Paul's hypocrisy and its consequence
- Thread starter Zao is life
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
So God would never have spoken to Paul through other disciples because none of them were chosen vessels and could not have been speaking by the Holy Spirit's inspiration?
I think your exaltation of the apostles to the Christ-like status of never being able to make a mistake or misunderstand what God was saying to them when speaking to them by the Holy Spirit through other Christians, is born in idolatry.
@PEtRA Paul would no doubt be the first to rebuke you for exalting him to such an extent and for failing to understand that God does not work in that way so as to never have spoken to an apostle by the Holy Spirit through other Christians.
What is boring is your self-righteousness and your pride...so that ANY reproach against you has to be false. Just one more grand-stander here. And your hyper-sensitivity is glaring even as you attack an apostle of Christ for doing as you do. You are not seeing the bible interpreting you and your motives. The bible exposes us all....for what we are.
God knows that the self-righteousness and pride that you have just falsely accused me of is born in your own self-righteousness and pride. And when I answer you, your own sensitivity shows you up for your own pride.
@Episkopos And you can't stop showing yourself up (shaking my head)
You obviously think the man you're looking at in your mirror is me. It's really sad.
The above are merely your false accusations yet again
- once again falsely accusing me of "attacking" an apostle by pointing out that he made himself guilty of hypocrisy once by agreeing with James and the elders to go through the purification ritual that the law required (in order to placate the Torah-observing Jewish believers who had heard about his doctrine regarding the law and despised Paul and his doctrine).
I'm not attacking Paul but talking about the biblical history that is written in Acts.
The more you falsely accuse me of attacking Paul or ascribing hypocrisy to his character just because I'm saying he made himself guilty of it once, the more you are showing yourself up as a false accuser of the brethren who cannot stick to the subject
- but needs to make personal attacks and say things about my motives etc (which only God knows the truth about) and implies that you yourself are God or God-like enough to know also.
PS: You don't know. Because you and all your hysterical falsely accusing buddies are wrong in all your false accusations.
One day you may actually add something of substance to this subject by sticking to the subject only. There are some here who have done so, though they disagreed with me or partly agreed and partly disagreed with me. The fact that you are incapable of the same speaks a great deal about you and says nothing about me.
You have shown that you don't need the Bible to show you up for what you are - your own words and false accusations betray you.
Last edited:
I'm not holding my breath about all the hysterical accusers hurling personal attacks and false accusations against me such as @Episkopos has just done yet again, adding anything of value to this thread. Their opinions are quite clearly clouded by their hsyterical and emotional reactions and prideful false accusations about the motives and thoughts of others that indeed only God knows the truth of.
Makes it not very difficult to understand the reaction to Paul's visit of the Torah-abiding believing Jews in Jerusalem that James and the elders asked Paul to try to appease in the way he did, because they're quite clearly of the same nature and produced by the same spirit.
You don't have to be an apostle to experience it
Makes it not very difficult to understand the reaction to Paul's visit of the Torah-abiding believing Jews in Jerusalem that James and the elders asked Paul to try to appease in the way he did, because they're quite clearly of the same nature and produced by the same spirit.
You don't have to be an apostle to experience it
Last edited:
This thread is about wounded pride...in a failed attempt for self-aggrandisement based on a quick and somewhat superficial judgment of the apostle Paul. We see how the bible functions to expose us for what we are. The hyper-sensitivity of the flesh is connected to a heightened sense of self based on a false apprehension of being elevated by "grace." So then a misplaced belief in self makes a person worse off than before
Why did Jesus say...tax-collectors and harlots get into the kingdom before you???
Why did Jesus say...tax-collectors and harlots get into the kingdom before you???
face2face
Well-Known Member
- Jun 22, 2015
- 8,243
- 1,203
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- Australia
Was Paul Inconsistent?
Paul believed "For neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything; the only thing that matters is a new creation! Ga 6:15.
Paul respected the Law, for it was of divine origin, and "holy, and just, and good" (Rom 7:12). Judaizing "Christians" demanded that the Law be observed as a necessary adjunct to belief in the Messiahship of the Lord Jesus. Paul taught no such doctrine, and opposed it in the strongest possible terms. Nevertheless, he was prepared to make concessions in regard to Jews and the law they had been associated with for over 1,400 years.
Some, to be sure, are preaching Christ from envy and rivalry, but others from goodwill. 1:16 The latter do so from love because they know that I am placed here for the defense of the gospel. 1:17 The former proclaim Christ from selfish ambition, not sincerely, because they think they can cause trouble for me in my imprisonment. 1:18 What is the result? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is being proclaimed, and in this I rejoice. Php 1:15–18.
cp. Acts 18:18).
Paul, after staying many more days in Corinth, said farewell to the brothers and sailed away to Syria accompanied by Priscilla and Aquila. He had his hair cut off at Cenchrea because he had made a vow. Acts 18:18.
Hence he wrote:
To the Jews I became like a Jew to gain the Jews. To those under the law I became like one under the law (though I myself am not under the law) to gain those under the law. 1 Co 9:20.
In doing this, he breached none of the dictates of honesty and truth. Jewish converts were not required by the apostles to totally discard their association with the temple and the Law, but were to understand that salvation could never be attained upon the principle of keeping the Law. Paul never deviated from this position, but tenaciously taught it to Jews in the synagogues and to Gentiles without.
F2F
Last edited:
We all feel sorry for you about your wounded pride, @Episkopos (all those who read this thread and saw it). Some never noticed it, but many would have, and did.
Personally I'm really disappointed that your pride prevents you from apologizing for continuing with your repeated false accusations - now you accuse me of "judging" my apostle Paul.
I say my apostle because I'm not sure he's your apostle. If he was you would not be carrying on like this.
Last edited:
Behold
Well-Known Member
How many times have you been guilty of hypocrisy @Zao is life ?
Did you want to write a "sincere" Thread about that fact, = about yourself,........... or are you only able to write attacking carnal Threads regarding the greatest Christian who ever lived, ??
Well the above is according to you why Paul did what he did that day. But here is the reason that Luke gave us:
Acts 21
20b "You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all ardent observers of the law.
21 They have been informed about you - that you teach all the Jews now living among the Gentiles to abandon Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to our customs.
22 What then should we do? They will no doubt hear that you have come.
23 So do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow;
24 take them and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself live in conformity with the law.
Paul was not sharing the gospel with Jews who believed that day. Yet in your post above you make it plain why he was nevertheless going to be considered "guilty" by the Torah-observing Jewish believers in Jerusalem (of the things of which he was accused by them).
So what James and the elders in Jerusalem had asked Paul to do in order to try and prevent (trying to placate them by the above action in order that they will know that Paul himself lives "in conformity with the law") did not work.
Exactly why Peter withdrew from the Gentile table when the visiting Torah-observing Jewish party from Jerusalem arrived in Antioch.
So Peter made himself guilty of hypocrisy at that point, but Paul did not?
What Peter's motive was compared to what Paul's motive was makes no difference. Paul himself may not have feared them and their reaction to Paul's presence, but James and the elders clearly did, and told Paul the reason they asked Paul to do so.
Maybe Paul agreed knowing he was going to making himself guilty of hypocrisy but found himself caught in a "catch-22" situation because going against the wishes of the leaders of the church in Jerusalem would not have sent a fair signal regarding their authority.
We don't know why Paul agreed - but in doing so he made himself guilty of hypocrisy that day - and it never even worked. Instead after 2 years of arrest he was sent to Rome and remained under effective house arrest for the rest of his life. I wouldn't like to know how that must have felt for Paul who had been so free and traveled the whole world until then.
This is not saying it was God's judgment upon Paul's one act of hypocrisy - but it was the consequence that could have been avoided.
Last edited:
You write a sincere thread about how many times you have been guilty of hypocrisy and stop obsessing yourself with how many times someone else might have been.
Go on, you can do it. There's a good boy.
And also write a thread about how many times you have falsely accused someone like you just did me of "attacking" Paul.
You have just joined all the others in this thread who have been showing themselves up.
PS: The greatest Christian who ever lived was Jesus.
Behold
Well-Known Member
What are you , about a 13 yr old mentality, trapped inside a 40 yr old body?
Seem so to me... in my humble opinion..don't you know.
Now, Here is the thing...
Paul Wrote all the Church Doctrine, most of the NT Epistles, started at least a dozen Local Churches.... was stoned to death and saw the 3rd Heaven.... and was martyr'd for Jesus.
What have you done ? ??
Now, according to your Thread... here is the revelation regarding You..... @Zao is life ......You have purposely written an attack THREAD against the incredible Saint Paul, because you're not very wise, you're not very spiritual, and probably your born again experience, if you tried to explain it, would make no sense to any Real Christian.....
So, That's on you..
Take it to heart. @Zao is life
Your false accusation again. Round # 2
According to the reason given by Luke in Acts as to why Paul did what he did that day, Paul made himself guilty of hypocrisy because the record states that the only reason given by James and the elders who asked Paul to do what he did that day, was to placate and appease the Torah-observing Jewish believers in Jerusalem who hated Paul's doctrine.
It had nothing to with sharing the gospel or with defending or explaining his doctrine.
I do not hate Paul's doctrine. I believe his doctrine.
So if you're too scared to take your false accusation to Jesus (because you should be) then give it back to the accuser of the brethren who passed it on to you.
Because the only one acting and speaking like a a spoiled and very ignorant child in this conversation is you. mentioning one act of hypocrisy is not condemning the person or failing to value and appreciate everything else that can be valued and appreciated about Paul. And you're being R-I-D-C-U-L-O-U-S.
Last edited:
Behold
Well-Known Member
Your Thread is your own accusation against yourself.
Im just here to help you understand it.
And i see that you are getting the message.
Now, Let me show you the people who the Devil loves to USE the most.
1.) Atheists,..2.) and people who want to try to prove that the Bible can't be trusted, nor the people who wrote down the world of God.
Do you see yourself, @Zao is life ?
Take a good look.
Now, HERE is one more verse that you need to consider.... should you feel the fleshly need to continue your pursuit..
-
-
"""""When the sentence for a crime is not quickly carried out, people’s hearts are filled with schemes to do wrong.""""
English Standard Version
Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed speedily, the heart of the children of man is fully set to do evil.
King James Bible
Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.
New King James Version
Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil.
New American Standard Bible
Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed quickly, therefore the hearts of the sons of mankind among them are fully given to do evil.
NASB 1995
Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed quickly, therefore the hearts of the sons of men among them are given fully to do evil.
NASB 1977
Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed quickly, therefore the hearts of the sons of men among them are given fully to do evil.
Legacy Standard Bible
Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed quickly, therefore the hearts of the sons of men among them are given fully to do evil.
Amplified Bible
Because the sentence against an evil act is not executed quickly, the hearts of the sons of men are fully set to do evil.
I'm not interested in your opinions. Your post is your own accusation against yourself. God does not care about what you say because He knows that you are a liar and a false accuser of your brethren.
So have fun while you join the others here who keep showing themselves up. You obviously have as little control over yourself to stop as they do.
@Behold Take note of those scriptures you posted because ALL of the fleshly behavior you are pointing out is your own - and until you stop falsely accusing me and stop your posting of fleshly nonsense, you will just keep on proving it and showing yourself up instead of me who is the one who you think you're showing up.
Everyone who reads this thread who is sane and objective can see I have not attacked you but you can't stop with your false accusations and personal attacks on me.
Bow out while you can, because this isn't making you look good.
Last edited:
Acts 21
17 When we arrived in Jerusalem, the brothers welcomed us gladly.
18 The next day Paul went in with us to see James, and all the elders were there.
19 When Paul had greeted them, he began to explain in detail what God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.
THE ONLY REASON RECORDED ABOUT WHY PAUL WENT THROUGH THE PURIFICATION RITUAL
20 When they heard this, they praised God. Then they said to him, "You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all ardent observers of the law.
21 They have been informed about you - that you teach all the Jews now living among the Gentiles to abandon Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to our customs.
22 What then should we do? They will no doubt hear that you have come.
23 So do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow;
24 take them and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself live in conformity with the law.
What a shame that all the idolaters in this board cannot be objective about this, but instead see it as an "attack" on Paul to say that in the process, he made himself guilty of the same hypocrisy he had accused Peter of - because it was only done to placate and appease the Judaizing party in Jerusalem.
It does not detract from Paul's great achievements and work and dedication and success and suffering he went through for the gospel. Facts about an apostle's only recorded mistake do not diminish his achievements
and mentioning Paul's mistake does not constitute an "attack" on Paul.
And there's something seriously lacking in the maturity of people who would falsely accuse anyone of "attacking" Paul who considers the history objectively (as I have done in this thread) and says that Paul made a mistake and in the process made himself guilty, because he did something with the sole purpose of placating or appeasing Jewish Judaizers, of the same hypocrisy that he had earlier accused Peter of.
So that's my last statement.
If anyone is still reading this thread and still wants to continue reading this thread, enjoy the show while you watch the hsyterical and emotionally charged false accusers continue with their hsyteria and false accusations about me "attacking Paul.
Because I won't.
17 When we arrived in Jerusalem, the brothers welcomed us gladly.
18 The next day Paul went in with us to see James, and all the elders were there.
19 When Paul had greeted them, he began to explain in detail what God had done among the Gentiles through his ministry.
THE ONLY REASON RECORDED ABOUT WHY PAUL WENT THROUGH THE PURIFICATION RITUAL
20 When they heard this, they praised God. Then they said to him, "You see, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all ardent observers of the law.
21 They have been informed about you - that you teach all the Jews now living among the Gentiles to abandon Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or live according to our customs.
22 What then should we do? They will no doubt hear that you have come.
23 So do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow;
24 take them and purify yourself along with them and pay their expenses, so that they may have their heads shaved. Then everyone will know there is nothing in what they have been told about you, but that you yourself live in conformity with the law.
What a shame that all the idolaters in this board cannot be objective about this, but instead see it as an "attack" on Paul to say that in the process, he made himself guilty of the same hypocrisy he had accused Peter of - because it was only done to placate and appease the Judaizing party in Jerusalem.
It does not detract from Paul's great achievements and work and dedication and success and suffering he went through for the gospel. Facts about an apostle's only recorded mistake do not diminish his achievements
and mentioning Paul's mistake does not constitute an "attack" on Paul.
And there's something seriously lacking in the maturity of people who would falsely accuse anyone of "attacking" Paul who considers the history objectively (as I have done in this thread) and says that Paul made a mistake and in the process made himself guilty, because he did something with the sole purpose of placating or appeasing Jewish Judaizers, of the same hypocrisy that he had earlier accused Peter of.
So that's my last statement.
If anyone is still reading this thread and still wants to continue reading this thread, enjoy the show while you watch the hsyterical and emotionally charged false accusers continue with their hsyteria and false accusations about me "attacking Paul.
Because I won't.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
I did not say you said this. This is something I said.
James and Paul agreed not to let superficial issues of the Law to get in the way of preaching Christ, who is more important than the external trappings of the Law. Christ is not about not eating things that had been strangled, and yet the appearance of such a thing in that culture would get in the way of preaching the internal change that Christ came to bring.
Acts 15. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood.
Paul argued that eating food dedicated to idols was purely external and insignificant for the Christian except that those weak in the faith can be thrown off by the appearance of such a thing. So to avoid putting a stumbling block in the way of preaching Christ, he encouraged abstinence from this activity *in the presence of those bothered by it*--not to placate people who argued that the Law prohibited it.
But he firmly held to his beliefs, while not advocating for demonstrating his "rights" in the presence of those who would be disturbed by it. Paul was not trying to produce violent reactions from those who wished to argue various matters.
I don't know what you mean by this statement? Pointing out what I think is an error in your thinking is not being an "accuser of the brethren," which has to do with Satan's attempt to disqualify God's People from Salvation.
A critical spirit is the thing to watch out for among Christians who have a "root of bitterness," who do not like to be corrected. Some Christians think that they are above being corrected when the Scriptures actually say that correction is the way to life....
Proverbs 6.23 For this command is a lamp, this teaching is a light, and correction and instruction are the way to life,
Proverbs 10.17 Whoever heeds discipline shows the way to life, but whoever ignores correction leads others astray.
We all need to be corrected at times--sometimes every day. To challenge one's beliefs, doctrines, or teachings, or even their character is not being an "accuser of the brethren." If correction comes from the right spirit, it is designed to bring life to the person. We should call one another away from living in the bitterness of an angry, carnal spirit, so as to encourage them to live in the peace of Christ's life and Spirit.
There is nothing here about trying to placate Christians who have wrong doctrines. It is more an understanding that there are issues among those raised in the culture of the Law which had been connected to universal moral standards. It is difficult to extricate those who wish to live moral lives from the external trappings of their legal upbringing.
Paul did not justify those who wished to remain under the Law. But neither did he want to speed the issue unduly and miss the opportunity to bring the deeper issue of Christ himself to those who were still unsettled in these matters.
It was much more dangerous to delve into issues in Jerusalem among Jews in Judaism than it was to deal with them privately or outside of Israel. One may not believe in Communism, but one does not run into Red Square shouting, "Down with Communism!"
James and Paul were both committed to bringing the Gospel from Jerusalem to the ends of the earth. Some matters of the Law were to be kept to the side while Paul argued that the issue of separating Jews and Gentiles in Christianity could not be sacrificed.
Christ came to bring the wall of separation down whereas some matters of the Law were considered "dead" at the cross and had to give way to more internal matters of the Spirit. Some of the externals of the Law could be dealt with gradually, though some truths could not be put aside for later.
Who Christ is in his purity of spirit should not be sacrificed, including its means of uniting Jews and Gentiles who share the same Christ. But matters of external worship can be set aside until the picture is made clear as we conform to the one Spirit of Christ.
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
Is your "respect for Paul" supposed to offset the fact you accuse Paul of being a hypocrite? It might be fine to accuse Paul of such a thing if it was true from the Scriptures.
But it isn't. That is purely what you're surmising--not what is actually said to be the case in Scriptures. Nowhere is Paul being called a hypocrite for the matters you claim he is guilty of.
So you wish to believe there is a big distinction between calling Paul a hypocrite in some matters and "characterizing him as a hypocrite" overall? Well, calling him a hypocrite in a matter where he is not identified by such in the Scriptures is not only a guess on your part, but worse, it implies that Paul has done something that he never apologized for. Wouldn't that in itself characterize him as a hypocrite in his character?
You're the one who made up this notion that others have accused you of being anti-Paul overall. I personally have only been talking about the issues where you called him hypocritical.
I never indicated you had no respect for Paul. It seems that you want to change the narrative so that you can accuse those who disagree with you "accusers of the brethren?" You wish to eliminate all opposition by tarring them with "false accusations?"
What we really have is a difference of opinion, which you apparently wish to make into something more to avoid all need to defend your position. You wish to turn things into something personal when it began as an opinion, which many would see as "anti-Paul" and "anti-Scripture."
If I view your position as "anti-Paul" and "anti-Scripture" why not simply present your case, rather than try to make our differences personal? After all, we both agree the Scriptures are true. We simply need to prove our case from Scriptures rather than get hostile.
"Outspoken and bold"?
That's an overly generous way to put it. Too generous and so a mischaracterization.
Look carefully at how he spoke to Peter.
It was anything but generous or graceful but instead snarky and cutting....and this was THE Leader of the cult he was a member of.
Peter, later in his letter, spoke well of Paul but said some of the things Paul said were difficult to understand. (Much more graceful way of speaking about Paul than Paul ever was)
Paul had the stew beat and whipped out if him....then left forgotten in Jail often. But he persisted in his ways. He was brash....even vulgar at times...
Nothing to get in a snit about but Paul wasn't exactly what people often think of him as.
Similar threads
