St. Paul's God

B

battig1370

Registered Senior Member
Here is what Saul/St.Paul wrote about his God, "And for this cause GOD shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a LIE." -( 2 Thess. 2:11 ).

Is there A LIE so big and massive that it is IMPOSSIBLE to believe it's a LIE?

"THE CLOAKING OF EVIL" ---> The DECEIVER, Saul/St.Paul's Christ has cloaked his wickness with the garment and name of Jesus for nearly 2000 years. The DECEIVER through Saul/St.Paul said, "Abstain from all appearance of evil." - ( Thess.5:22 ), and JESUS said, "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheeps clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.


ABOUT SAUL'S CHRIST. On the Road to Damascus a vision of a blinding light came to Saul, from his Lord, the God of his fathers. This Lord said to Saul, "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?" Saul answered, Who art thou, Lord?" Saul must have been very surprized that his Lord, called himself 'The Jesus of Nazareth'. After this Saul arrived in Damascus where Ananias came to Saul. Ananias said to Saul, " The God of our fathers has chosen you." -( Acts 22:14 ) --- Who was and is the God of Saul's and Ananias's father. Both they and their fathers were Pharisees, that JESUS spoke of, who were the pious religious. --- JESUS said "Ye are of your father the Devil, and the lust of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.(John 8:44). --- The God of Saul's and Ananias's fathers was not JESUS, the ALPHA and OMEGA, but their God was and is the Devil, as JESUS said.

After the Road to Damascus event, Saul went to Jerusalem where he was brought in front of the council, there Saul cried out, "I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee.-( Acts 23:6 ) JESUS said, "Woe unto you, Pharisees ---> Matthew chapter 23. " For ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in."

Is there A LIE so big and massive that it is IMPOSSIBLE to believe it's a LIE?

The reason that most Christians MUST believe it's unthinkable and impossible that Satan came to Saul as an angel of light, saying "I am Jesus of Nazareth", to deceive the whole world, is because the consequence of this being TRUE would be so massive that it would bring about a great spiritual earthquake that would crumble all the foundations of the christian churches.

Let the Spirit of Love and Truth be with you and guide you.

Peace be with you, Paul
 
Well, Paul didn't get those words from out of thin air. In either Kings 1 or 2 God allows a lying spirit to deceive. By deceive it is understood that demons, and the antichrist, will have the power to do "signs." But I don't understand this context to be any different than God allowing the magicians to do signs.

Second, Paul never murdered anyone. Being a so-called law-abiding citizen, he reported suspected Christians to the authority.
 
Second, Paul never murdered anyone.
Click to expand...



hmmm......ok tell that to Stephen:


Acts Chapter 7

58 And cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the witnesses laid down their clothes at a young man's feet, whose name was Saul. 59 And they stoned Stephen, calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. 60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.


At worst Paul/Saul was a murderer at best he was someone who turned others in whom he knew would be murdered :m:
 
okinrus said:
Well, Paul didn't get those words from out of thin air. In either Kings 1 or 2 God allows a lying spirit to deceive. By deceive it is understood that demons, and the antichrist, will have the power to do "signs." But I don't understand this context to be any different than God allowing the magicians to do signs.

Second, Paul never murdered anyone. Being a so-called law-abiding citizen, he reported suspected Christians to the authority.
Click to expand...

okinrus,

Is this more subjective "reasoning" from you? How do you know that Paul never murdered anyone? And how do you know he reported "suspected Christians" to the authority? Oh wait, is it because he called himself law-abiding? Of course! Since someone insists they are law abiding, it MUST be true so lets all simply buh-leeave in their testimony without falter.

And how convenient of you to understand this "in context". The verse you are referring to in Kings actually has God COMMANDING the lying spirit to visit the king. Your ingenious use of the verb "allows" is misleading.

Shall we then conclude that your God is a demon, or the antichrist? :rolleyes:
 
St.Paul's GOD shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a LIE.

To allow or to permit is much different then to send them strong delusion.

("allows a lying spirit to deceive"---"allowing the magicians to do signs.")

God allowed/permited Satan to come to Saul as an angel of light, saying "I am Jesus of Nazareth", to deceive the whole world. The big question is why?

Christian History will show you that people who believe Saul/St.Paul's Jesus Chirst have murdered and done all kinds of wickness their faith.

Peace be with you, Paul
 
Saul/St.Paul said, "Abstain from all appearance of evil." - ( Thess.5:22 ), and JESUS said, "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheeps clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

To abstain from all appearance of evil is the best way to deceive. Do you agree?

Peace be with you, Paul
 
Throwing stones, fulfilling the responsibilities of a corrupt government, is not exactly murder. It's likely executing being the executioner when someone is unjustly convicted. Now Paul, in his zeal, did not understand that what he was taught was wrong. But I don't think that makes him a murder.

How do you know that Paul never murdered anyone? And how do you know he reported "suspected Christians" to the authority? Oh wait, is it because he called himself law-abiding? Of course!
Click to expand...
I see no reason to doubt him. He would not mention Stephen he believed he murdered him. And he would not be able to call himself a Jew fulfilling the law if he believed that he had murdered someone.

And how convenient of you to understand this "in context". The verse you are referring to in Kings actually has God COMMANDING the lying spirit to visit the king. Your ingenious use of the verb "allows" is misleading.
Click to expand...
No, it was from memory. I'll look up the passage and get back to you if I can.
 
okinrus said:
Throwing stones, fulfilling the responsibilities of a corrupt government, is not exactly murder. It's likely executing being the executioner when someone is unjustly convicted. Now Paul, in his zeal, did not understand that what he was taught was wrong. But I don't think that makes him a murder.
Click to expand...

My stupid browser keeps losing the responses and I have to go back and type them all again...

Wow, okinrus, you really are being naieve here. "Not exactly murder"? There is no such thing; either it is murder, or it is not. Please don't try to twist morality on us by saying "not exactly murder" since that is dishonest. By your logic, a suicide bomber can never be a murder since he "did not understand that what he was taught was wrong." Of course we understand that such a conclusion is foolish, therefore we must throw out your conclusion since it is similarly flawed. I wonder how any intelligent human being can possibly be so arbitrary that they will say murder is "not exactly murder". Is this how every other atrocity in the Bible is twisted for the purpose of justification?

I see no reason to doubt him. He would not mention Stephen he believed he murdered him. And he would not be able to call himself a Jew fulfilling the law if he believed that he had murdered someone.
Click to expand...

Of course you see no reason to doubt him. You have just absolved him by twisting the very definition of murder. Why would you? Oh wait, because Paul claimed to be far advanced in Judaism beyond his contemporaries, there is no reason to doubt his testimony. Or because he claimed he had a vision in which he saw Jesus (he had never even seen Jesus before?), we have absolutely no reason to question his claims. :rolleyes:

Come on okinrus. Do you really have to be that arbitrary? The very fact that he didn't believe he was Stephen's murder points to his skewed interpretation of morality. So much for being a law abiding Jew..

No, it was from memory. I'll look up the passage and get back to you if I can.
Click to expand...

1 Kings 22
19 Micaiah continued, "Therefore hear the word of the LORD : I saw the LORD sitting on his throne with all the host 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 lying 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 lying spirit in the mouths of all these prophets of yours. The LORD has decreed disaster for you."
24 Then Zedekiah son of Kenaanah went up and slapped Micaiah in the face. "Which way did the spirit from the LORD go when he went from me to speak to you?" he asked.

By deceive it is understood that demons, and the antichrist, will have the power to do "signs."
Click to expand...

Again, I pose my question:

By your definition, shall we then conclude that your God is a "demon", or the "antichrist"?
 
Here is some writtings that describes the personality and characteristics that Saul reveals about himself, which is certainly not a sign of a true apostle or a SAINT.--- as written in 2 Cor. chapter 10-12. But first, Anannis, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all Jews has said, that he has heard by many, how much evil Saul has done to the saints in Jerusalem. When Saul was in Jerusalem to join the disciples, they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a disciple.-( Acts 9:26 ) Saul was not a disciple because of his deeds.

Saul said, "---I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into ministry; Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor,and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief. And the grace of our 'Lord' was exceeding abundant with faith and love which is in Christ Jesus."-( 1 Tim. 12-15 ).

--- "As the truth of Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of this boasting in the regions of Achaia."
--- " For though I should boast somewhat more of our authority"
--- " That I may not seem as if I would terrify you by letters."
--- " But though I be rude in speech, yet not in knowledge; but we have been throughly manifest among you in ALL things"
--- " I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service."
Being rude, robbing churches , to terrify and being boastful is not the charateristics that of a chief apostle of JESUS.
--- "Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake:"
--- "I became a fool in glorying; you have compelled me: for I ought to have been commended of you." Here Saul is complaining because his Jesus said, "My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness."
--- "We are fools for Christ's sake, but you are wise in 'Christ';" (Cor.4:10)
--- "Whether in pretence or in truth, Christ is preached I therein do rejoice." (Phil. 1:18) --- " And unto the Jews I became a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; --- To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by ALL MEANS save some. ---"
---"being crafty, I caugth you with guile"
--- "bear one anothers's burdens and so fulfill the law of Christ ," -(Gal. 6:2)<---vs.---> "For every man shall bear his own burden." -(Gal. 6:5)
--- "I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ'" --- "I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord," -(Ephesians 3:1, 4:1).
--- "Paul, a prisoner of Jesus Christ" --- "being such as one as Paul the aged, and now also a prisoner of Jesus Chirst." --- "Therefore salute thee Epaphras, my fellowprisoner in Jesus Christ" -(Philemon 1:1, 1:9, 1:23).

PRISONER---> a person confined against their will.
CRAFTY---> Skillful in deceiving: cunning.
INFIRMITTIES ---> physical or mental defects.
PRETENSE---> false show of intentions or motives
RUDE ---> impolite; offensive
TERRIFY ---> fill with terror
FOOL ---> idiot, halfwit, buffoon, entertainer, stooge
BOASTFUL ---> talk about oneself with indulgent pride
THIEF ---> a robber, person who steals especaily in secret, con man
EVIL ---> wicked, morally bad
COMPELLED ---> forced
MUST ---> feel compelled, or force to

Even though Saul said, "Abstain from all appearance of evil." ( Thess.5:22 ), he himself has come short of following the advice of his own Christ to maintain the pretense of Sainthood. It is quite understandable why Saul was a prisoner of his Christ, the God of his fathers, who is the Devil. Being compelled to suffer and trying to abstain from all 'appearance' of evil was very difficult for Saul, and made Saul feel like a prisoner of his Lord. For reasons that I do not know, most chritians believe that these qualities defined above, are that of a saint of the most high, the chief apostle. The reason for Saul's sainthood might be because he was told that he must suffer, was compelled becoming a fool, and took pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for his Christ's sake. Or maybe Saul was given sainthood because he was a prisoner of his Lord Jesus Christ. Today, who would grant Sainthood to a man with Saul's personality and characteristics, would you? Ask yourself who is this Lord Jesus Christ of Saul's? Jesus was not compelled to suffer by his Father, and Jesus would not compell anyone to suffer and make them feel like a prisoner, not even Saul. The One that came to Saul on the road to Damascus was the Devil disguised as The Jesus of Nazareth.

The personality and characteristics of Saul's Jesus is quite different than the Jesus of the gospel.

Peace be with you, Paul
 
I advise anyone interested in the subject of Paul to check out the website As Paul tells it....

Battig, your post borders on slander. Please check your sources before you just repeat them. Or at least cite them (The arguments look typically Muslim fundamentalist).Thanks.
 
*************
Battig: "The One that came to Saul on the road to Damascus was the Devil disguised as The Jesus of Nazareth. The personality and characteristics of Saul's Jesus is quite different than the Jesus of the gospel.
*************
M*W: I couldn't agree with you more!
 
Jenyar: I advise anyone interested in the subject of Paul to check out the website As Paul tells it....
*************
M*W: Your advice is about as good as your tap shoes. In other words, worthless.

Paul's resume is full of lies. If I hired him for a job as a tradesman, he'd be fired because his resume is worthless. He claimed to be a number of professions, but he lied about them all. He was an opportunist. If someone needed a tent made, then Paul would tell them he was a tentmaker. If Judaism needed a Pharisee, Paul would tell them he's a Pharisee. Same goes for the other side who needed a Saducee -- Paul would say he was one. Paul also claimed to be an apostle of Jesus Christ -- let's make that "self-appointed." Paul never knew Jesus. Paul even claimed to be a rabbi, and he alluded to being the messiah as well. Let's say he "deluded" that he was the messiah. He is the grand liar of Christianity, and he is the founder of the cult.
*************
Jenyar: Battig, your post borders on slander. Please check your sources before you just repeat them. Or at least cite them (The arguments look typically Muslim fundamentalist).Thanks.
*************
M*W: Jenyar, your post borders on delusion. Please check your sources before you just repeat them as you perpetually have done. If you're not part of the truth, then you are part of the lie -- the big one.

Slander? You don't know the truth. You only know the lies. Paul was evil. In a court of law (in the USA), there is no one who would be charged with slandering Paul. Besides, you're incorrect. It would be a charge of libel, but still no conviction. A charge of slander or libel would only prevail in a court of law if what Paul's accuser said was done as a blatant lie with the intention to harm Paul's character. Paul proved for himself what an evil man he really was -- a pathological liar, a common thief, a serial murderer, and a sexual predator of Timothy, et al.. And this is the man who invented Christianity!
 
WOMEN ---> Jesus' radical treatment towards women were revolutionary as written in John 4:7-26. He refused to follow the behavioral rules established by the three major Jewish religious groups, Essenes, Pharisees and Sadducees of the day, who restricted women to roles of little or no authority, and also were considered to be inferior and under the authority of men.

Saul/St.Paul said, "I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not: After the Damascus road event Saul cried out, "I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee.-( Acts 23:6 ). Here what Jesus said about the Pharisee, "Ye are of your father the Devil, and the lust of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.(John 8:44).

Here are some of Saul's commendments for women that christian fundamentalists believe to be the Word of God:

"---women adorn themselves in modest apparrel, with shamefaceness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold or prearls, or costly array;"

"---train the younger women---to be subject to their husbands."( Titus 2:4 )

--- "WIVES, submitt yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church:"-(Eph. 5:22-23)

"---women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says, If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church."( 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 )

--- "Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over man, but to be in slience." --- " ---but woman being deceived was in the transgression. Not withstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue faith and charity and holiness with sobriety." (1 Tim. 2:11-15)
"---Christ is the head of every man, and a husband the head of his wife, and the head of Christ is God."( 1 Corinthians 11:3 )

Because of these kind of doctrines, women have been enslaved , imprisoned, disgraced and made silent if at all possible by their fathers, husbands, and brothers, and the religious community. For the women that did not believe and accept these doctrines of Saul's Lord (the Devil), the punishments that many women have suffered were to wicked to mention. The History on how women were and are treated in the religious world was and is an abomination. In recent years, as in the twentith century, women have been rebeling against the words of Saul's Christ, without even recognizing that Saul's testimony is of the Devil who claimed to be The Jesus of Nazareth. No wonder so many cruse Jesus' name.

All these written commandments for women, from Saul the Pharisee, are not in agreement with Jesus' words and examples. It's important to know how Jesus treated women. Women that were treated as outcast by the mainstream, Jesus demonstrated both tender compassion and insight. Jesus was also approachable by those that were considered the lowest of the low, or the rejects by the status quo. In the four gospels, there are many examples of how Jesus treated women. One good example is about the woman of Samaria ---> ( John 4:6-26 ).

Peace be with you, Paul
 
Some articles to read to get another perspective of Paul's influence from his epistles, according to these historians.

Who Founded Christianity: Jesus or Paul? By N.T. Wright.
"When Paul preached the gospel, he was consciously implementing the achievement of Jesus, not founding a separate religion."
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/143/story_14300_1.html

St. Paul, Friend or Enemy of Women? By Rosemary Radford Ruether.
"It's too simplistic to call the apostle a patriarchal misogynist on the one hand--or to praise him unreservedly on the other."
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/142/story_14272_1.html

The role of women in the Christian churches of Paul's day by Dr. Helmut Koester
http://www.bibletexts.com/terms/women01.htm
 
Dear battig1370, et al

Who would have thought I would run into those that would have similar ideas concerning 'Saul of Tarus' in a science forum. I have been trying to contrivute to the thread for some weeks now but the forum manager had disabled the new member registry.

Most Biblical scholars agree that the Epistles attributed to "St. Paul" have at least two authors. I think I may have identified them historically. Hint: If one were running a privately funded covert action military destablizing unit, and the illicit drug trade were not available as a source of funding, might not one take advantage of that military's second biggest 'procurment' program - tents? I hope I have sparked some interest in elaboration.

aguy2
 
aguy2: Dear battig1370, et al

Who would have thought I would run into those that would have similar ideas concerning 'Saul of Tarus' in a science forum. I have been trying to contrivute to the thread for some weeks now but the forum manager had disabled the new member registry.

Most Biblical scholars agree that the Epistles attributed to "St. Paul" have at least two authors. I think I may have identified them historically. Hint: If one were running a privately funded covert action military destablizing unit, and the illicit drug trade were not available as a source of funding, might not one take advantage of that military's second biggest 'procurment' program - tents? I hope I have sparked some interest in elaboration.
*************
M*W: Saul of Tarsus was an evil man. He was a lunatic. It doesn't surprise me that Christians everywhere believe what he wrote. Christians everywhere are the stupidest people alive! Al-Queda is beheading the wrong people. The need to focus on the ignorant Christians. Be Gone With Them!
 
Medicine Woman

My opinion of 'Christians' may not as intense as yours, but I must admit that at times I have refered to them as "Saulite Heretics". Are you at all curious as to who I think Saul/Paul really are?

aguy2
 
There has never been any argument that Paul was sinful. As a man, how could he be anything else? However, I think many of the verses we throw so casually up on the thread need to be looked at in context. For example, the verse that seemingly started it all, 2 Thessalonians 2:11:

11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie
The New International Version, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House) 1984.

Now, read it in the context of the passage (all emphasis added):

They [those who "will be...decieved"] perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 12 and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

God does not send them the lie until they have made there choice. It is obvious from the text that they are not hovering on the cusp of salvation, but rather in open rejection of it. Therefore, God gives them only what they ask of him, a way to explain away his existence.

As to the attributes of Paul, of course he wasn't perfect. However, many of those are ways in expressing ideas that aren't sinful at all. Take boasting for example. Paul qualifies this in 2 Corinthians 10:13-18.

13 We, however, will not boast beyond proper limits, but will confine our boasting to the field God has assigned to us, a field that reaches even to you. 14 We are not going too far in our boasting, as would be the case if we had not come to you, for we did get as far as you with the gospel of Christ. 15 Neither do we go beyond our limits by boasting of work done by others. Our hope is that, as your faith continues to grow, our area of activity among you will greatly expand, 16 so that we can preach the gospel in the regions beyond you. For we do not want to boast about work already done in another man’s territory. 17 But, “Let him who boasts boast in the Lord.” 18 For it is not the one who commends himself who is approved, but the one whom the Lord commends.

I think the problem we have is the connotation of the word boast rather than the denotation. Paul here says that the action of boasting is permisable as long as the motive and object of the boast are both correct. Boasting in the work the Lord is doing through you does not elevate yourself, but merely glorifys God.

When it's all said and done, who was Paul? Paul was just like every other Christian of the day. He was given certain spiritual gifts unique in the Church, just as every othe Christian was. However, when it boils down to it, he was just another sinner saved by grace.

Ephesians 2:8-9
8 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast [in their salvation :)].

Have a great day!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top