• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Could this be Paul?

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
A rather odd statement. This has nothing to do with dispensationalism. Night and day.

What neither TS or BH understand is the simple gospel of Jesus Christ. They imagine that right terms (grace, believe, justification, eternal life; etc.) means right UNDERSTANDING of those terms. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The gospel of Jesus Christ includes not merely recognition of the right gospel terms but the right understanding of those gospel terms.

"Another gospel" does not repudiate the gospel terms but rather repudiates the proper understanding of those terms and redefines them to mean something completely contrary to the Gos and/or adds or subtracts to the gospel of Christ - Gal. 1:8-9; 1 Cor. 15:9-20; etc.
 

The Biblicist

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I think Paul was a little screwed up but one thing we can know for sure: Paul wasn't in it for the money.

Bill you are the only one "screwed up" when it comes to Paul or your views. If Paul did not write by inspiration then he flat lied. If his salvation testimony was not true then he flat lied. There is no indication in history that any of the congregations he planted were rejected by the 12 apostles or that they rejected Paul's writings as inspired scripture. Peter certainly claimed they were "as other scriptures" - 2 Pet. 3:15-17.
 

Bob Hope

Member
What neither TS or BH understand is the simple gospel of Jesus Christ. They imagine that right terms (grace, believe, justification, eternal life; etc.) means right UNDERSTANDING of those terms. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The gospel of Jesus Christ includes not merely recognition of the right gospel terms but the right understanding of those gospel terms.

"Another gospel" does not repudiate the gospel terms but rather repudiates the proper understanding of those terms and redefines them to mean something completely contrary to the Gos and/or adds or subtracts to the gospel of Christ - Gal. 1:8-9; 1 Cor. 15:9-20; etc.



There is Zero need to have an understanding of terms to be saved. Faith like that of a child is what is required. Children understand that being a good boy means not doing bad things. Children want to be obedient, and they want their parents to be happy with them. Salvation is that easy, but it still requires, obedience, repentance. And for those who have grown to close with the world, a renewal. We must all be like children and in the spirit of the moment I will now eat a Twix bar.
 

Bob Hope

Member
Bill you are the only one "screwed up" when it comes to Paul or your views. If Paul did not write by inspiration then he flat lied. If his salvation testimony was not true then he flat lied. There is no indication in history that any of the congregations he planted were rejected by the 12 apostles or that they rejected Paul's writings as inspired scripture. Peter certainly claimed they were "as other scriptures" - 2 Pet. 3:15-17.


So at the end of one of Pauls letters when he says things like, so and so says hi, and hey Tim, drink some wine for that tummy ache, thats the Holy word of God?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

billwald

New Member
>If Paul did not write by inspiration then he flat lied.

You don't know the difference between being wrong and being a liar? A True Believer BB member. <G>
 

Alive in Christ

New Member
Bob Hope...

Pauls books seem at odds with the gospels

Your kidding, right? You HAVE to be kidding.

The Pauline epistles can not be over emphasised.

The Pauline epistles, in regard to the gosple, are the Gold standard, and Mount Rushmore of the scriptures.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Alive in Christ

New Member
Why would you say that?

Because Paul, more than anyone else, is the singuler vessel, whom God chose to revel the monumental, and foundational truthes of the New Covenant.


This will be much better than my explanation....

The Pauline epistles contain much of the doctrine the Christian faith is built upon, especially in relationship to salvation. The Pauline epistles expound on the doctrines of sanctification, justification, redemption, and reconciliation. The Pauline epistles contain significant teachings on difficult theological issues such as: election, predestination, foreknowledge, the deity/humanity of Christ, God’s ongoing relationship with Israel, and the Judgment Seat of Christ. The Pauline epistles also get very practical in how the church should function, containing teaching on: spiritual gifts, qualifications of church leaders, the role of women in ministry, and the relationship between law and grace in the life of a Christ-follower.

The Pauline epistles are not to be confused with "Pauline Christianity," which is the unbiblical view that Paul’s teachings in the epistles are unique in Scripture and distinct from the gospel of Jesus. The “Pauline Christians” believe that what Paul taught differs from what is taught in the Gospels. This belief goes against some of the most fundamental beliefs of orthodox Christians, including the inerrancy of Scripture, the unity of the Bible and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. We know that “all Scripture is God-breathed,” inspired by the same Spirit. Therefore, it is a unified whole, preserved forever by God. The Pauline epistles are part of that unity and the teachings they contain are equally inspired and in complete harmony with the rest of the Bible

http://www.gotquestions.org/Pauline-epistles.html.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top