Posted on 11/15/2011 5:10:37 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Bob Jones III, chancellor of the fundamentalist South Carolina university that bears his family’s name, has become the latest conservative Christian leader to publicly cast doubt on President Barack Obama’s stated Christian commitment.
"I've no reason to think he's a Christian,” Jones told National Journal in an interview published Saturday. “Anyone can say he's a Christian.
“Some people will say whatever they think the politically helpful thing would be,” Jones said. “I say, 'Where is the evidence that he is a Christian?' "
Jones is an influential conservative leader in South Carolina, home to one of the nation’s key Republican primaries next year. Bob Jones University, where Jones served as president from 1971 to 2005, is a popular stop for GOP candidates courting Christian votes.
This year, evangelical leader Franklin Graham questioned Obama’s Christian commitment, telling ABC News that for Obama, “going to church means he’s a Christian,” while for Graham, “the definition of a Christian is whether we have given our life to Christ.”
Last year, Graham insisted that Obama was born a Muslim, though the president hasn’t said that....
(Excerpt) Read more at wavenewspapers.com ...
”Jones said. “I say, ‘Where is the evidence that he is a Christian?’” Thanks Bob. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.
If Paul, instead of Our Lord, is the final authority on who or what is a Christian, why is it called Christianity, rather than Paul’s religion or some such? Saul/Paul wasn’t even one of the original disciples and never met Jesus. I’ve always wondered why Paul is always deferred to. I’m not saying this to insult you, but it’s always kind of stuck in my craw.
Who did he meet on the 'Road to Famascus'?
That said; better "second thoughts"; than none at all.
Zero is not religious at all. There’s not enough room in his head for himself and God. One of ‘em has to go and it isn’t Zero.
He claimed to meet Our Lord. But he never knew Jesus during His life and mission.
1. Paul did meet Christ. His was the last appearance of the resurrected Christ.
2. Paul received the Gospel directly from Christ. Then he went to Jerusalem and checked with James and Peter to make sure he and they had gotten the same Gospel. They had.
3. Paul is by far our earliest account of the beliefs of the first Christians. The Gospels and Luke were not written until much later.
So I’m pretty good with taking Paul’s opinion on things as true.
IIRC, hadn’t Christ already ascended into Heaven in front of the disciples earlier than the “road to Damascus” incident?
That was obvious from his path. Are you implying he didn't know of Jesus, and where is that proof?
He claimed to meet Our Lord.
Just as Peter claimed Paul did. Or isn't Peter's affirmation of Paul's apostleship good?
“Zero is not religious at all. There’s not enough room in his head for himself and God. One of ‘em has to go and it isn’t Zero.”
Good analysis.
“IIRC, hadn’t Christ already ascended into Heaven in front of the disciples earlier than the “road to Damascus” incident?”
1 Cor 15 explicitly includes the appearance to Paul as the last of the bodily appearances. It also includes a creedal and the first written statement of the Gospel that is known. I understand your point about the ascension. But He’s God. He can do as he pleases. If He wanted to appear to Paul, it’s done.
Paul was beaten, tortured, jailed and finally beheaded for his preaching of the Gospel. He was accepted as an Apostle by the other Apostles. His Epistles are called “scripture” by Peter. His sincerity is, imo, beyond reproach. He put his money where his mouth is.
I noted in another post you made on this thread that you believe Paul “claimed” to have seen the resurrected Jesus. Do you think he claimed meeting Christ falsely? Or that he hallucinated and the whole thing was a big mistake? Or do I misread your post?
I know there has been much Paul revisionism by athiest theologians since the 70’s. But I have always regarded that as motivated by the knowledge that the bodily appearance to Paul is a big problem they have in making an historical case against the resurrection (James being the other half of that problem.) Is there a body of Christian Paul revisionism also that I never heard of? I’m not being rhetorical—I am genuinely curious.
There may be no evidence that he is a Christian, but there is a mountain of evidence that he was born a Muslim, studied and observed Islam as a child, and remains heartfelt in his homage and affiliation with Muslims and Islam even now.
I fail to see how pretending that Obama does not have Islamic leanings helps anything.
Yep. "And as he journeyed, it came to pass that he drew nigh unto Damascus: and suddenly there shone round about him a light out of heaven: and he fell upon the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: but rise, and enter into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men that journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing the voice, but beholding no man. And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw nothing; and they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus. And he was three days without sight, and did neither eat nor drink. — Acts 9:3–9, ASV "
Every Apostle was chosen by Christ and then regenerated by God the Holy Spirit with the spiritual gift of Apostleship. As with all spiritual gifts, it is given by Grace.
In the case of Paul, he was the Apostle to the Gentiles, although Paul didn’t think this was his role. Paul continually lapsed into his scarred soulish thinking, recognizing his incredible abilities from a worldly perspective as a believer in Christ amongst the Jews of Jerusalem.
Consider how in nearly every case where Paul attempts to return to Jerusalem to witness to other Jews, his journey is interrupted. By imprisonment, by storm, by shipwreck, by incarceration and transport to Rome, by deferment of his judgment to other parties,....every time God’s logistical providence which had been predestined placed Paul on the path to Rome.
This stresses an important point. No matter what worldly indications may direct us to think we should perform such and such good work by what is righteous is our own minds, even if most of the time we keep in fellowship with Him, it is much more important to be in fellowship with Him, continuing to advance in our spiritual walk with Him, so He can place us in the right place, at the right time, to perform the right thing, by the right protocol, which He teaches us, in the right way to fulfill His Plan for our lives.
Zero is not religious at all. There’s not enough room in his head for himself and God. One of ‘em has to go and it isn’t Zero.
2. Acts 9: 10-15. The Lord tells Ananias to go to Paul, who is blind at this point. Ananias knows who Paul is (called Saul of Tarsus at that point)and what he was doing to the Jewish converts to Christ. Ananias was afraid. The Lord told Ananias to go anyway BECAUSE: "Go, for he (Paul) is a chosen vessel of MINE to hear My name before the Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel." Thus, the Lord Himself said that Paul was HIS chosen person to preach the Gospel to Gentiles and the rest of the world.
3. Paul further states in Galatians, Chapter 1, vs.15-18, that Christ called him by grace, that Paul went to Arabia for 3 years. There are meetings at the Jerusalem conference where Paul met with Peter, James and the others and it was agreed that Paul was indeed come to the Gentiles and James and the others were to go to the children of Israel. That is Scripture my friend.
4. If you will simply take the time to read the Scriptures, there are several verses where Paul speaks of Jesus. Remember, all this concerning Paul's conversion was right after the Crucifixion and resurrection of our Lord. THUS, PAUL HAD TO BE AROUND JERUSALEM in these times. He was a Pharisee. He himself said he was a Pharisee of Pharisees. He trained at the foot of the greatest of them in Jerusalem at that time. So Paul HAD to be there during the times that Jesus was in Jerusalem. He had to have heard of Him, even seen Him. The Scriptures are silent on if Paul might have been there at the actual trial and Crucifixion of Christ. But, knowing Paul's position in the Jewish hierarchies at that time, he most likely was there.
What you need to do my friend is take the thorn out of your craw. You need to spend your time in a Bible study class taught by someone who actually teaches the Scriptures as are written. Do not take your current mind and heart and send yourself to ruin. These Scripture are the very Word of God. Jesus Christ Himself appointed Paul. He chose Paul. He trained Paul in the wilderness of Arabia Himself. Please toss out your unbelief in the Scriptures.
Let me put it this way. The Old Testament is for the Jews. It is for our learning and education. The Four Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are also to the Jews. Christ Himself told the 12 NOT to go to Gentiles or into Samaria. Go ONLY TO THE LOST SHEEP OF ISRAEL!!! That is Jews. Not Gentiles. Just before He was crucified, the three gentiles wanted to speak to Christ and He refused because His time had not been fulfilled. Christ came to fulfill the OT prophesies.
Only after the Jews unbelief and refusal to accept Jesus for who He said He was, did God make a change and send the message to the gentile world. Through the Apostle Paul. If you do not believe in the letter of Paul, then you might as well throw out most of the NT material. Since I suspect you are not a Jew, then if you don't believe in Paul, and who he is in this plan of Salvation, then my friend, you have a difficult road to Salvation. Because if you do not believe in Paul's letters, what are you believing in? What is going to save you? The Gospel is! And, that came through Paul, FROM GOD! Paul did not make this stuff in some smokey back room of a tavern on Saturday nights.
That plan of salvation is found in 1 Corinthians 15, verses 1-4:
1. Moreover brethren, I declare to you THE GOSPEL, which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand.
2. by which also YOU ARE SAVED, if you HOLD FAST THAT WORD which I preached to you - unless you believed in vain,
3. For I delivered to you first of all, WHICH I ALSO RECEIVED, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4. and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures.
And my friend if you will read further there, check out verse 8, and THIS IS THE ONE YOU NEED TO SEE:
8. THEN LAST OF ALL HE WAS SEE BY ME ALSO, AS BY ONE BORN OUT OF DUE TIME.
(All emphasis are mine.)
So, that TELLS you straight from the Scriptures, and TOTALLY refutes your statement that Paul never met Jesus. He was there. Whether they had personal conversations, the Scriptures are silent. But the Scriptures STATE Paul saw Him. Thus Paul was there. The Bible says it, I believe it, I don't doubt it. I pray you will come to realization that what I have told you above is true. But, DON'T take my word for it. GET INTO YOUR BIBLE AND A BIBLE CLASS AND LEARN IT FOR YOURSELF. God's grace on you friend. I will pray for you.
PS: I forgot to add this, where you said that Paul NEVER spoke to Jesus. I draw your attention to the Damascus Road experience where Christ struck Paul blind. This is where Paul was converted. I draw your attention again to Acts 9, verses 4-6, where Christ asks Paul why he is persecuting Him, Jesus Christ. Paul replies “ Lord what do You want me to do?” Paul was SPEAKING TO THE ASSENDED LORD WHO WAS SPEAKING FROM HEAVEN!!
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.