Brother Bob
New Member
Everyone on here knows this is the truth. Not on BB, but everyone.It seems everyone who ever runs off with a young woman, or molests little boys, the first thing they say is, well apostle Paul was chief of sinners
BBob
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!
Everyone on here knows this is the truth. Not on BB, but everyone.It seems everyone who ever runs off with a young woman, or molests little boys, the first thing they say is, well apostle Paul was chief of sinners
Allan said:Here is the response I gave to you in the "other sheep" thread. But you are still trying to re-word the passage.
BBob, it was this quote...Brother Bob said:excuse to sin??? Don't know what you are talking about.
It bothers me that people use the scripture when they commit adultery to say, well apostle Paul was chief of sinners.
Scripture is silent on what sins Paul committed (maybe his thorn in the flesh?), but Scripture is also clear that Paul considered himself the chief of sinners...not that he used to be the chief of sinners.To try and say that Christians can commit any sin known to mankind, then I have seen it used several times. When that passage by Paul, is not saying he is the biggest or chief sinner right then. If you think so, please tell me what sin he was committing when he wrote the passage.
Web; I know you have been in discussions on here where some have used this scripture to justify that Christians commit chief sins. I know you have seen all the Pastors on TV, who ran off with a young woman, use it.BBob, it was this quote...
Quote:
It bothers me that people use the scripture when they commit adultery to say, well apostle Paul was chief of sinners.
Scripture is silent on what sins Paul committed (maybe his thorn in the flesh?), but Scripture is also clear that Paul considered himself the chief of sinners...not that he used to be the chief of sinners.
The OP does not say this and you have made a false accusation.[Edited to add!] I'm not referring to your response to me, here about an ad hominem attack, but to the OP reference to these unknown and unstated individuals who suposedly advocate sin, as a lifestyle!
I'd like to hang around and play, but I have to get back to counting, for now.
Ed
standingfirminChrist said:I believe Paul's 'thorn in the flesh' was Alexander the Coppersmith who 'did me much evil,' for Paul declares that the 'thorn in the flesh was 'a messenger of satan to buffet me.'
As to 1 Timothy 1:15, I have no qualms in saying Paul was speaking of himself in the present tense when he stated 'Christ came to save sinners, of whom I am chief.'
Paul clearly stated in Romans 7 that 'the evil that I would not, that I do.' Paul struggled with the flesh often, maybe more often than others, for he later stated that he had to keep his body 'under subjection,' which implies a constant struggle.
Paul, in his first epistle to Timothy, was admitting that even though he was saved, he struggled with and often gave in to the sinful flesh.
standingfirminChrist said:In all of Paul's epistles, Paul uses the word 'was' 132 times in total. He also uses this term in the first chapter of his first epistle to Timothy.
1 Timothy 1:11 According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
1 Timothy 1:13 Who was before a blasphemer, and a persecutor, and injurious: but I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.
In verse 15, if he was referring to his past character, why not use the word 'was' instead of the word 'am'?
Careful examination of Paul's admission of the warring of his flesh with the spirit shows that he did sin, so the word 'am' is indeed speaking of present tense and not past tense.
standingfirminChrist said:He was a sinner. As we all are.
Just because one gets saved does not mean he is no longer a sinner. Paul struggled with sin often after his Damascus Road experience.
I am sorry you cannot see this.
No, I think Paul was considering his whole life and how he had persecuted the church of God and by God's Grace, he was saved. He would not of used "was" if he was talking of his whole life.standingfirminChrist said:If Paul was speaking of his past life in verse 15, he would have used the word 'was' as he did in verse 11 and 13. Do you think he suddenly had a lapse of memory and forgot that three-letter word just moments after writing it and chose the word 'am' to mean 'was'?
I don't.
Not if he was considering his whole life and how God's Grace had saved him. I can see myself feeling the same way.standingfirminChrist said:If what you say is true, that he was considering his past life, he would have used the word 'was' and not the word 'am'.
So, he was comparing himself to all the saved around him. That is not what the scripture says.standingfirminChrist said:Wrong! He was considering his current life.
He had previously written 'Reckon ye yourselves dead unto sin, but alive unto Christ.
Paul was not referring to the old man in verse 15 of 1 Timothy 1. He referred to the old man in the previous verses, but when talking about himself in verse 15, he was speaking of the present. The old man was dead.
Don't be cute now, I understand every word you type. Slow or fast.standingfirminChrist said:Bob, I am typing this out slowly for you...
Of whom I am... not of whom I was. Paul, in his present saved state, was the chief of sinners. Present, Bob... not past.