Yuku free message boards

Quote:

---

As I piddled around the studio looking for something to read, I came across a book about the Pauline epistles. The introduction said something like this: "if the apostle Paul were here today, he'd be astonished to know that his personal letters to friends have been used as universal teachings [etc.]."

I found that statement to be unbelievable and chalked it up to the blatherings of an uninformed mind and the product of an underground "journalist". Then I heard it again! This time on the History Channel and this time from an "ordained" woman of some sort.

Since this was television, she was able to add a little chuckle as if to suggest that those of us who accept Paul's epistles as scrip-ture are somehow naive (or easily duped).

Then it happened yet again! Peter PLO Jennings aired a "documentary" about the beloved apostle and he managed to find another "scholar" who repeated the same slur almost word for word!

Who would be insane enough to think that the "private letters" of Paul were actually to be viewed as the commandments of God?

1 Corinthians 14:37
If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.

How 'bout Paul.

And what kind of naive bumpkin would ever consider what Paul wrote to be scrip-ture?

2 Peter 3:15-16
And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scrip-tures, unto their own destruction.

How 'bout Peter.

Let's all be Bereans and "search the scrip-tures whether these things are so" (Acts 17:11).

Don't let the backward collars or the man-anointed title of "scholar" confuse you. Paul's words can be tested against the revealed Word of God in the Old Testament. We don't need the worthless blessings of anti-gospel teachers.

Speaking of the gospel, if Paul hadn't meant for his epistles and doctrines to be taken as from God, why then would he say the following?:

Galatians 1:8
But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

Paul's gospel was not his own, it was given by God! Paul's ministry to the Gentiles was a God-given ministry. He didn't need Peter, James or anyone else to confirm it let alone some 21st Century gospel-denyer! He didn't even need Peter Jennings' blessing!

Galatians 1:11-12
But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

The man claimed to be "separated from the womb and called!" These letters weren't just private letters to friends!

Galatians 1:15-17
But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.

No, Paul wouldn't be surprised that "some people" (see also: ME) would consider his letters as from God, he'd be confirmed in his belief that heretics would come along denying the gospel delivered unto him by the Lord.

1 Corinthians 11:1-2,23
Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you...For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you..

Some "private" letter...



Paul's Little Letters

---

Quote:

---

Now Paul most clearly taught:

• That man was created directly by God out of the dust of the earth and was not evolved from any lower form of life. I Cor. 15:47, "The first man (O protos anthropos-the very first man) was made of dust (ckoikos) out of the earth (ek ges)."

• That Christ was very God (Titus 2:10, 13).

• That Christ's teachings must be our highest and final authority because He was God's own wisdom personified (1 Cor. 1:24; Col. 2:3, 9).

• That Christ died for man's sins (Gal. 1:4; 1 Cor. 15:3 ; Rom. 3:23-26).

• That God was the father of Christ's physical nature (Gal. 4:4; Col. 1: 17; Acts 13:33; Acts 20:28; Rom. 8:3).

• That Christ arose with a physical body which did not see corruption (Acts 13:35-37), and that this body was actually seen by scores of persons other than himself (1 Cor. 15:1-9).

• That man cannot save himself by his own morality or good works, but only by the washing of regeneration (Titus 3:5), and the applying of Christ's righteousness to our account (Rom. 4:5; Phil. 3:9; Gal. 2:16; Eph. 2:8 ).

Now Paul most clearly taught:

---

Quote:

---

So was Paul a sexist?


Certainly not. Those few texts that silence and subordinate women do sound sexist when they are read in isolation from the wider context of Paul's ministry.

But in light of the evidence elsewhere that Paul affirmed the contributions of women in a wide diversity of ministries (including those with a marked public, leadership and teaching function, and as 'senior' as apostle and prophet) it is hard to see how Paul could have ever intended the kind of restrictions specified in 1 Cor 14 and 1 Tim 2 to apply to anything other than the specific situations of abuse being addressed at the time.

If the 'medicine' prescribed seems unfair to women, it is only because women in particular were exacerbating the problem being dealt with.

This does not mean that we simply ignore the restrictive texts. From them we can learn that order, discipline, mutual respect and theological understanding are essential components of leadership and teaching ministries.

But to take from them some eternal, God-given limitation on the ministry opportunities open to women per se, is to ignore crucial evidence to the contrary and to render the great apostle an advocate of the injustice we today call 'sexism'.

And that, I believe, would be an injustice to Paul.



So was Paul a sexist?

---

Quote:

---

It's important to understand the differences between Jewish and Christian Eschatology:


Israel was promised that one day God would return to dwell with them forever in the land He had given them (Ezekiel 43:7).

The Church was promised that we would go to heaven to dwell with our Lord Jesus forever. (John 14:1-3) Because the Bible can't contradict itself both promises have to come true.

Just as the Olivet Discourse is focused on the 2nd coming, Paul's two letters to the Thessalonians reference the 2nd coming in each chapter, for an average of once every 13 verses. The difference is that Paul's letters feature an event that doesn't appear anywhere in the Olivet Discourse, the Rapture of the Church.

It was the first public disclosure of an incredible secret God had kept to Himself since the very beginning of time, (His reasons for keeping this secret were discussed in my last article) and it's this difference that enables both Jewish and Gentile eschatology to come true.



The End Times According To Paul ... Part 1, 1st Thessalonians 1-3

---

Quote:

---

Other than the Lord Jesus Christ, the most divinely gifted and inspired evangelist in the first century was the Apostle Paul. As the most prolific writer of the New Testament, there is much that we can learn from his example and teachings, especially in dealing with opponents of the Gospel. In the first century, the greatest opposition to the spread of the Gospel came from the corrupted religion of Judaism.

Today, the Gospel's greatest opposition is the deceptively false religion of Roman Catholicism. With its great power, wealth, control and influence, many evangelicals are reluctant to expose it as an enemy of Christ and His Gospel. In both corrupted religions, the authority of God's word runs smack into the unbending traditions of men. With this in mind, let us look at the Apostle Paul's motivation and ministry and how he contended for the faith.


If we follow Paul's example we will warn Catholics that:


1) sinners are justified by faith in Jesus, not by water baptism;

2) sinners are purified by the precious blood of Jesus, not by purgatory's fire; and

3) sinners have their sins expiated by the redemptive work of Jesus, not by penance and indulgences.

To follow Paul's example is to call professing Christians off the broad road that leads to destruction while pointing them to the narrow road that leads to eternal life.

Paul also urged believers not to be partakers or partners with deceivers (Eph. 5:6-7). Accordingly, he renounced secret and shameful ways and urged believers to mark and avoid deceptive teachers. This vital element of contending for the faith and exposing deception is not practiced by many in the body of Christ today.

In fact there are many parachurch ministries that embrace Roman Catholicism as a valid Christian denomination. As a result, the church has given the enemy free reign to sow tares among the wheat (Mat. 13:25). Many churches have more tares than wheat and thus reflect a picture of the world rather than a sanctified sanctuary of believers.




More . . .

---

Quote:

---

The Singularity of God's Gospel


You would think Paul's undisputed condemnation of the Judaizers for perverting the Gospel would keep the Gospel pure within the professing church. However, the Gospel of Rome is a much greater distortion. It requires Catholics to receive sacraments, keep the law, attend weekly sacrifices and do works of mercy for their salvation (CCC, para. 815; 1032; 1129; 2068 ).

Satan's relentless assaults against the Gospel continues to come from two distinct enemies - legalism, which is most prominent in Roman Catholicism, and antinomianism, which is most noticeable throughout liberal Protestantism. Those who teach antinomianism distort the Gospel by declaring any person who has been justified by faith in Christ is no longer obligated to obey the moral law. The apostle Paul corrected this ungodly doctrine in 1 Cor. 5-6.

Whenever the "Father of Lies" enters the pulpit, he does not deny the Gospel but perverts it with additions or subtractions. Any perversion of the Gospel is ultimately the Devil's delusion which keeps his captives in bondage. With so many perversions in the church today, there is a desperate need for the preaching of the pure Gospel of God. It alone has the power to save sinners from the punishment, power and ultimately, the presence of sin (Rom. 1:16).



More . . .

---

Quote:

---

Paul's gospel was distinct from any previous gospel (Gal. 1.6-12, 2.1-9) since he received it by the direct revelation of the risen Christ.

He referred to the gospel he preached as the gospel which I preached to you (1 Cor. 15.1-5),

my gospel (Rom. 2.16, 16.25, 2 Tim. 2.8),

our gospel (2 Cor. 4.3; 2 Thes. 2.14),

that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles (Gal. 2.2),

the gospel of the uncircumcision (Gal. 2:7),

the gospel of Christ (Rom 15.19; 1 Cor. 9.12; 2 Cor. 2.12, 9.13, 10.14; Gal. 1.7; Phil. 1.27; 1 Thes. 3.2),

the gospel of the grace of God (Acts 20:24),

the gospel of your salvation (Eph. 1.13),

the gospel of peace (Eph. 6.15),

the gospel of his Son (Rom. 1.9),

the gospel of the glory of Christ (2 Cor. 4.4),

the gospel of our Lord Jesus (2 Thes. 1.8),

the glorious gospel (2 Tim 1.8),

and the gospel of God (Rom. 1.1, 15.16; 2 Cor. 11.7; 1 Thes. 2:2, 8-9).


Paul's gospel of grace was a new revelation which he received from the risen Lord.




More . . .

---