Paul Was In Jerusalem During Jesus' Ministry And Crucifixion (preaching, belief, disciple)

[Alt Thinker]

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

When you read the many contradictions between Paul's teaching and that of Jesus, your final line of thought doesn't hold up as well (and I always appreciate your thoughtful responses). There are so many differences between the teaching and preaching of Paul and Jesus that one would really have to see Paul in an intentionally ugly light as opposed to just plain not knowing what Jesus said. In addition, if the gospel writers had relied on Paul they perhaps would have been modifying their own Jesus stories to reflect Paul.

I think there was very little communication in a modern sense among Christians outside of Jerusalem. And they were being led by James, the brother of Jesus, and maintained a very "Jewish" element to their beliefs. Paul struck out in a different direction by going to the Gentiles, and its even reflected in some of the thinly veiled conflicting letters of James and Paul, and with Paul's struggles with Peter.

Now the deeply religious Christians will see this as apostasy, but they simply don't approach scripture methodically. They approach it from preconceived notions taught by entrenched religious institutions. Those institutions are not about to weigh anything in the Bible on a critical basis.

On the contrary, it is in the misrepresentations of Paul where many of the alleged contradictions arise. Paul argued that gentiles could follow Jesus without converting to Judaism. Contrary to popular belief (wish?) Paul never said that Jewish law was not binding on Jews. To him the Jesus movement was bigger than just Judaism. (If one wanted to, one could find justification for that in Isaiah's 'all nations' references, although Paul never does.) But even Matthew, the most Jewish of the Gospel writers who insisted that the Jewish Law was here to stay, allowed for gentile participation.

Other than the gentile issue, what contradictions do you see between Paul's teaching and preaching and tose of Jesus as presented in the Gospels?

[thrillobyte]

What I'm having trouble with is the total disconnect between the epistles and the gospels.

Written supposedly within ten years of each other, neither show the slightest awareness of the other. I tried to say in my last post (but accidentally used "gospels" instead of "epistles") that Luke, given his hero-worship of Paul, would have at least mentioned something of Paul in his gospel, at least near the end. He'd already completed all his journeys with Paul. The mere mention of Paul in the gospel would have lent it more credibility because it would have anchored the gospel to the period in which the gospel was written and lent even more credibility to Paul already being visible in the story of Jesus rather than appearing out of the blue in Acts.

I don't buy that Paul hadn't heard about Jesus; I don't buy that Jesus was that unknown despite all the miracles, the crucifixion, the resurrection, appearing before hundreds of people after his death and his ascension, a jaw-dropping miracle in and of itself--to me greater than the resurrection. If Paul was in Jerusalem at the time, and historians agree he was, Paul would have been one of those who'd gone out to see Jesus ascend. Wouldn't you, if the news was making the rounds that a guy who'd been crucified and resurrected was about to ascend into the sky? If that happened today, every news camera in the world would have been out there to film this.

Yet it's as if in Acts Jesus' entire earthly ministry has vanished and it's back to business as usual, except for these few pesky Christians led by Peter wandering around causing not that much trouble.

Reading Acts, one could get the sense that Paul was in another country, totally oblivious to Jesus and suddenly he appears out of nowhere on fire ready to imprison and put to death any Christian he could lay his hands on. So why run all the way to Damascus when he had all the Christians he could handle right there in Jerusalem? And how many Christians would have been in Damascus compared to Jerusalem where the Christian movement had arisen?

It all seems so concocted--Luke just has to get Paul up to Damascus so he can have the vision of Jesus, like the birth narrative of Jesus where Luke has to get Jesus to Bethlehem via a phony census and Matthew has to get Jesus to Egypt so that he can work some obscure passage out of the Old Testament that has absolutely nothing to do with Jesus or a Messiah of any sort into his gospel, "Out of Egypt have I called my son."

Would anybody care to speculate just exactly why Paul has to go to Damascus to arrest Christians, other than to get him on this road so that he can be knocked off his donkey by a vision? This whole thing just doesn't make any sense.

[Wardendresden]

Originally Posted by Alt Thinker

On the contrary, it is in the misrepresentations of Paul where many of the alleged contradictions arise. Paul argued that gentiles could follow Jesus without converting to Judaism. Contrary to popular belief (wish?) Paul never said that Jewish law was not binding on Jews. To him the Jesus movement was bigger than just Judaism. (If one wanted to, one could find justification for that in Isaiah's 'all nations' references, although Paul never does.) But even Matthew, the most Jewish of the Gospel writers who insisted that the Jewish Law was here to stay, allowed for gentile participation.

Other than the gentile issue, what contradictions do you see between Paul's teaching and preaching and tose of Jesus as presented in the Gospels?

I see much. Here are just a few examples of how I think Paul didn't know about the gospel writers and the gospel writers knew nothing of Paul.

Paul writes:

In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us with groans that words cannot express

Romans 8:26 NIV
Jesus says:

And he said unto them, "When ye pray, say, Father, Hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come…"

Luke 11:2

Paul writes:

Is it not certain that we are to be the judges of angels? how much more then of the things of this life?

I Cor. 6:3
Jesus says:

Judge not, that ye be not judged.

Matt 7:1

Paul writes:

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not in wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made void.

I Cor. 1:17
Jesus says (in His apparently last conversation with the eleven apostles):

Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit

Matt 28:19

Paul writes:

Wherefore, if meat causeth my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh for evermore, that I cause not my brother to stumble.

I Cor 8:13
Jesus says:

After he had left the crowd and entered the house, his disciples asked him about this parable. "Are you so dull?" he asked. "Don't you see that nothing that enters a man from the outside can make him 'unclean'? For it doesn't go into his heart but into his stomach, and then out of his body."

Mark 7:17-19

Paul writes:

Be kind to one another, tender-hearted, forgiving each other, just as God in Christ also has forgiven you.

Ephesians 4:32
Jesus says:

For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.

Matt 6:14-15
Please note in the above that Jesus taught forgiveness from God is dependent on OUR forgiving others. Paul speaks as if it has already been accomplished and there is nothing for us to do.

Paul writes:

For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

2 Thess. 3:10
(Apparently there are conditions on feeding people according to Paul)
Jesus says:

Then the king will say to those at his right hand, ‘Come, you that are blessed by my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world; for I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you gave me clothing, I was sick and you took care of me, I was in prison and you visited me.

Matt 25:34-36

Paul writes:

On the contrary: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head."

Rom. 12:20
Jesus says:

But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other also. If someone takes your cloak, do not stop him from taking your tunic. Give to everyone who asks you, and if anyone takes what belongs to you, do not demand it back. Do to others as you would have them do to you.

"If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even 'sinners' lend to 'sinners,' expecting to be repaid in full. But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

Luke 6:27-36

There is a world of difference in caring for someone in order to "heap burning coals on his head," and caring for him because that is what you would have them do to you.

Paul has some things to say that are meaningful. But he wrote much without any guidance, and he even bragged that no man taught him anything--- it came straight from God.

When I hear Jesus' words, whom I believe DID come straight God, and compare them with many of Paul's, I realize Paul was a man who had a revelatory experience, but remained in that same situation without ever growing in Christ. Perhaps that was because he never knew Jesus in the flesh. And perhaps that was because he didn't much care to listen to the apostles who HAD been with Jesus in the flesh.

Pauline Christianity rules today and results in much of the ugliness that is practiced by people claiming to be Christian. When we stick with Jesus' teaching, it is not only less judgmental, but very much about our actions, not just our beliefs. For me, true Christianity is rooted primarily in the teaching and words of Jesus.

[Alt Thinker]

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

I see much. Here are just a few examples of how I think Paul didn't know about the gospel writers and the gospel writers knew nothing of Paul.

One at a time.

Paul writes:

Romans 8:26 NIV

Jesus says:

Luke 11:2

In context:

Romans 8
22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. 23 Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies. 24 For in this hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is no hope at all. Who hopes for what they already have? 25 But if we hope for what we do not yet have, we wait for it patiently.
26 In the same way, the Spirit helps us in our weakness. We do not know what we ought to pray for, but the Spirit himself intercedes for us through wordless groans. 27 And he who searches our hearts knows the mind of the Spirit, because the Spirit intercedes for God’s people in accordance with the will of God.

“We do not know what we ought to pray for.” Not what to pray, but what to pray for. “The Spirit intercedes” and “helps us in our weakness” while we “groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies”.

Here is some interesting commentary on this passage.

What is the problem? We do not know what we should ask God. What is His sovereign will for us, our family, our ministry, etc.? We often do not know what we need, nor do we know what is best for us.

Every Christian experiences these weaknesses and it is this that makes prayer difficult.
…
The Holy Spirit helps us in the weaknesses. He “intercedes” for us with groans that words cannot express” (v. 26). The all-powerful Holy Spirit is our Helper. He comes to our aid for access to the Father (Eph. 2:18).

The apostle Paul uses the word sunantilambanetai that denotes a person coming alongside another to take part of a heavy load to help him bear it.
Jesus had the same idea in mind when He called the Holy Spirit Parakletos, “one who is called alongside of another” to help in time of need. The Holy Spirit comes along side to help us in our weakness. How hopeless we are, yet He bears our burdens. The emphasis Paul is making is this is a divine work, not half-divine and half-human.
We do not know what to pray for in the midst of our suffering the heavy load so He gets up under it with us and bears it along. He identifies with us in our weakness.

http://www.abideinchrist.com/selah/jul31.html"]

The Gospel of John and Acts both speak of the Holy Spirit coming to sustain believers in life while they await their future resurrection. Instead of a contradiction, this is a thematic link between Paul and the Gospels.

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

Paul writes:

I Cor. 6:3

Jesus says:

Matt 7:1

In context:

! Corinthians 6
1 If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? 2 Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4 Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, do you ask for a ruling from those whose way of life is scorned in the church? 5 I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6 But instead, one brother takes another to court—and this in front of unbelievers!
7 The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8 Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers and sisters.

Paul is arguing that lawsuits should not be brought in civil court (the ungodly) by church members against other church members. If there is a dispute it should be handled with the community. In fact, there should never be anything between members leading to a lawsuit.

For the Lord’s people judging the world (v 2), refer to Matthew. Judging angels might be just hyperbole but it could be justified as well. Man was made in God’s image. Angels were not. God became man to redeem Man. Angels were not redeemed. Man, the glorified faithful at least, may possibly be raised to a rank greater than angels. Of maybe Paul was just exaggerating for effect.

Matthew 7
1 “Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.
3 “Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? 4 How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.

Jesus is warning against hypocrisy, one of his big hot buttons. Do not judge someone else if you are vulnerable yourself. In the Paul passage above it is a qualified third party judging a dispute between two people, not an unsolicited and hypocritical judgment, which is what Jesus is talking about.

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

Paul writes:

I Cor. 1:17

Jesus says (in His apparently last conversation with the eleven apostles):

Matt 28:19

In context:

1 Corinthians 10
I appeal to you, brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another in what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought. 11 My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12 What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas”; still another, “I follow Christ.”
13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. 16 (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) 17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

Paul is warning against the division of doctrinal leadership that he sees happening. He is emphasizing that he is not trying to form his own sect of Christianity but that there should be one faith. Paul is preaching the gospel of Christ, not baptizing people into his own Pauline church.

Note that Matthew has Jesus say that “all nations” should be made disciples. “Nations” means, or at least includes, Gentiles. Make Gentiles into Jesus followers? Wonder where that idea came from?

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

Paul writes:

I Cor 8:13

Jesus says:

Mark 7:17-19

In context:

1 Corinthians 8
4 So then, about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that “An idol is nothing at all in the world” and that “There is no God but one.” 5 For even if there are so-called gods,whether in heaven or on earth (as indeed there are many “gods” and many “lords”), 6 yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we live; and there is but one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things came and through whom we live.
7 But not everyone possesses this knowledge. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat sacrificial food they think of it as having been sacrificed to a god, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled. 8 But food does not bring us near to God; we are no worse if we do not eat, and no better if we do.
9 Be careful, however, that the exercise of your rights does not become a stumbling block to the weak. 10 For if someone with a weak conscience sees you, with all your knowledge, eating in an idol’s temple, won’t that person be emboldened to eat what is sacrificed to idols? 11 So this weak brother or sister, for whom Christ died, is destroyed by your knowledge. 12 When you sin against them in this way and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ. 13 Therefore, if what I eat causes my brother or sister to fall into sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I will not cause them to fall.

What Paul is saying: For those who know there is one God, it does not matter if they eat food sacrificed to idols. The idols are meaningless and the food is just food. But for those who previously used to worship idols, that idea might still be in their minds. If they see a Jesus follower eating sacrificed food, they might go do it themselves and have idol worship in their heads as they do it and therefore be sinning. Better not to eat that kind of food. The believer has the right to do it (v 5) but best not to. Once again Paul indulges in hyperbole and talks about never eating meat again to avoid causing someone else to sin. Nothing to do with observing or not observing kosher law.

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

Paul writes:

Ephesians 4:32

Jesus says:

Matt 6:14-15

Please note in the above that Jesus taught forgiveness from God is dependent on OUR forgiving others. Paul speaks as if it has already been accomplished and there is nothing for us to do.

Luke says it that way. Matthew and Mark do not.

Matthew 6:14-15
For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.

Matthew 18_21-22
Then Peter came to Jesus and asked, “Lord, how many times shall I forgive my brother or sister who sins against me? Up to seven times?” Jesus answered, “I tell you, not seven times, but seventy-seven times.

Matthew 18:35
“This is how my heavenly Father will treat each of you unless you forgive your brother or sister from your heart.”

Mark 11:25
And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins.”

And of course Paul says “forgiving each other”, which could go either way.

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

Paul writes:

2 Thess. 3:10
(Apparently there are conditions on feeding people according to Paul)

Jesus says:

Matt 25:34-36

In context:

2 Thessalonians 3

6 In the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, we command you, brothers and sisters, to keep away from every believer who is idle and disruptive and does not live according to the teaching you received from us.
…

10 For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”
11 We hear that some among you are idle and disruptive. They are not busy; they are busybodies. 12 Such people we command and urge in the Lord Jesus Christ to settle down and earn the food they eat.

Paul is talking about freeloaders. Matthew is talking about the needy.

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

Paul writes:

Rom. 12:20

Jesus says:

Luke 6:27-36

There is a world of difference in caring for someone in order to "heap burning coals on his head," and caring for him because that is what you would have them do to you.

In context:

Romans 12
9 Love must be sincere. Hate what is evil; cling to what is good. 10 Be devoted to one another in love. Honor one another above yourselves. 11 Never be lacking in zeal, but keep your spiritual fervor, serving the Lord. 12 Be joyful in hope, patient in affliction, faithful in prayer. 13 Share with the Lord’s people who are in need. Practice hospitality.
14 Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. 15 Rejoice with those who rejoice; mourn with those who mourn. 16 Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited.

17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone.18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. 19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” [from Deuteronomy] says the Lord. 20 On the contrary:

“If your enemy is hungry, feed him;
if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.” [from Proverbs]

21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

The passage you quoted from Luke and the more complete version of the passage from Romans sound rather alike, do they not? And the ‘burning coals’ language you objected to is from scripture. Paul is just quoting.

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

Paul has some things to say that are meaningful. But he wrote much without any guidance, and he even bragged that no man taught him anything--- it came straight from God.

When I hear Jesus' words, whom I believe DID come straight God, and compare them with many of Paul's, I realize Paul was a man who had a revelatory experience, but remained in that same situation without ever growing in Christ. Perhaps that was because he never knew Jesus in the flesh. And perhaps that was because he didn't much care to listen to the apostles who HAD been with Jesus in the flesh.

Pauline Christianity rules today and results in much of the ugliness that is practiced by people claiming to be Christian. When we stick with Jesus' teaching, it is not only less judgmental, but very much about our actions, not just our beliefs. For me, true Christianity is rooted primarily in the teaching and words of Jesus.

What ‘rules’ much of Protestant Christianity is a misrepresentation of Paul’s emphasis on faith, turning that into ‘faith alone’ and too often abandoning the actual teachings of Jesus that appear in the Gospels and, yes, even in Paul.

Question: Are seriously out of context and rather belabored one-liners like this really your reason for disliking Paul? If so it sounds more than a bit like a conclusion in search of evidence. Say it ain't so, Joe. (First person to ID that quote gets a rep uptick)

[Wardendresden]

Originally Posted by Alt Thinker

One at a time.



In context:



“We do not know what we ought to pray for.” Not what to pray, but what to pray for. “The Spirit intercedes” and “helps us in our weakness” while we “groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption to sonship, the redemption of our bodies”.

Here is some interesting commentary on this passage.



The Gospel of John and Acts both speak of the Holy Spirit coming to sustain believers in life while they await their future resurrection. Instead of a contradiction, this is a thematic link between Paul and the Gospels.




In context:



Paul is arguing that lawsuits should not be brought in civil court (the ungodly) by church members against other church members. If there is a dispute it should be handled with the community. In fact, there should never be anything between members leading to a lawsuit.

For the Lord’s people judging the world (v 2), refer to Matthew. Judging angels might be just hyperbole but it could be justified as well. Man was made in God’s image. Angels were not. God became man to redeem Man. Angels were not redeemed. Man, the glorified faithful at least, may possibly be raised to a rank greater than angels. Of maybe Paul was just exaggerating for effect.



Jesus is warning against hypocrisy, one of his big hot buttons. Do not judge someone else if you are vulnerable yourself. In the Paul passage above it is a qualified third party judging a dispute between two people, not an unsolicited and hypocritical judgment, which is what Jesus is talking about.




In context:



Paul is warning against the division of doctrinal leadership that he sees happening. He is emphasizing that he is not trying to form his own sect of Christianity but that there should be one faith. Paul is preaching the gospel of Christ, not baptizing people into his own Pauline church.

Note that Matthew has Jesus say that “all nations” should be made disciples. “Nations” means, or at least includes, Gentiles. Make Gentiles into Jesus followers? Wonder where that idea came from?




In context:



What Paul is saying: For those who know there is one God, it does not matter if they eat food sacrificed to idols. The idols are meaningless and the food is just food. But for those who previously used to worship idols, that idea might still be in their minds. If they see a Jesus follower eating sacrificed food, they might go do it themselves and have idol worship in their heads as they do it and therefore be sinning. Better not to eat that kind of food. The believer has the right to do it (v 5) but best not to. Once again Paul indulges in hyperbole and talks about never eating meat again to avoid causing someone else to sin. Nothing to do with observing or not observing kosher law.




Luke says it that way. Matthew and Mark do not.



And of course Paul says “forgiving each other”, which could go either way.



In context:



Paul is talking about freeloaders. Matthew is talking about the needy.




In context:



The passage you quoted from Luke and the more complete version of the passage from Romans sound rather alike, do they not? And the ‘burning coals’ language you objected to is from scripture. Paul is just quoting.



What ‘rules’ much of Protestant Christianity is a misrepresentation of Paul’s emphasis on faith, turning that into ‘faith alone’ and too often abandoning the actual teachings of Jesus that appear in the Gospels and, yes, even in Paul.

Question: Are seriously out of context and rather belabored one-liners like this really your reason for disliking Paul? If so it sounds more than a bit like a conclusion in search of evidence. Say it ain't so, Joe. (First person to ID that quote gets a rep uptick)

If you have to spend time "explaining" scripture, you've already lost the battle. "Explaining" is a key to having a fundamentalist viewpoint, because the "explanation" becomes God breathed scripture to the one doing the explaining.

And yes burning coals is a quote from Proverbs, and Jesus message is one that CHANGES that viewpoint, which He was prone to do despite the protests of many--but that's for another thread.

[Jerwade]

Pray with thanksgiving for that which you have today, as tomorrow may never come.

[Alt Thinker]

Originally Posted by Wardendresden

If you have to spend time "explaining" scripture, you've already lost the battle. "Explaining" is a key to having a fundamentalist viewpoint, because the "explanation" becomes God breathed scripture to the one doing the explaining.

And yes burning coals is a quote from Proverbs, and Jesus message is one that CHANGES that viewpoint, which He was prone to do despite the protests of many--but that's for another thread.

I did not 'explain' anything. I simply put your one-liners in context. Your claims are unfounded. Can you point to any of my 'explanations' that is at variance with what was said? It is not explaining that is the key to a fundamentalist viewpoint, it is grabbing one-liners out of context to support a pre-established conclusion.

Paul said not to be overcome by evil but to overcome evil with good. Not just to submit to evil but to overcome it, to turn it around. Doing nothing about evil encourages it. Surprising evil-doers by treating them as friends could turn their heads around. The burning coals on the head are of course not literal. They are symbolic of hitting them hard, right between the ears. Do you think that Jesus meant to encourage evil? Or to maybe turn it around?

[chuckmann]

just wanted to say two things:

1) very many wonderful posts here. I have enjoyed reading just about everything on this thread.

2) missing seems to be the realization the the very early church was, in the modern parlance, keeping a very low profile. There could well have been several different churches in the big cities, none of which knew about the others. This could well be part of the reason that Paul was not known by many, and that Paul did not know everyone.

Good job on this one, folks

[thrillobyte]

I'd like to pose the question just one more time:

Why did Paul have to go all the way up to Damascus to arrest a few Christians when he had all the Christians he could handle right there in Jerusalem to arrest?

[Age-enduring]

Originally Posted by thrillobyte

I'd like to pose the question just one more time:

Why did Paul have to go all the way up to Damascus to arrest a few Christians when he had all the Christians he could handle right there in Jerusalem to arrest?

He had relatives up that way. He was going to see his Grandma.

You read it here first. ...Or, you'll probably only ever read it here, so by default, it must be right/wrong (delete as appropriate)

Age