- Status
R
Reuben_J
Guest
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Maybe let’s get back to the subject of the thread. 
I
inJESUS
Guest
I
inJESUS
Guest
yes you are right since both Paul and John (and maybe others dont remember) mentioned false teachings being spread…and since Paul met the disciples, we do not doubt anything he taught. This is called logic. If Paul claimed a vision that was not witnessed, and contradicted what the apostles taught ,like Muhammad, then he’d be in the category of false prophets.
D
De_Maria
Guest
Hamba,
As I have said before, you really do not understand Scripture. First, you say,
the “different gospel”
As though St. Paul is speaking about a specific gospel. No. He is speaking about any revelation which disagrees with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
I know, I know. Your next totally expected and typical Muslim misinformed statement, “But Jesus didn’t write a Gospel.”
No, but the four Gospels are explanations of Jesus’ Gospel. The four Gospels agree and are therefore four expressions of the ONE Gospel of Jesus Christ. St. Paul’s teachings are also another expression fo Jesus’ Gospel. In fact, the teachings of all the Apostles agree and ANY teaching or revelation which disagrees with the ONE Gospel of Jesus Christ as explained by the Apostles is anathema.
That means the new Gospel of Mohammed, also known as the Quran. The new Gospel of Uthman, also known as Uthman’s rescension. The Sunnas of Mohammed and any other so called revelation including the fraudulent book entitled the Gospel of Barnabas. They are alll false Gospels and they are anathema.
Then you say,
Paul said so and therefore it surely has to be the gospel truth.
Correct. Paul’s writing is included in the Canonical Scriptures and is therefore the WORD OF GOD.
God said so and therefore it is surely the Gospel truth.
Sincerely,
De Maria
P
planten
Guest
**I do not see paul mentioned in the Quran at all. Also he is not there in the bible NT. Mathews and others do not talk about him. He does not talk much about Mathews and Luke etc. He seemed to have lived in a different world and not met JESUS OR Mary or the disciples. But he became the greater or greatest disciple.Fortunately, you are right.
Other so-called Gospels that did not conform to the teachings of the apostles were wrong.
Paul was right and his teachings were corroborated by the teachings of the othe apostles and followers. And rightly that Paul said this to prevent heresy.
He knowing nothing about the real teachings of Jesus started his own philosophy. There were 12 disciples only. How come this became number 13?**
R
ralphinal
Guest
Two little things.
First, would someone be so kind as to give a list of teachings that Paul has that are in error? I do not need the comentary, just the teachings and the verse.
Second, the first site Hamba put up for the Gospel of Barnabas is a Muslim site. The second is as well. According to non-Muslim, non-Christian sources, this Gospel has issues with the Epistle of Barnabas, leading people to think that they were not written by the same person. It was common for false documents to be attributed to more famous people. Yes, a Gospel is mentioned earlier than the 14th century, but it is only the younger versions that we have in any amount to be studied.
The intro to this translation has good points
sacred-texts.com/isl/gbar/
This site may be problematic, but it gives some good points
muslimhope.com/ForgeryOfTheGospelOfBarnabas.htm
I am loth to do so, but please refer to the wikipedia site
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas
First, would someone be so kind as to give a list of teachings that Paul has that are in error? I do not need the comentary, just the teachings and the verse.
Second, the first site Hamba put up for the Gospel of Barnabas is a Muslim site. The second is as well. According to non-Muslim, non-Christian sources, this Gospel has issues with the Epistle of Barnabas, leading people to think that they were not written by the same person. It was common for false documents to be attributed to more famous people. Yes, a Gospel is mentioned earlier than the 14th century, but it is only the younger versions that we have in any amount to be studied.
The intro to this translation has good points
sacred-texts.com/isl/gbar/
This site may be problematic, but it gives some good points
muslimhope.com/ForgeryOfTheGospelOfBarnabas.htm
I am loth to do so, but please refer to the wikipedia site
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas
D
De_Maria
Guest
**
Not surprising since the Quran is not a true revelation of the faith.
Yes he is. He is prominent in the Acts of the Apostles and mentioned in St. Peter’s epistle. As well as his own epistles. These are all canonical books of the NT.
He is not mentioned in the four Gospels because they are histories of Jesus’ life and during that time Paul was a child born of Pharisees who named him Saul.
The Gospels were not yet part of the Scriptures. The only Scriptures yet recognized during that period were the Old Testament books. And St. Paul mentioned that he got his information about Jesus from Jesus Himself:
**Galatians 1 1 Paul, an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead, …11 For I give you to understand, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For neither did I receive it of man, nor did I learn it; but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
**
Or do you mean that he doesn’t much speak about the Disciples? He does mention almost everybody in his various epistles. But he seems to neglect to mention Matthew, that is true. However, Sts Peter, James, John, Mark, Luke and many others are mentioned by St. Paul.
**
**
What are you reading? Certainly not the Bible. It is very clear that St. Paul met the risen Christ and many of the Disciples. In fact, they protected him in their homes after his conversion. And they were all there in the council of Jerusalem.
**
**According to whom? To you?
He is certainly a great Apostle. But Jesus said the Greatest of the Disciples would be their servant. That puts one Disciple in that category. St. Peter, the Servant of the Servants of God.**
**
No he didn’t. St. Paul’s teachings are the teachings of Jesus Christ.
**Apostle means “one who is sent”. There were originally
twelve Apostles selected by Jesus Christ. The number of original Apostles selected by Jesus remains 12.
After that the Church established Apostles and the number grew. And they were not numbered.
Philippians 2
25 But I have thought it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother and fellow labourer, and fellow soldier, but your apostle, and he that hath ministered to my wants.
The Catechism:
**860 **In the office of the apostles there is one aspect that cannot be transmitted: to be the chosen witnesses of the Lord’s Resurrection and so the foundation stones of the Church. But their office also has a permanent aspect. Christ promised to remain with them always. The divine mission entrusted by Jesus to them "will continue to the end of time, since the Gospel they handed on is the lasting source of all life for the Church. Therefore, . . . the apostles took care to appoint successors."
Sincerely,
De Maria
P
planten
Guest
**I am sorry, I have no such list. But a comaprison can be made by reading the actual gospel of the real disciples (the four gospels) and the other parts of NT bible (Romans etc) and it is easy to see the difference. Paul was not prophesied in the bible OT. He is not mentioned in the Quran while John Baptist and Jesus and Mary and disciples are described with extra ordinary praise in the Quran. It is a revealed book and there is no mention of paul there. Why is that?? Then why are John and Jesus and Mary and disciples described in the Quran with all good words.
So many other prophets also from the time of Adam are described in the Quran, all Jewish prophets are mentioned. Paul is not mentioned in the Quran and bible OT.
There are many prophesies about Jesus in bible OT. But there is nothing about paul if he was so important to have taken over everything of christianity?? He was not even a disciple, a comrade of Jesus. Christians can believe in anything, whatever they like. But Muslims will never give any thought to paul for the reasons stated above.**
D
De_Maria
Guest
**
Which disciples are named in the Quran?
No it isn’t.
Because Mohamed made it up.
Which disciples? Or do you mean that the word “disciple” is used in the Quran?
The Bible OT does not mention any of the Apostles or disciples.
The Quran, as far as I know, only says, “the disciples” and does not name any of them.
What makes you think he took over Christianity?
**It is Muslims who believe anything. They believe a false prophet who declares himself the seal of the Prophets without any evidence. They believe Uthman who replaces the original Quran with his version. They believe the false teachings of the Quran which contradict nature, science and logic.
**Sincerely,
De Maria**
D
De_Maria
Guest
**Why am I not surprised? As usual, you believe whatever another Muslim tells you without proof. Typical Muslim protocol.
Sincerely,
De Maria**
I
inJESUS
Guest
R
Reuben_J
Guest
Look like you are not sure about the terms apostle, disciple and comrade. The way you interchange them in your usage look like you think that the are one and the same.
Here are some pointers for you:
Apostles were the 12 selected by Jesus. In Act, Judas was replaced by a newly appointed Mathias, perhaps to keep the number at 12.
Disciples are seldom named in the NT but they were those who were outside the group of the 12 apostles. At one time it was mentioned there were 72 disciples whom Jesus sent out to evangelized the Jews.
Then you have the followers of Jesus, whose number may be greater.
Comrades? I don’t know. But even among the 12 apostles there seemed to be the inner circle, comprised of Peter, John and James, who were always there at important moments in Jesus time - e.g. the transfiguration and the agony in Gethsemane.
There is no real necessity for any of them to be prophesied in earlier scripture except for Jesus, as they were only ‘followers’. Their main importance would be that they became true witnesses of Jesus.
Paul did not take over everything in Christianity. Why do you get this idea? Look at the history of the early Christians. In fact Paul did not enjoy such high ranking when compared to the original twelve. He was subjected to their decision in matters pertaining to the early church.
And the Gospels are not written by the apostles except for Mathew and John.
Paul certainly was a very passionate character and he passionately discharged his given duty, as a Pharisee and later as a disciple of Christ.
The conversion of Paul happened in a miracle. A glorified Jesus appeared and talked to him. He was blinded. Jesus told the priest Ananias about this. Ananias, who did not know about Paul, met him and healed him in a temple in Straight Street.
Paul then teamed up with the apostles, the disciples and the followers of Jesus. He sure did learned from them, and being a scholar himself, he would sure catch up fast.
Paul did not write any Gospel but letters to the early Christians in the early churches. The Church is like a body; each member has different role and each is equally important, like the eyes, the ears, the arms or the legs. Perhaps Paul talent must lie in his ability to write.
God bless.
Reuben
S
Semper_Fi_1
Guest
What is ironic to me is that Muslims today try to discredit Paul for having the same type of visitation Muhammad supposedly had. Except Paul’s was of Jesus, not the Archangel Gabriel. Paul is a direct threat to Muslims in that St Paul was the Apostle of the gentiles, the job Muhammad claimed for himself a few centuries later minus the original witnesses.
Either you choose to believe the 11 other apostles and that Paul was a genuine Christian and teacher of the Faith, or you believe Muhammad. That is where the line in the sand is drawn for Muslims and other anti-Christians. To them, Paul is the only one that taught that Jesus is God incarnate, it is easier to teach this and discredit one person than it is a whole bunch of witnesses (this trick can be used on Islam as well), so the sword is a two-edged one.
Either you choose to believe the 11 other apostles and that Paul was a genuine Christian and teacher of the Faith, or you believe Muhammad. That is where the line in the sand is drawn for Muslims and other anti-Christians. To them, Paul is the only one that taught that Jesus is God incarnate, it is easier to teach this and discredit one person than it is a whole bunch of witnesses (this trick can be used on Islam as well), so the sword is a two-edged one.
C
Catherine_S
Guest
Typical but not new thinking…
" If you can read the Koran you can understand the Koran" *
The Koran explains the Koran!
A muslim version of Sola Scriptura! *
They too are without a final authority here on earth who can affirm or not affirm their personal interpretations* of the Koran and its teachings.*
Muslims* do not*** have an ordained ministry, although religious leaders, such as imams and mullahs, **can wield considerable influence and often disagree with one another. **
.
R
ralphinal
Guest
Here is the thing. I veiw Paul’s writings through the teachings of Jesus. I see no conflict. At all. If you look at Paul first, you might see all kinds of issues with Jesus, but that is not the way to look at it (nor is it the way Paul would want you to). If you cannot show me a list, then I will make my own reasons that Paul is “bad.”
First, Paul teaches that without a doubt, Jesus died on the Cross. Further, it is through his Death and Ressurection that we are saved.
Second, there is no salvation outside of that which is through the Name of Jesus. It is whithin Christ that man finds salvation.
Third, Jesus is God incarnate. There is no other option but to accept him as God.
Fourth, Paul taught that anyone who preaches anything different than the message of Christ is a false prophet.
I can go on, but these four seem to be a major reason why Islam would hate Paul.
First, Paul teaches that without a doubt, Jesus died on the Cross. Further, it is through his Death and Ressurection that we are saved.
Second, there is no salvation outside of that which is through the Name of Jesus. It is whithin Christ that man finds salvation.
Third, Jesus is God incarnate. There is no other option but to accept him as God.
Fourth, Paul taught that anyone who preaches anything different than the message of Christ is a false prophet.
I can go on, but these four seem to be a major reason why Islam would hate Paul.
P
planten
Guest
Thanks for providing the list of bad works of paul. None of those things were taught by Jesus in his life time. Add to those the doing away with the law of Moses and sabath and so many other things. Jesus never taught those things. paul took the followers of Jesus on a wrong track.
Did Jesus teach about the original sin?? Did he say that one mans blood can save the whole mankind sinners?? We feel that the teachings of paul are totally different to those of Jesus mentioned in the four gospels.
Paul does not discuss the true disciples and the true disciples do not discuss paul. The teachings are also not same. So why ask for a list?? OT does not mention paul. For Muslims, there is no paul.
I
inJESUS
Guest
Planten, we can all throw words…your Muslim friend does not see Paul contradicting Jesus…so if you want to prove your point, quote Paul’s teachings that contradict Jesus and the other apostles.
R
ralphinal
Guest
What? You’ve lost me here. The Gospels are full of Jesus teaching what is needed for salvation. Did he say that one Man’s blood can save everyone? Start with Mark 14:24 His Blood seals the covenant. That covenant is Salvation. Just one place.
Let me put it this way. I do not want to offend anyone, but I must say this. If I want to undestand Islam, should I ask a Muslim before I look at what non-Muslims say? No. Now, for hundreds of years BEFORE Islam, Christians accepted Paul’s writings. If he was not preaching the truth, the early Church would have removed them from Canon. All of a sudden, a man claiming to know the truth teaches something in opposition to Christianity. He makes claims about what Christians beleive and shows a different way. The followers of this faith have tried for 1400 years to show Christians how they are wrong, starting with our own faith. You tell us why we should believe something without seeing what it is that we beleive. You say that Paul is wrong, but you cannot show me exactly how or why. You say the scriptures are corrupt, but you cannot show me how or when this occured. Here, I see something strange in the whole argument: similarity.
Paul recieved a vision of Christ. He was convicted by this vision. He then repented, began to learn the faith, was confirmed in his belief by the others and began to teach it. Mohammid recieved a vision of an angel. He began to teach his faith. It spread. There are also differences
Paul had others to comply with. Nothing he said was in error, or the other would have stopped him. Paul did not lead men in war nor did he conquer any peoples. Mohammid did not have to comply with any other teachings. His proof was what he taught and what he taught said he was the teacher. No one saw his visions. No one could confirm what he saw or what was told to him.
I see Muslims grasping at straws trying to shake our faith. It works on some. Not on others. Then, when some Muslims see that it is not working, they go another route. They try to show how we are the same. Again, we do not move. What is next? I for one will never become a Muslim, for a thousand reasons. Maybe more than that. I know that you are not planning on becoming Catholic. That is your choice as well. BUt before you claim that my scriptures are wrong, be ready to prove them using valid emperical evidence, not just because my scriptures disagree with yours.
- Status