Salvation by the work of attaining God’s attention

[Revmitchell]

The Resurrection was physical. Paul did not witness the physical resurrection of Christ. He heard a voice and saw the light.

And that in and of itself makes him a witness to his resurrection. its hard to have an experience with someone still in the grave.

 

[agedman]

The Resurrection was physical. Paul did not witness the physical resurrection of Christ. He heard a voice and saw the light.

I agreee

Furthermore, Paul got up from the earth with no more insight into what “ministry” he would have than any other believer at 5he point of conversion.

 

[agedman]

And that in and of itself makes him a witness to his resurrection. its hard to have an experience with someone still in the grave.

No more than any other believer who encounters the living Christ and can exclaim as those long ago, “He has risen, indeed!”

 

[Yeshua1]

Who claimed there is "inherit faith" in lost sinners? Nobody so a bogus insinuation.
Folks they are just posting falsehoods as fast as they can.

Does faith come from God, or is it in ourselves?
And based upon that, why do some accept Jesus, most reject, all hearing same Gospel message?

 

[TCassidy]

And that in and of itself makes him a witness to his resurrection. its hard to have an experience with someone still in the grave.

So you don't believe the Resurrection had to be physical and had to be witnessed by people? They walked with Him. They even touched Him. Can Paul say the same?

And I can't help but notice you ignored the other requirements established by Peter in Acts 1.

Was Paul with the Twelve from the time of John baptizing?

Was Paul with the Twelve when they witnessed Christ's ascension?

Let's face it. He just doesn't fit the criteria.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

'Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?' (1 Corinthians 9:1).
Paul was a witness of the resurrected Christ.

 

[agedman]

'Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?' (1 Corinthians 9:1).
Paul was a witness of the resurrected Christ.

I think the question is did Paul see the risen Christ in bodily form at His conversion. Va

There is no Scripture for that to be the true. In the absence of Scripture, one should not assume permission of that sort.

That does not negate the statement that Paul was an Apostle, but he most certainly did not meet all the standards established by Peter.

What is certain is that Paul’s opening of 1Cor. 9 includes that even in His day the Apostleship was in question.

The church fathers considered it important that there be twelve, there is nothing to suggest they sought the Lord’s leading in the choosing of the replacement of the betrayer.

Paul was certainly an apostle, but as he said, “...as one abnormally born.”

 

[Yeshua1]

So you don't believe the Resurrection had to be physical and had to be witnessed by people? They walked with Him. They even touched Him. Can Paul say the same?

And I can't help but notice you ignored the other requirements established by Peter in Acts 1.

Was Paul with the Twelve from the time of John baptizing?

Was Paul with the Twelve when they witnessed Christ's ascension?

Let's face it. He just doesn't fit the criteria.

Paul was the real 12th Apostle, the one to replace Judas, as he saw the risen Christ and spoke to him!

 

[Yeshua1]

'Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord?' (1 Corinthians 9:1).
Paul was a witness of the resurrected Christ.

ANY who was an Apostle had to be able to have seen Jesus, so none since John passed away!

 

[agedman]

Paul was the real 12th Apostle, the one to replace Judas, as he saw the risen Christ and spoke to him!

Or, was the one chosen by the apostles.

 

[Yeshua1]

I think the question is did Paul see the risen Christ in bodily form at His conversion. Va

There is no Scripture for that to be the true. In the absence of Scripture, one should not assume permission of that sort.

That does not negate the statement that Paul was an Apostle, but he most certainly did not meet all the standards established by Peter.

What is certain is that Paul’s opening of 1Cor. 9 includes that even in His day the Apostleship was in question.

The church fathers considered it important that there be twelve, there is nothing to suggest they sought the Lord’s leading in the choosing of the replacement of the betrayer.

Paul was certainly an apostle, but as he said, “...as one abnormally born.”

Jesus was physically risen from the dead, correcxt?

 

[agedman]

Jesus was physically risen from the dead, correcxt?

Of course, He is risen, indeed!

 

[TCassidy]

Paul was the real 12th Apostle, the one to replace Judas, as he saw the risen Christ and spoke to him!

So, do you think Peter lied when he said the true 12th Apostle had to have accompanied the Twelve all the time of Christ's earthly ministry?

And that he had to have been with them from the time John was baptizing?

And that he had to have been present at the ascension of Jesus?

Why would Peter, and the Holy Spirit, lie about it?

 

[Yeshua1]

Or, was the one chosen by the apostles, and Paul.

Jesus appointed Him as His last Apostle, correct?

 

[Yeshua1]

So, do you think Peter lied when he said the true 12th Apostle had to have accompanied the Twelve all the time of Christ's earthly ministry?

And that he had to have been with them from the time John was baptizing?

And that he had to have been present at the ascension of Jesus?

Why would Peter, and the Holy Spirit, lie about it?

Mattius was the one chosen by tjem casting lots, , but really think that the casting of lots was not what the Lord wanted them to do, as paul was to be the real replacement!

 

[TCassidy]

Mattius was the one chosen by tjem casting lots, , but really think that the casting of lots was not what the Lord wanted them to do, as paul was to be the real replacement!

So you do think Peter and the Holy Spirit both lied?

 

[agedman]

Why twelve?

The answer often resides in tradition of the number of twelve. 12 tribes, twelve apostles given the new covenant.

But were there only twelve?

Was not the land divided into 12 , but two were the children of Joseph?

Could not Paul and Mathias be reflective as the ones born late, yet were still given the portion, just as Joseph’s children born not of Israel, yet given the portion as ones adopted into the grouping late?

 

[carpro]

No, I didn't. .

You may not have meant to, but I think you did.

 

[Yeshua1]

Why twelve?

The answer often resides in tradition of the number of twelve. 12 tribes, twelve apostles given the new covenant.

But were there only twelve?

Was not the land divided into 12 , but two were the children of Joseph?

Could not Paul and Mathias be reflective as the ones born late, yet were still given the portion, just as Joseph’s children born not of Israel, yet given the portion as ones adopted into the grouping late?

Paul was appointed by Jesus Himself, Commissioned and inspired to preach and write divine revelation, correct?

 

[agedman]

Paul was appointed by Jesus Himself, Commissioned and inspired to preach and write divine revelation, correct?

That is what he stated as his own authority.