Does anyone here think it’s possible to bully me into like St. Paul? Or to scare me into it? I don’t like the man revealed by his writing. I do not think he was very tightly wrapped; I think he may have been insane. His level of sophistication does not impress me.
If anyone here thinks that I am going to knuckle under and praise St. Paul, they are sadly mistaken. I first read him seriously 35 years ago. As Dr. E. has said, those asleep in the Lord are DEAD, you know, like St. Mary. I doubt that Jesus Christ, Risen Son of the Living God and my Lord and Savior, will send me to hell for dissing St. Paul, dead man.
It’s a crying shame that I must agree with Quix et al on St. Paul or else submit to insinuations that I was drinking when I read the scriptures. Evidently, that’s the best he can come up with right now.
I despise St. Paul. Presbyterians worship him. I prefer, above all books, the Gospels but I am not ignorant of the other books. I’m not that wild about Jeremiah either, frankly.
People who WORSHIP the NT tend to get stuck in the Pauline epistles and criticize those who don’t, in my experience.
Very interesting considering who Jeremiah was
I don’t know of anyone fantasizing that you are going to like or love Paul because of anything we
or the Roman Catholic magicsterical asserts to you.
Most of me doubts you would if you were threatened with excommunication.
I’m merely trying to suggest that telling God He made a mistake with Paul is foolhardy.
I have no real idea what God’s response might be—I’m just fairly certain it’s not likely to be wonderously positive.
However, I DO GREATLY APPRECIATE your demonstration that . . . contrary to a LOT of noise hereon about how homogeneously congruent and early righteous the dogma of the Roman Catholic et al Vatican INSTITUTION IS . . .
at the end of the day, Roman Catholics believe whatever they jolly well want to believe . . . more or less like everyone else.
So much for pristine exclusivity in terms of TRULY TRUEST TRUE TRUTH etc. goes.
Good grief. Paul wrote a significant portion of the NT. If you’re going to dismiss him like that, you must end up dismissing the NT books he wrote.
FWIW, I find it ironic that Catholics find fault with Scripture like that they claim the Catholic Church fathers themselves wrote.
If the Catholic Church is responsible for writing the NT, then why would they put in so many things that cause so many difficulties for the Catholic Church?
The Catholic Church is now in a position of trying to justify many of its doctrines which cannot be supported by a clear, plain reading of Scripture. If the RC Church held more closely to the Scripture it claimed it wrote, it would have to change its current doctrinal position on things, instead f elevating tradition to equal station as Scripture to justify them.
Wow. Does your local "alter Christus" know you believe this?
Perhaps someone who "despises" Paul just doesn't understand Paul, if they've read him at all.
(Paul's) level of sophistication does not impress me.
lol. So that's it. Paul is too rough-around-the-edges for you. He probably eats his peas with the dessert spoon.
Black-hearted bounder. What fools those Gentiles were to listen to him and be converted by the Gospel he was preaching.
Is this what Rome has come to? Is this the Christianity Rome declares? Does Rome "despise Paul" while pandering to pederast priests who think they are "another Christ?"
1 Corinthians 2:14 (New International Version) 14The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.