Replies

The point is that it is Jesus who Christians are to follow, not Paul.

No, the point is the person you are promoting lies...Paul did not say not to follow Jesus...

If your author wasn't so deceptive he would admit that Gentiles Paul was preaching to did not know Jesus and maybe did not know of Jesus...Scripture was scarce and had Paul told the Christians to follow Jesus, they wouldn't have any idea what to follow...

So Paul who had spent 3 years following the risen Jesus told the church follow him as an example on how to follow the Lord...He did not tell them to follow him as the Lord but to follow him as one following the Lord...

What deception you are posting!!!

No, the point is the person you are promoting lies...Paul did not say not to follow Jesus...

I am not promoting this person, I have already said I did not agree on some of the things he said and on this particular subject I said that it was just his opinion.

I did not read much of what he calls proof but just the ones I pointed out, one of which I take with a grain of salt, the others which make a lot of sense which I will study on before I go to something else.

Many protestants seem so quick to except Pauls chastisement of Peter as gospel and they believe Paul had all authority, and the only reason for this comes from Paul.

But if some one points out scriptures that leads to a different view they call them liars, and there are many scriptures that brings concern regardless of what my author as you call him may say.

So Paul who had spent 3 years following the risen Jesus told the church follow him as an example on how to follow the Lord...

I do not know how many years it was but the Asian Churches were obviously not so new and they are the reason Paul was defending his apostleship, so Paul being an apostle was questioned even then.

And why would Paul have to defend his role as an apostle to the Corinthians unless there were some doubt there?

What deception you are posting!!!>>>>>

No, I am not posting any deception, I am just pointing out scripture that needs to be considered.

The Catholic Church has to except Paul as an apostle because they are the ones who included all of his what you call gospel in the Bible.

The protestants except Paul to the point of excluding every one else including the ones Jesus personally chose and they also reject any scripture that may indicate other wise.

I think of Paul as having a lot of common sense and believe he made sense on most of what he said, I also believe him to be more at odds with the chosen apostles than he was with them.

I am only using his own words other than the words in rev 2:2 by John which could be the reason Paul was defending his role of an apostle both to timothy and to the Corinthians.

The only problem on that would be that the dates of the writings would have to be reconsidered, but we know that many of the dates are not sure things.