Records are subject to translation......
Records are subject to translation......
1. Judas was also "appointed." And?
I merely noted a fact that Paul was NEVER appointed by Jesus while he was on earth, neither did he ever meet Jesus in the flesh as far as anyone knows. I also did not mention that this was the
only way that anyone could be a true apostle, just noting this fact.
Paul says very little about Jesus as he is presented in the gospels, says little about his teachings recorded there, no virgin birth, parables, the sermon on the mount, the Lord's prayer, his great miracles, etc. Paul only mentions one saying of the Lord as you note below, but its nowhere shared verbatim in the gospels.
Also, his teaching on the Lord's supper (Eucharist) is claimed to have been given to him by personal revelation, NOT something he got down from any tradition. The gospels are dated a few decades or more after his letters, so it seems the Eucharist event could have been imported into the gospels from Paul's letters, not the other way around. I've covered this elsewhere.
Acts 1 KJV
23 And they(The 11 apostles-my note) appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
24 And they (The 11 apostles-my note)prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,
25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.
26 And they (The 11 apostles-my note)gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.
So, you are on record, by your argument, that there are just 11 apostles, as the "appointment" of Matthias, was not by "Jesus after the flesh?"
Not so, as I didnt claim that one must
necessarily be appointed by Jesus
in the flesh, to be an apostle. As far as Mattias who was chosen, we have no record of what happened to him, or if he even kept the faith.
And, thus, you are on record, that this scripture should be deleted:
Revelation 21:14 KJV
And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb.
Do NOTE, that the original 12 apostles of the Lamb would include Mattias who took Judas place, unless Judas was granted opportunity of repentance or reformation in the spirit world, and his soul has been restored to the 'original 12'. PAUL is never included or assumed to be one of the original 12. - you do see the significance of
the 12 appointed in the passage?
2. If you could show me where "Jesus in the flesh," or "God in the flesh," ever appointed you to anything, I would be much obliged. Chapter, verse, in Matthew-John, where your name is cited. Remember, you cannot cite Roman-Philemon, as that is not legitimate, as it is not of "Jesus after the flesh/God in the flesh."
Again,....I merely noted some facts about Paul's
assumed apostleship. As far as my name being in the book (silly boo) I've never claimed to be an 'apostle' like Paul did (among other boasts), and let my commentary stand as it may, engaging in 'creative dialogue' per my usual forte'. All points of view are subject to change. Truth is eternal, but descriptions and interpretations thereof are more or less relative and conditional to whatever context is assumed.
I think alot of those rejecting Paul hold more to the school of James and original apostles holding to the fundamentals of Judaism, as if serving as apologists to keep the lineage of Jesus secure....mainly his teaching to the fore, focusing more on his teachings, rather than Pauls. Maybe they are making too much of it. We've had threads on Paul before, maybe continue in one of those or opening a new thread may be more appropriate, for those interested. Any are free to exchange ideas and dialogue with me as well via facebook, PM or email. I've shared research links on Paul here before, but the Gestapo here has deleted those, just because they present alternative or seemingly anti-christian sentiments or conclusions, but this is anti their own 'version' of Christianity of course. So if any are interested in engaging more controversial matters, try those other avenues.
I find philosophical inquiry and exploration a worthy endeavor. Even atheistic/agnostic views. No one particular religious cult-ure or tradition has a monopoly on 'God'.
3. Did the Lord Jesus, "in the flesh," ever teach, say, "It is more blessed to give than to receive?"
That is not recorded verbatim in the gospels to my knowledge, and is only metioned by Paul in one of his letters. Paul also quotes from sources not in the canon, they being 'apocryphal'...as well as pagan authors to make his points. He was quite a Morph-eus
It is therefore something Paul heard by tradition or in some written record somewhere (lost now), or that he got it by revelation, etc. With Paul its hard to say.
Asides from all these technicalities, its the religious and spiritual truths, allegorically and symbolically speaking that matter, these seemed most important to Paul essentially, within his own catalog of terms. 'Christ' to him is a life giving spirit, a cosmic avatar and redeemer of sorts, something more spiritual and gnostic in nature, while the gospels were written later after his letters to place this cosmic Christ figure into a physical form, a place in history living out a human life, going thru the ritual of birth, death, resurrection, ascension into glory. This is also a prototypal story for the transformation of all souls who attain the resurrection and put on immortality. Therefore the allegorical and esoteric teaching holds, of which the literature and exoteric body is but the vehicle to communicate or illustrate the process of 'salvation'.
Call this sophistry if you like, Paul and other mystics of various schools engage in plenty of it
