conflict.

Then there is an attempt to make hay out of whether or not the others remained standing or fell to the ground:

The men who were traveling with him stood speechless, hearing the voice but seeing no one. 9:7

And when we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew dialect, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’ Acts 26:14

Luke states that the men stood...Paul relates that they all fell to the ground...I ponder, price of tea in China anyone? I mean really, what difference does the issue of whether the men with Paul all fell down, remained standing, or fell down at the hearing of the voice but got back up and were standing to help the blinded Paul up. Again, these are just the kind of differences you get when different people relate the same event to others.

Nothing about the differing accounts would cause the evidence to be thrown out of a court of law. If Paul was standing in a court of law...oh, wait...he was!

He was in a court of law and being tried and the verdict was:

The king stood up and the governor and Bernice, and those who were sitting with them, and when they had gone aside, they began talking to one another, saying, “This man is not doing anything worthy of death or imprisonment.†And Agrippa said to Festus, “This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar.†Acts 26:30-32

 

[reba]

With that attitude that can be arranged quickly!