Posted on 02/24/2014 2:10:01 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Because the list of topics and references disagree with Catholic doctrine per Trent? Canons 9/12/14/20 on justification for starters.
Read Acts 9:15
Christ founded the Church on the Apostles, the first Bishops. Paul wasn’t even there.
Jesus said, “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you." John 16:12-14
Many of those things to be revealed were revealed through Paul.
Ping
The people the article is addressing -- those who think that Paul corrupted Christianity -- are almost invariably Judaizers who come from one or the other cultic offshoot of Protestantism. A Catholic who rejects Paul is automatically at least a material heretic.
Jesus did not change Saul’s name to Paul.
Some believe that Paul was just the Roman/Latin equivalent of Saul, but the Bible gives us no explanation as to why two different names are used.
Maybe I am misreading your post.
So you believe Jesus designated Paul as the Spirit of Truth?!
Not hardly.
I did not say Jesus changed Saul’s name to Paul.
I think Saul is his Hebrew name, while Paul is his Latin name which he uses for Gentiles in the Roman Empire.
Paul is from the Roman family name Paulus, which meant “small” or “humble” in Latin.
Saul on the other hand is from the Hebrew name Sha’ul which meant “asked for” or “prayed for”.
Thanks for gathering so much material.
RE: Back in Norman Vincent Peale’s heyday, someone commented that he found Paul appealing and Peale appalling.
Norman Vincent Peale’s church in New York City, the Marble Collegiate Church prides itself as a GAY AFFIRMING CHURCH.
They even have a LGBT fellowship. See here:
http://www.marblechurch.org/Programs/GIFTSLGBTFellowship/tabid/95/Default.aspx
I thought i may have misread the post. Sorry
Luther's 'teachings' are Paul's teaching, straight up. That all don't agree is self-evident. The Lutheran Confessions doesn't have any doctrine not tied to the plain text of the scripture.
I love the list of the doctrine as well,
Belief in Jesus for eternal life
Righteousness by faith
Justification by faith
Forgiveness of sin through faith
Repentance
Contending Paul wasn't an Apostle?
Thanks for the ping. I think God would say to us, “Don’t be too hard on my servant, Paul. He did right well with his life.”
He wasn’t one of the first apostles called by Christ. Don’t you have that list in your bible in several places.
Paul came later.
It makes one really wonder why he would claim to be a Christian at all? I mean, if the man whom Christ chose to be the apostle to the Gentiles couldn’t get the faith right, what makes people like this fellow you mentioned think that they are “wiser” and more “spiritual”?
They had Faye Wattleton of Planned Parenthood speak there as well.
Do you think he was an Apostle? If so, you need to work on that post’s sentence structure.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.