The Gospel According to Paul?????

[AllahUAkbar]

Salaam,

 

I am posting this topic because this is my personal experience. I used to be a Christian and I learned that being a Christian required believing the books of the self proclaimed Apostle Paul. I am posting this, as a way to explain my reasoning behind why I feel the bible today is not trustworthy. I feel the words in the current bible are not the words of Jesus, or God. They are the works of Paul the self proclaimed Apostle. I know a lot of Muslims like to show Christians that the Bible talks about Muhammad (PBUH) or like to show its contradictions. But doing this will get you nowhere with die hard Christians. You see many Christians and Muslims will not falter no matter what you say or try to prove. This is what faith is all about. You must prove a valid point and hope people will listen. Insha Allah I can help shed some light on this man named Paul the Apostle. We must look at the true authorship and intentions of such a person. Paul claims to have received the revelation from Jesus (PBUH) while on the way to Damascus.

 

Volume 4, Book 55, Number 651:

Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "I am the nearest of all the people to the son of Mary, and all the prophets are paternal brothers, and there has been no prophet between me and him (i.e. Jesus)."

 

This message from our beloved Prophet (PBUH) explained that there was nobody except himself after Jesus. As Muslims this is clear proof to the matter but to Christians it takes more explanation. Those of us who were Christians know for a fact how hard it was to truly see what the Qur’an was saying. Only when we opened our hearts did we see the truth.

 

When Christianity started two people were in focus: Jesus (PBUH) and Paul. Jesus (PBUH) according to Christians is the founder of Christianity; but Paul was considered as the one who explained the teachings and redelivered the supposed true intentions of Jesus (PBUH) purpose. He did this in a way he says that Jesus (PBUH) himself never did. Paul explained how Jesus' (PBUH) life and death fitted into salvation. Almost all of the Christian doctrines come mostly from the influence of Paul and his self-proclaimed apostleship.

 

Was Jesus (PBUH) the founder of Christianity, as we know it today? Most of the New Testament doesn't emphasize Jesus (PBUH), but instead it is focused on the Apostle Paul and defending himself and trying not to establish himself as a liar.

 

Paul never actually met Jesus (PBUH) in the flesh, he is only said to have a vision and proceeded to create his own teachings of Jesus (PBUH), until he created the new religion or what we can refer to as the Pauline Doctrine of Christianity. Because there are no actual gospel from Jesus (PBUH) in writing exists, the Apostles, or anyone that knew Jesus (PBUH) in the flesh most of what Jesus (PBUH) taught is lost forever. Only Allah knows what was really said. I feel that Paul built his following by preaching the Gospel according to him (Paul).

 

Can Christians prove that Paul was an apostle? No! No one can prove Paul was an apostle, and there's a lot evidence to prove this. I ask why doesn't this evidence exist against any of the others? Until Christians can truly prove that Paul was a apostle of Jesus (PBUH), it would be wrong to follow, preach or quote Paul's doctrine.

 

Paul wasn't shy about calling himself an apostle. In nine of the thirteen of his books, he introduces himself as an apostle of Jesus (PBUH), and in every case he says in one way or another that this is by divine sovereign decree

[Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell]

Volume 4, Book 55, Number 651:

Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "I am the nearest of all the people to the son of Mary, and all the prophets are paternal brothers, and there has been no prophet between me and him (i.e. Jesus).

"Mohammed(may piss be upon him) was a liar so I don't care!

 

When Christianity started two people were in focus: Jesus (PBUH) and Paul. Jesus (PBUH) according to Christians is the founder of Christianity; but Paul was considered as the one who explained the teachings and redelivered the supposed true intentions of Jesus (PBUH) purpose. He did this in a way he says that Jesus (PBUH) himself never did. Paul explained how Jesus' (PBUH) life and death fitted into salvation. Almost all of the Christian doctrines come mostly from the influence of Paul and his self-proclaimed apostleship.

This has gotr to be the largest lie in the history of lies! First of all the life of Paul was recorded in the book of acts which was written by St. Luke the apostle. Was Luke also a self-appointed apostle? Luke bears witness in these writings.

 

Was Jesus (PBUH) the founder of Christianity, as we know it today? Most of the New Testament doesn't emphasize Jesus (PBUH), but instead it is focused on the Apostle Paul and defending himself and trying not to establish himself as a liar.

More lies! Paul starts out in the book of acts as a Pharisee who is out to destroy the fledgling Christian Church. He is rich and powerful. He lays all of this down after his conversion (witnessed by at least Luke and Ananias) to live a life of poverty and suffering. He became a tent maker to support his ministries. In fact, he wrote all of his letters to the churches while incarcerated in prison for Preaching the good news of Jesus Christ! Why would a rich and powerful man become a poor and wretched preacher if he weren't at least convinced himself of his mission. If you read Paul's writing's he never "tries to establish himself as a liar" he writes mainly on how a church ought to behave.

 

Paul never actually met Jesus (PBUH) in the flesh, he is only said to have a vision and proceeded to create his own teachings of Jesus (PBUH), until he created the new religion or what we can refer to as the Pauline Doctrine of Christianity. Because there are no actual gospel from Jesus (PBUH) in writing exists, the Apostles, or anyone that knew Jesus (PBUH) in the flesh most of what Jesus (PBUH) taught is lost forever. Only Allah knows what was really said.

Another bold faced lie! Paul met Jesus on the road to damascus where Paul was struck blind for 3 days. There were at least 6 gospels written 4 of which were added to the bible by the counsel of trent under Constantine.

 

I feel that Paul built his following by preaching the Gospel according to him (Paul).

Finally the truth "You feel" all of this. Of course anyone can give a symbolance of credibility to their bull-shit by stating they "feel" ne way or another.

 

Can Christians prove that Paul was an apostle? No! No one can prove Paul was an apostle, and there's a lot evidence to prove this. I ask why doesn't this evidence exist against any of the others? Until Christians can truly prove that Paul was a apostle of Jesus (PBUH), it would be wrong to follow, preach or quote Paul's doctrine.

Uh, I just did! Can a Muslim PROVE that Mohammed(may piss be upon him) was a true prophet? According to him and his goons he was a prophet. I "feel" he was a charloton and a pedophile murderer and the father of terrorism.

 

Paul wasn't shy about calling himself an apostle. In nine of the thirteen of his books, he introduces himself as an apostle of Jesus (PBUH), and in every case he says in one way or another that this is by divine sovereign decree.

What's your point?

 

Should we believe the books of a person who made such huge claims about themselves when all we have for proof of their claim is no more than their word and statements from his friends?

Take your own advise and throw the damn koran in the garbage then, because mohammed(may piss be upon him) made the same claims with no prrof to their claim.

 

A true prophet or apostle does not have to go through so many problems to convince the world they are who they say they are. Even Jesus (PBUH) said that if he alone bore witness of himself, his witness was invalid. John 5:31 And of all the people who shouldn't need to have others testify on their behalf, Jesus (PBUH) was that person (A True Prophet).

I have already told you of at least two other witnesses to Paul's conversion and Apostlehood... for a former Christian, you sure don't know much about it!

 

Paul viewed himself as an apostle, but didn't stop at just claiming to be an apostle. He did what he could to communicate to his followers that he was the biggest and the best.

This has nothing to do with anything, it serves a filler of space. But I like the verses....

 

2 Corinthians 11:5-10 NKJV

"For I consider that I am not at all inferior to the most eminent apostles". ...."As the truth of Christ is in me, no one shall stop me from this boasting in the regions of Achaia."

I don't see how this is a claim to the best Apostle... but I like the verse.

 

Sometimes he claims to be unworthy. I feel that he thought the weak would embrace him as the greatest of apostles because he was so humble. In the same sentence he states he worked much harder than the other apostles did.

More filler, good verses... it doesn't help or hinder your argument.

 

1 Corinthians 15:9,10 NKJV

"For I am the least of the apostles, who am not worthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am, and His grace toward me was not in vain; but I labored more abundantly than they all...".

 

Paul makes no pretense to the Galatians about how he compares himself to Peter, James, and John:

There is still no point to your argument...

 

Galatians 2:6,7,9 NKJV

"But from those who seemed to be something - whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man- for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me. But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, ...and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship..."

 

A couple verses latter Paul takes a cheap shot at Peter. Without Peter around to defend himself, Paul brags to the Galatians how he put Peter in his place before the entire church of Antioch.

 

Galatians 2:11-14 NKJV

"But when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews played the hypocrite with him so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straight forward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, "if you being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?"

more filler, where is your point??? How does this prove or disprove that Paul was not an Apostle???? This whole passage is about following the custom's of men and not the God's.

 

Then Paul goes on to describe Peter as a hypocrite and for living a different gospel from the one that Paul preached.

Yes, for compelling the followers the live by jewish law when Jesus himself said "I have come not to destroy the law but to fulfill it." Jesus also said "It is not what enters the man that defiles him, but what comes out."

 

It is interesting to note that earlier in Galatians. 1:8,9 Paul commanded his followers to damn anyone who preaches a different gospel than his. According to Paul, that would include Peter and possibly James and John as well. It is obvious to the reader of the first two chapters of Galatians, that Paul is demanding that the Galatian church follow no one but him, and not the apostles in Jerusalem.

More lies! He is telling people not to concerned with man's religion, they should concern themselves with God's religion.

 

When I was a Christian I had to accept Paul as an apostle, this is when I really began to question his true intent.

I don't "feel" you were ever a Christian! You read into the bible things that are not there. You read out things that are.

 

I always wondered why God didn't give him the revelation of the end times if he was a true apostle.

Oh great! You wonder why God does and does not do things... No one knows God!

 

He was supposedly the apostle with the message renewed, right?

WRONG!!!! How many more lies must I suffer with this crap????

 

Why did John get this revelation and not Paul? We will never know. Dp we really know who John was? The John of revelations was certainly not John the Baptist.

No he was not JOhn the Baptist he was John the Apostle who was in prison at the Isle of Patmos, the same John that wrote the Gospel of John... I suggest you read it, before you embarass yourself further.

[Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell]

Well the bottom line is that if it weren’t for Paul there would be a different form of Christianity today and people would probably be following the true intentions of Jesus’ (PBUH) teachings. Not this distorted book called the Bible.

Bottom line is that had not satan conjured up mohammed(may piss be upon him) the world would be free of terrorism today. And we would not have to deal with the distorted koran.... blanket statements are so easy, aren't they?)

 

Wasalaam,

Clifton

Wassup, MRIH

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Ok just a quick quiz; if any of you can tell me who said this, and where it was said I will truly be in awe of your biblical knowledge.

 

 

Hint: Old Testament

 

 

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

http://www.blueletterbible.org/index.html

 

They don't have a listing either.

 

I think your full of crap!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Funny how when someone can not figure something out or it just does not fit into their perception they say it is crap. I have my answer,

You relay on technology and search engines to glean your truths out of the written word there is no real understanding.

It was said by Moses, after being in the desert only a short time with the tribes of Israel. They started complaining and wishing they had spices and meats and the comforts that Egypt gave them in slavery, many wanted to return and thought it better to be slaves than to wonder the desert and suffer as free men.

 

Hmm...

 

Funny, you asked about a quote from the Old Testament. You did not ask about a paraphrase.

 

So yes, I still say you're full of crap. Even more so than before.

 

I think the time you are talking about, from your limited description, is when they were in the wilderness of Zin, and Moses said nothing like what you asked about.

 

Would you care to quote Book/Chapter/Verse?

 

The most amazing part of your indignant response though is this tidbit,

 

"You relay on technology and search engines to glean your truths out of the written word there is no real understanding".

 

Amazing. One minute, some Christians are calling the Bible the literal, infallible word of God, the next minute, some Christians are calling it literary and without real understanding except for the hidden messages.

 

Wow!

 

Make up your mind will you, and while your at it, either cite your source Book/chapter/verse, or apologize for being wrong and then being rude about it you little prick!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Hmm...

 

It's amazing when people get caught in their lies and half-truths, they resort to name calling and sexual reference.

 

Carry on genius!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Thank You I accept your apology

 

Yeah right. I wasn't apologizing your arrogant fool.

 

You're a liar and a fabricator. Plain and simple.

 

Have a nice day!

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Hey NazzNegg!

 

What is that anyway? Sounds like something you might find in a wadded up tissue...

 

Did you ever find that Book / Chapter / Verse for your little quote quiz?

[Master_Jaffer]

Hey NazzNegg!

 

What is that anyway? Sounds like something you might find in a wadded up tissue...

 

Did you ever find that Book / Chapter / Verse for your little quote quiz?

MRIH, it's so easy to disdain anothers religion. Watch:

Christianity is full of shit, I think it's a false religion, and Jesus is not related to God in any such manner.

 

There. I'm using your manner of debating. Prove me wrong.

[phreakwars]

And your probably right Jaffer, and thats what makes Christianity a peacefull religion. If Jesus was or was not Gods son is a matter of opinions, some Christians believe he was NOT the son of God, yet are still very religious.

 

"Christianity is full of shit, I think it's a false religion" my friend, is just a matter of opinion by one individual, so means nothing.

 

While the validity of whether Jesus was the son of God or not, is the only thing you said which can be debated, but still will never leave anyone with any less faith in Christianity.

 

While interpretations of Mohammad(MPBOH) WILL.

.

.

[Vortex]

I must be the only one who sees the irony of a BOOK being written by humans (other than the gods or divine people they are about) that define our "truth" about what heaven and god and his "son" turely are. Apparently forging things is only in our decade..not the oooooooold days. after all they thought magic was real and painting things on the outside of their doors meant protection...

 

 

thank goodness we rely on them to tell us what to do now adays......whew

 

oh wait, i take that back...shouldnt we rely on the faiths older than christianity since they were written by kings and people in power? after all thats what we do now?

 

I am so confused...my head is spinning...i guess logic has no bearing...that should help my head from spinning!