Anti-Paulism

[Eucharisted]

Anti-Paulism is a term I’m coining to mean either an irrational hatred of Saint Paul or a belief that Saint Paul is part of a 2000-year-old conspiracy in Christianity.

 

[brigantine]

What is truly shocking is there is so much of it allowed on this forum!

 

[Cluny]

I’ve repeatedly complained about the blasphemous anti-Christian posts of someone who shall be nameless, and the moderators don’t do anything.

 

[brigantine]

I’ve repeatedly complained about the blasphemous anti-Christian posts of someone who shall be nameless, and the moderators don’t do anything.

As I do. I’ve reported him twice today already and the day has only started! I waiting to see if they ban me first. LOL I bet they will which is really sad!

 

[ralphinal]

I am not bothered by those who hold this position and wish to discuss it. The problem is this people have no desire to discuss.

Paul was the first great theologen of the Church, and the only one who actually wrote Scriptures. However, one can only say that Paul invented Christianity, or even corrupted it, if you read Paul and not the Gosples. Paul taught NOTHING against what Jesus taught.

Some faith systems are so caught up in their own heresy that they cannot stand what Paul says. If you compair what Paul teaches to Islam, you see that Islam is a false religion taught by a wolf-in-sheep’s clothing. The cross is a stubling block for them, and they have no desire to see past their own depravity.

Jesus would agree.

 

[Saintlucy]

Are we talking about another muslim or psuedo Catholic posting rubbish again?

 

[planten]

I am not bothered by those who hold this position and wish to discuss it. The problem is this people have no desire to discuss.

Paul was the first great theologen of the Church, and the only one who actually wrote Scriptures. However, one can only say that Paul invented Christianity, or even corrupted it, if you read Paul and not the Gosples. Paul taught NOTHING against what Jesus taught.

**Surely not. Saul was the wolf in sheeps clothing. He came when Jesus disappeared and took over while he had not spent even a day with jesus or mother Mary. Even when Jesus went away, Saul should have first visited mother Mary. But did he Do? No.

Also, Jesus had warned that many will come in his name… Did Saul not come in the name of Jesus? Please tell us? Muhammad did not come in the name of Jesus. he came in the name of Allah. There are 114 chapters in the Quran. In each chapter at the beginning is written, “In the name of Allah, the Beneficient, The Merciful.” That means what is to follow is from God (Allah).

So I can say that Saul was an outsider who highjacked the teachings of Jesus, in my opinion. You may disprove it from the NT Bible gospels.**

Some faith systems are so caught up in their own heresy that they cannot stand what Paul says. If you compair what Paul teaches to Islam, you see that Islam is a false religion taught by a wolf-in-sheep’s clothing. The cross is a stubling block for them, and they have no desire to see past their own depravity.

Jesus would agree.

** We have observed that Saul reversed the whole system. he introduced Trinity, the son of God theory, The death on the cross, the original sin, the annulment (abrogation) of the Jewish law (Even called it a curse.) Imagine a law which was given to Jews and Jesus by God was made a curse. By Whom? Saul called it a curse.

Your God is Jesus. Jesus must have given the law of Moses to Moses. saul called that law as a curse. I have given my opinion. You bring your arguments from the gospels.

Remember that Jesus never predicted that most important thing that very soon his enemy Mr. saul will convert. Why Jesus did not give this important news to his disciples before going away? it was the most important news. Do you say that Jesus did not know that Saul would convert? I hope not.

Jesus does not mention anything good about saul. The Disciples or writers of bibleNT who wrote bible after quite a long time do not mention the conversion of Saul. Why is that? It is all false, in my opinion.

Of course, while the bibleNT was in the process of being written (say 30 to 80 years after Jesus), saul had died (beheaded) by then. Why could not the Mathew and Mark and Luke and John include a word about saul in their writings? If saul was a good person and serving the christianity then they would have mentioned him in their writings.

In my opinion, saul was teaching his own philosophy which was totally different to teachings of Jesus. More can be said on this subject but it seems that you will not have the patience to disgest all that, in my opinion.

Please do not say that Muhammad was the wolf in sheeps clothing. If you do then we have every right to expose the real wolf in sheeps clothing. So do not feel hurt, in my opinion.

**

 

[brigantine]

So I can say that Saul was an outsider who highjacked the teachings of Jesus, in my opinion. You may disprove it from the NT Bible gospels

Wow thanks Planten for allowing us to disprove you and only allowing us to use the NT gospels. I just love how you think you can lie but then define how we can refute your lies. Thats like me saying something about your mohamed and then picking out the chapters of you little book the koran that I want you to use to disprove it. Your just to much!

 

[ralphinal]

**Surely not. Saul was the wolf in sheeps clothing. He came when Jesus disappeared and took over while he had not spent even a day with jesus or mother Mary. Even when Jesus went away, Saul should have first visited mother Mary. But did he Do? No.
**

First incorrect point. Paul DID visit with the Faithful in Jerusalem and get their permission. Read Acts 9:26-30 and Acts 13:1-2.

Also, Jesus had warned that many will come in his name… Did Saul not come in the name of Jesus? Please tell us? Muhammad did not come in the name of Jesus. he came in the name of Allah. There are 114 chapters in the Quran. In each chapter at the beginning is written, “In the name of Allah, the Beneficient, The Merciful.” That means what is to follow is from God (Allah).

This will be good. I can’t wait to see how you can prove this.

** We have observed that Saul reversed the whole system. he introduced Trinity, the son of God theory, The death on the cross, the original sin, the annulment (abrogation) of the Jewish law (Even called it a curse.) Imagine a law which was given to Jews and Jesus by God was made a curse. By Whom? Saul called it a curse.
**

Paul did not introduce the Trinity, Jesus taught it. Paul did not introduce the Son of God “Theory” Jesus claimed it as fact. Paul did not introduce the death on the Cross, JESUS DID IT. Paul did not introduce the concept of Original Sin, God did. Paul did not abrogate the Jewish Law. He explained how it was no longer needed, especially for converts to Christianity by non-Jews. The reason that the law is a Curse, if you were to take the time to READ Paul instead of junk, is because the Law never changes the nature of man’s soul. All it does it temporarily remove blaim from him. Man stays trapped in the sinful nature.

Your God is Jesus. Jesus must have given the law of Moses to Moses. saul called that law as a curse. I have given my opinion. You bring your arguments from the gospels.

Yet again, you refuse to even ACT like you understand what we say about the Trinity. There is really no reason to discuss it with you, because you will not read and do not care. Yes, Jesus is my God. He is your God, too.

Remember that Jesus never predicted that most important thing that very soon his enemy Mr. saul will convert. Why Jesus did not give this important news to his disciples before going away? it was the most important news. Do you say that Jesus did not know that Saul would convert? I hope not.

First, Saul had not started his role as persicutor while Jesus walked the earth. Second, he had no need to predict it. The Holy Spirit was there to lead the Church to all truth.

Jesus does not mention anything good about saul. The Disciples or writers of bibleNT who wrote bible after quite a long time do not mention the conversion of Saul. Why is that? It is all false, in my opinion.

THe Gosples are not about Paul. They are about Jesus. Paul is covered in Acts of the Apostles.

Of course, while the bibleNT was in the process of being written (say 30 to 80 years after Jesus), saul had died (beheaded) by then. Why could not the Mathew and Mark and Luke and John include a word about saul in their writings? If saul was a good person and serving the christianity then they would have mentioned him in their writings.

Read ACts of the Apostles. It was written by Luke

In my opinion, saul was teaching his own philosophy which was totally different to teachings of Jesus. More can be said on this subject but it seems that you will not have the patience to disgest all that, in my opinion.

Please do not say that Muhammad was the wolf in sheeps clothing. If you do then we have every right to expose the real wolf in sheeps clothing. So do not feel hurt, in my opinion.

I do not care about your opinion. I care about facts. Show me facts that Paul perverted Chrsitianity. Not from the Qur’an or the Bible, but from first hand sources.

I had the patience to discuss this a few thousand posts ago. Now, I am tired of the same old song and dance. Learn a new tune