Zone1 Does Paul receive enough credit in Christianity?

[BULLDOG]

So in other words you don't know. You just did a google search.

I can compare contradictory scriptures. You could too if you were even a little bit honest.

 

[ding]

I can compare contradictory scriptures. You could too if you were even a little bit honest.

Let's say I said to you that the logical conclusion of atheism is that they make no moral distinction between good and evil like you made the statement that Jesus and Paul did not agree. And you asked me why I believed the logical conclusion of atheism is that they make no moral distinction between good and evil like I asked you what Jesus and Paul disagreed about. I wouldn't send you a screenshot of a google search with the phrase "the logical conclusion of atheism is that they make no moral distinction between good and evil" like you sent me a google screenshot of "Paul contradicts Jesus" because that make it look like I didn't know why the logical conclusion of atheism is that they make no moral distinction between good and evil. No. I would tell you that the reason why the logical conclusion of atheism is that they make no moral distinction between good and evil is because atheism proceeds in all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts.

 

[BS Filter]

See my response to dinger. #58

You're gonna have to be more specific. Verse vs verse.

 

[ding]

See my response to dinger. #58

And I certainly wouldn't be bragging to anyone that you posted a screenshot of a google search proving you didn't know what you were talking about.

 

[ding]

You're gonna have to be more specific. Verse vs verse.

I know how the universe began.

 

[ding]

Look everyone.... I know how to do brain surgery on a monkey.

 

[ding]

I can compare contradictory scriptures. You could too if you were even a little bit honest.

So you want me to prove your claim for you? Are you drunk posting again?

 

[BS Filter]

I think your both a couple of fruit loops.

 

[ding]

I think your both a couple of fruit loops.

You probably need thicker skin or better arguments. Because that shit was funny.

 

[Thors Provoni]

Paul gets credit where its due, but he did not write “most of the New Testament “

That was Luke. Pinch off luke and Acts.
Look at it. Paul wrote a good deal of the New Testament- but not as much as Luke.

 

[Thors Provoni]

Paul travelled a lot and started many churches. I think Luke travelled some of the way with him.

Why some people bash Paul boggles my mind.

 

[BS Filter]

Paul wrote about the believers position in Christ. It's quite a revelation.

 

[Thors Provoni]

“Robbin’ Peter to pay Paul” -I dunno where that came from, but Paul’s work is without peer in founding churches, mentoring Timothy and Titus, and many other aspects. Yay Paul!

 

[Thors Provoni]

The believers position in Christ was indeed delineated by Paul.
When Peter wrote about brother Paul’s writings - that was the word Peter used WRITINGS - how we got SCRIPTURES I don’t know
GRAPHAIN
Peter was not saying Paul’s writings were SCRIPTURE, not that they weren’t, but let’s not see more than what is there.

 

[Thors Provoni]

We face Paul-bashers on the net, and those who say Peter didn’t write Second Peter.
I believe Peter wrote both epistles, liberal scholars want to punt 2 Peter to a way later date.

 

[BS Filter]

The believers position in Christ was indeed delineated by Paul.
When Peter wrote about brother Paul’s writings - that was the word Peter used WRITINGS - how we got SCRIPTURES I don’t know
GRAPHAIN
Peter was not saying Paul’s writings were SCRIPTURE, not that they weren’t, but let’s not see more than what is there.

Well, notice when Peter says that Paul's writing can be difficult to understand and ignorant people distort his words like they do with "other" scripture. If Peter didn't mean Paul's writing was scripture he wouldn't have the word "other". Here is an opinion that agrees with me.

What does 2 Peter 3:16 mean? | BibleRef.com

as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which there are some things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. - What is the meaning of 2 Peter 3:16?

www.bibleref.com

 

[Thors Provoni]

Pretty good stuff.

What part of Paul’s writings -to YOU - are hard to understand?

 

[Thors Provoni]

And the bigger question I guess is what part of Paul’s writings were HARD FOR PETER TO UNDERSTAND?

 

[Thors Provoni]

No writer of Scripture that I know of makes this claim about another Scripture writer - that his writings contain things that are hard to understand.

Peter seems to be acquainted with a good many of Paul’s letters -if not the entire corpus of them.

I ask myself WHAT ARE THE HARD TO UNDERSTAND things?

Could be Predestination - could be lifting restrictions of diet to Gentiles - I really can’t say for sure…

 

[BULLDOG]

Let's say I said to you that the logical conclusion of atheism is that they make no moral distinction between good and evil like you made the statement that Jesus and Paul did not agree. And you asked me why I believed the logical conclusion of atheism is that they make no moral distinction between good and evil like I asked you what Jesus and Paul disagreed about. I wouldn't send you a screenshot of a google search with the phrase "the logical conclusion of atheism is that they make no moral distinction between good and evil" like you sent me a google screenshot of "Paul contradicts Jesus" because that make it look like I didn't know why the logical conclusion of atheism is that they make no moral distinction between good and evil. No. I would tell you that the reason why the logical conclusion of atheism is that they make no moral distinction between good and evil is because atheism proceeds in all its manifestations from the assumption that the basic principles guiding the life of an individual and of mankind in general do not go beyond the satisfaction of material needs or primitive instincts.

There is a difference. The bible is a definitive record of what Jesus said, and what Paul said. In he same book, you can compare the remarks of both, and see the disagreement in the teachings of both. Of course, this is assuming you still believe the Bible to be a credible record of what they both said. Here are a few to get you started. Paul says The earth Will be freed from its bondage to Decay. Jesus says it will be destroyed. Jesus said the law can be summed up in two Commandments, Paul said the law can be summed up in one commandment. is it summed up in one or two, it can’t be both. Read Matthew, then Romans. Read Luke followed quickly by first and second Timothy. Start writing down the contradictions