User Tag List

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 45

Thread: The differences between Apostleship of Peter and Paul ??

  1. #1
    Over 2500 post club
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    L.A.
    Posts
    2,829
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 111 Times in 83 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    121263

    The differences between Apostleship of Peter and Paul ??

    Hi to all , and there is a big difference between HOW PETER and SAUL/PAUL were chosen and many do not see any difference , and I remember my Pastor of years ago say , PAUL is not my God !!

    There are many that do believe , we speak PAUL , PAUL , PAUL and I plead guilty , for Paul is the Apostle of Grace who we are to follow , 1 Cor 11:1 !!

    All apointments to be an Apostle in Jesus time had to BE in Acts 1:21 ;

    #1 , Had to companied with us all the time that the Lord went IN and OUT among us .

    #2 , VERSE 22 , be there at the Beginning of John's Baptism , until the day He was taken up from us !!

    #3 , Must be Ordained to be a WITNESS of His Resurrection !!

    #4 , We see that Peter was a Law keeper and the Law of Moses was a Program , until Acts 28:28 !!

    This why SAUL /PAUL could never be on of the 12 apostles and many believe that the 11 apostles were out of the will of God , by picking Matthias and one of my Pastors believed this !!

    SAUL/PAUL was different , as Paul was chosen or called by Grace from his mothers womb !! Gal 1:15 , CALLED BY GRACE !!

    Since Paul was called by Grace , where is there a verse that says Paul went back and taught the Law ??

    Gal 2:18 is proof that Paul could not rebuild what he TORN DOWN !!

    Paul is the ONLY one who is called the Apostles to the Gentiles and Peter never could say that !!

    dan p
    Last edited by DAN P; November 23rd, 2012 at 12:16 PM.

  2. #2
    . Eeset's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    7,546
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 707 Times in 426 Posts

    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1442945
    How interesting.

  3. #3
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by DAN P View Post
    There are many that do believe , we speak PAUL , PAUL , PAUL and I plead guilty , for Paul is the Apostle of Grace who we are to follow , 1 Cor 11:1 !!
    We are to imitate Paul BECAUSE he imitates Christ “Be imitators of me JUST as I ALSO imitate Christ.” To imitate Paul means to imitate Christ. We should imitate Christ as we are being transformed into the image of Christ (2 Cor. 3:18; Phil 3:21).

    Since Paul was called by Grace , where is there a verse that says Paul went back and taught the Law ??
    Where is there a verse that says Paul spoke against the Law? "...the Law is holy" (Rom. 7:12). Paul was NEVER against the Law; he was against the idea that the Law could make one righteous. The Mosaic Law could never make one righteous and it never will. The Mosaic Law didn’t make Peter righteous and it didn’t make Paul righteous.

    Gal 2:18 is proof that Paul could not rebuild what he TORN DOWN !!
    In context, what he “tore down” was not the Law; it was the idea that one will only be accepted by God if one is circumcised and follows the customs of Moses (iow, Paul tore down the idea that one is accepted by God only by following the Mosaic Law). Another way to put it is that Paul destroyed the notion that righteousness can be found in the Law. “For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise; but God has granted it to Abraham by means of a promise” (Gal. 3:18). “…if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law” (Gal. 3:21). “…Scripture has shut up EVERYONE under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe” (Gal 2:22).”

  4. #4
    LIFETIME MEMBER Nick M's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    13,725
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked 3,296 Times in 2,283 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147745
    Quote Originally Posted by Eeset View Post
    How interesting.
    And true. Peter is not your apostle. He is the apostle of the circumcision.
    Jesus saves completely. http://www.climatedepot.com/ http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

    Titus 1

    For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped

    Ephesians 5

    11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret

  5. #5
    LIFETIME MEMBER Nick M's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    13,725
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked 3,296 Times in 2,283 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147745
    Quote Originally Posted by surrender View Post
    Where is there a verse that says Paul spoke against the Law? "...the Law is holy" (Rom. 7:12).
    He spoke against keeping the law.

    The Lord Jesus Christ said;

    ...But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.

    Yet Paul said;

    And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death.

    You can continue on and on and on with this theme of what Jesus and his 12 apostles taught, compared with what Jesus had Paul teach.

    James, the Lord's brother said this;

    James 2

    14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? ...17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead....21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?


    Romans 4

    3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

    5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,


    The Lord Jesus Christ, James his brother, and Paul could not be clearer.
    Jesus saves completely. http://www.climatedepot.com/ http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

    Titus 1

    For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped

    Ephesians 5

    11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret

  6. #6
    Over 2500 post club
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    L.A.
    Posts
    2,829
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 111 Times in 83 Posts

    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    121263
    Quote Originally Posted by surrender View Post
    We are to imitate Paul BECAUSE he imitates Christ “Be imitators of me JUST as I ALSO imitate Christ.” To imitate Paul means to imitate Christ. We should imitate Christ as we are being transformed into the image of Christ (2 Cor. 3:18; Phil 3:21).

    Where is there a verse that says Paul spoke against the Law? "...the Law is holy" (Rom. 7:12). Paul was NEVER against the Law; he was ”
    Hi , and it is in Acts 21:21 whether you believe OR not !!

    Paul was telling the Jews to FORSAKE MOSES !!

    DAN P

  7. #7
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick M View Post
    He spoke against keeping the law.
    Why would Paul speak against keeping the law? Do you believe Paul did not want people to keep the commandment, “Do not murder”? Of course, Paul wanted people to keep the commandment, “Do not murder.” He certainly didn’t want people going around murdering each other. What Paul didn’t want was people keeping the commandment as a way of obtaining righteousness, for doing so results in death. Once you seek to establish righteousness through the Law, you put yourself under the jurisdiction of the Law. But because of sin, the Law will ultimately find you guilty and will result in death for you.

    People continue to live that way today. They believe that if they are “good enough” then they will gain entrance into a blissful afterlife. They find life, not in God alone, but in their own efforts. What they don’t realize is that they will inevitably be found guilty by the very law in which they are trying to gain life.

    he Lord Jesus Christ said;

    ...But if you want to enter into life, keep the commandments.

    Yet Paul said;

    And the commandment, which was to bring life, I found to bring death.
    Good point. Why would Jesus tell the rich man to keep something that could bring death to him? So, let’s look at a couple commandments. If you keep the commandment to not murder, does keeping that commandment kill you? Of course not. If you keep the commandment to not commit adultery, does keeping that commandment kill you? Of course not. So, why does Paul say that the commandment brought death to him? Paul tells us why: “for sin, taking an opportunity through the commandment, deceived me and through it killed me” (Rom. 7:11). We see here that it was not the Law or commandment that killed Paul; it was sin. Had it not been for sin, the Law would not have been able to find him guilty. So, Paul isn’t saying, “Don’t keep the Law,” Paul is saying, “Don’t keep the Law as a way of obtaining righteousness (i.e. life, cf. Rom. 7:10, 10:3), for doing so will only result in death because of your sin. Stop putting your hope in the Law, stop putting yourself under its jurisdiction, because you will be found guilty. So, keep the Law but don’t rely on your ability to keep the Law to justify you. Again, if you rely on the Law to justify you, you put yourself under its jurisdiction and you will be found guilty. So, if life is not found in the Law, where is life found?

    Going back to the rich man. When Jesus said, “If you wish to enter into life keep the commandments,” he could not have meant that one obtains life through the law or in keeping the commandments. We know this because it is made very clear how one obtains life:
    John 3:15 whoever believes in him have eternal life
    John 3:36 he who believes in the son has eternal life
    John 5:24 he who…believe Him who sent me has eternal life
    John 5:40 come to me so that you may have life
    John 6:40 everyone who beholds the son and believes in him will have eternal life
    John 11:25 he who believes in me will live even if he dies
    John 17:3 This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God and Jesus Christ whom You have sent
    John 20:31 by believing you may have life in his name

    By the way, Paul, too, tells us that those who do not keep the commandments will not see life:
    Idolaters (1 Cor. 6:9; Eph. 5:5) “You shall have no other gods before me” “You shall not make for yourself any carved image”
    Adulterers (1 Cor. 6:9) “You shall not commit adultery”
    Thieves (1 Cor. 6:9) “You shall not steal”
    Covetous (Eph. 5:5) “You shall not covet…”

    edit to add: Another commandment Paul confirmed:
    Honor parents (Eph. 6:1-3) "Honor your father and your mother..."

    Although Paul says those who do not obey the commandments will not see life, he also tells us that it is not through Law keeping that one obtains the promise of life. For the promise to Abraham and his descendants was not through the Law but through righteousness of faith, in order that it be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants (Rom. 4:13, 16).

    So, Jesus and Paul are in agreement that those who obey the commandments enter life and those who do not obey the commandments do not enter life. And both are in agreement that it is not through Law keeping that one obtains the promise of life. Jesus says life is found in knowing him and his God and Paul says that the promise of life is through faith in accordance with grace.

    So, if life is not obtained by law keeping, why did Jesus say tell the rich man to keep the commandments if he wants to enter life? I believe Jesus met the man where he was at so that Jesus could work with him from the inside out rather than from the outside in. The rich man asked Jesus what he could do to obtain eternal life. The man was already of the mindset that he could establish his own righteousness through the Law (i.e. obeying the Law would make him clean). Instead of telling the man how backwards he had it (i.e. being clean stimulates obedience to the Law), Jesus chose to go along with this man’s perception so that on his own he could recognize his misplaced trust in his efforts in relation to the Law. Convictions are more effective when they come from within rather than from without.

    Jesus tells him, okay, you seek to establish your own righteousness, then keep the commandments. After all, those who do not obey the commandments will not inherit life (1 Cor. 6:9). The rich man says, oh, but I do obey all the commandments. But with further dialogue it is revealed that the Law he thought justified him has found him guilty (i.e. he is greedy). It was a setup so that the man could, on his own, come to the realization that he cannot establish his own righteousness. He walked away without hope. As the Spirit worked on him, perhaps he later came to a place of humility and contriteness of heart, turning to God for life rather than the Law.
    Last edited by surrender; November 22nd, 2012 at 01:46 PM.

  8. #8
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by DAN P View Post
    Hi , and it is in Acts 21:21 whether you believe OR not !!

    Paul was telling the Jews to FORSAKE MOSES !!

    DAN P
    If Paul was telling the Jews to forsake Moses, he would have told the Jews to forsake Moses. Instead, he showed he respected the Mosaic Law through his participation in it (Acts 21:23-24, 26). How sad you continue to make the same mistake Paul so eagerly tried to correct.

  9. #9
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick M View Post
    James, the Lord's brother said this;

    James 2

    14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? ...17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead....21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?

    Romans 4

    3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.” 4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

    5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,

    The Lord Jesus Christ, James his brother, and Paul could not be clearer.
    Paul has Abraham justified in Genesis 15. James has Abraham justified in Genesis 22. So, when was Abraham justified?

    Obviously, there must be two meanings of the word “justify.” Paul tells us what he means by “justify” when he writes, “Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness” and “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds have been forgiven, and whose sins have been covered.” Clearly, Paul is speaking about justification in the ultimate theological sense (i.e. to restore one to a state of reconciliation with God). Paul’s focus is on the unconverted and how one comes to be reconciled to God. It is faith and faith alone that restores one to a state of reconciliation with God.

    James, on the other hand, is focusing on professing Christians (i.e. those who were already reconciled to God by faith alone). The overriding theme of James 1:2-2:26 is the testing of our faith to determine if it’s genuine or not. People can say they have faith when, in fact, they don’t have faith. The claim to faith is vindicated (or justified) in our sight by the fruit of faith (i.e. works). Abraham’s claim to faith is justified in our sight by his works.

    You are saved by faith apart from works (i.e. faith alone justifies/saves you) but you know that faith is authentic only if it has works (i.e. works justify/vindicate your claim to faith).

    “…Gentiles…repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with repentance” (Acts 26:20).

  10. #10
    LIFETIME MEMBER Nick M's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    13,725
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked 3,296 Times in 2,283 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147745
    Quote Originally Posted by surrender View Post
    Why would Paul speak against keeping the law?
    Because he was instructed by the Lord Jesus Christ not to follow it. Yet the 12 were instructed to follow it by the very letter.
    Jesus saves completely. http://www.climatedepot.com/ http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

    Titus 1

    For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped

    Ephesians 5

    11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret

  11. #11
    LIFETIME MEMBER Nick M's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    13,725
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked 3,296 Times in 2,283 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147745
    Quote Originally Posted by surrender View Post
    Paul has Abraham justified in Genesis 15. James has Abraham justified in Genesis 22. So, when was Abraham justified?
    You tell me why you think that is. James refers to Abraham after circumcision. Paul before. Two sets of rules, two different apostles for the two sets of rules.

    This is a rhetorical question, with an obvious answer of "YES!".

    21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?

    Paul taught the opposite. No matter how hard you cry about it.
    Jesus saves completely. http://www.climatedepot.com/ http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

    Titus 1

    For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped

    Ephesians 5

    11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret

  12. #12
    LIFETIME MEMBER Nick M's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    13,725
    Thanks
    323
    Thanked 3,296 Times in 2,283 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147745
    Quote Originally Posted by surrender View Post
    You are saved by faith apart from works (i.e. faith alone justifies/saves you.

    21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?

    Of course I now have concrete proof you are outside the faith, and trying to pull people away from it. Which is why you are arguing the fact that Paul preached a different gospel.

    Works is not evidence of salvation. In fact, you are carnally minded. You see the flesh, and that is what you judge. That is circumcision.
    Jesus saves completely. http://www.climatedepot.com/ http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

    Titus 1

    For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped

    Ephesians 5

    11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. 12 For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret

  13. #13
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick M View Post
    Because he was instructed by the Lord Jesus Christ not to follow it. Yet the 12 were instructed to follow it by the very letter.
    Still waiting for a verse that says Paul was instructed by the Lord Jesus Christ to not follow the Law.

  14. #14
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick M View Post
    You tell me why you think that is. James refers to Abraham after circumcision. Paul before. Two sets of rules, two different apostles for the two sets of rules.
    So, you actually believe Abraham needed justifying twice? Wow, you really are confused.

    This is a rhetorical question, with an obvious answer of "YES!".

    21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?
    Yes, Abraham was justified by works, but obviously Abraham wasn’t justified in the same sense Paul was talking about in Romans 4 (i.e. how Abraham came to be reconciled with God). Most people would see how ridiculous it would be to conclude that Abraham needed justifying twice.

    Paul taught the opposite.
    No, he didn’t (see post #9).

  15. #15
    Over 500 post club
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    505
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    80
    Quote Originally Posted by Nick M View Post
    21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar?
    Right, Abraham was justified by works, but obviously Abraham wasn’t justified in the same sense Paul was talking about in Romans 4 (i.e. how Abraham came to be reconciled with God). Most people would see how ridiculous it would be to conclude that Abraham needed justifying twice.

    Of course I now have concrete proof you are outside the faith, and trying to pull people away from it. Which is why you are arguing the fact that Paul preached a different gospel.
    Paul didn’t preach a different gospel. That’s what I’ve been saying all along. He and James preached the same gospel. Paul taught that one is saved by faith (Romans 3:28, 30; 4:16; 5:1; 9:30; Gal. 2:16; 3:8, 22) and the original twelve disciples taught that one is saved by faith (John 3:15, 36; 5:24, 40; 6:40; 11:25; 17:3; 20:31; Acts 15:9; 26:18).

    Works is not evidence of salvation.
    Yes, it is. “…Gentiles…repent and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with repentance” (Acts 26:20).

    Why were Gentiles asked to perform deeds in keeping with repentance? It wasn’t because performing deeds saved them; it was because such deeds were evidence of their faith.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us