Was paul inspired?

Question

In a study of logic, there is something which we call “undecidable propositions” or “meaningless sentences”, which are statements that cannot be determined because there is no contextual false. One of the classic examples cited is the Epiminedes’ paradox. Saul Kripke says:

Ever since Pilate asked, “What is truth?” (John XVIII, 38), the subsequent search for a correct answer has been inhibited by another problem, which, as is well known, also arises in a New Testament context. If, as the author of the Epistle to Titus supposes (Titus I, 12), a Cretan prophet, “even a prophet of their own,” asserted that “the Cretans are always liars,” and if “this testimony is true” of all other Cretan utterances, then it seems that the Cretan prophet’s words are true if and only if they are false. And any treatment of the concept of truth must somehow circumvent this paradox.[1]

Epimenides was Cretan and he said that “Cretans always lie”. Now, was that statement true or false? If he was a Cretan and he says that they always lie, is he then lying? If he is not lying then he is telling the truth and therefore Cretans do not always lie. We can see that since the assertion cannot be true and it cannot be false, the statement turns back on itself. It is like stating “What I am telling you right now is a lie”, would you believe that or otherwise? This statement thus has no true content. It cannot be true at the same time it is false. If it is true then it is always false. If it is false, it is also true.

Well, in the New Testament, the writer is Paul and he is talking about the Cretans in 1 Titus, as follows:

A prophet from their own people said of them “Cretens are always liars, wicked brutes, lazy gluttons.” This testimony is true. For this reason correct them sternly, that they may be sound in faith instead of paying attention to Jewish fables and to commandments of people who turn their backs on the truth. (Titus 1:12-14)

Notice that Paul says that one of their own men – a prophet - said that “Cretans are always liars” and he says that what this man say is true. It is a small mistake, but the point is that it is a human mistake. It cannot be a true statement at the same time that it is a false statement. Thus, how can Christians claim that the writers of the New Testament - in this case, Paul - had “inspiration” from God?

Some Christians have taken the position that a strictly logical approach to Epimenides’ statement can result in it not being a paradox after all. If it is not a paradox, one may argue that Paul’s calling it “true” was a subtle bit of mockery with tremendous foresight regarding later developments in logic. If that is the case, then maybe Paul’s statement actually was inspired. For example, while discussing Paul’s comments in the epistle to Titus, one Christian theological periodical concedes that “one of the very greatest of Christian thinkers enters the logic books wearing a dunce’s cap”[2] but then argues that Christians can find recourse in the fact that the statement might not be paradoxical. To back up this claim, the article calls to witness Quine, one of the greatest logicians that ever lived, thus it is important that we consider what Quine wrote:

There is the ancient paradox of Epimenides the Cretan, who said that all Cretans were liars. If he spoke the truth, he was a liar. It seems that this paradox may have reached the ears of St. Paul and that he missed the point of it. He warned, in his epistle to Titus: “One of themselves, even a prophet of their own, said The Cretans are always liars.” Actually the paradox of Epimenides is untidy; there are loopholes. Perhaps some Cretans were liars, notably Epimenides, and others were not; perhaps Epimenides was a liar who occasionally told the truth; either way it turns out that the contradiction vanishes.[3]

The question that arises now is how Quine was able to figure out that maybe other Cretans were liars or maybe Epimenides sometimes told the truth. Epimenides is clearly saying that Cretans are always liars. Every time a Cretan speaks, he is lying, so how could the statement ever allow for a Cretan (be it Epimenides or some other Cretan) to speak the truth? The reasoning is genius, and goes as follows: the obvious assumption behind the belief that the statement is paradoxical is that if all Cretans lie, then Epimenides is lying, so if his statement is true, it is false. In that sense it seems like any other pseudomenon. From here, if we consider the statement false, we are no longer forced into the kind of paradoxical vicious circle that a true pseudomenon (like “this sentence is false”) pushes us into. Commenting on a similar line of argumentation, Schoenberg writes the following:

We may feel intuitively that the argument is paradoxical; yet, from a formal logic point of view, it does not really have the look of a paradox. It looks simply like reductio ad absurdum proof of the falsity of ‘All Cretans are liars.’[4]

Thus, as Quine noted, it is not inconsistent to assume that some other Cretan does not always lie, or that some other statement by Epimenides was true. Prior explains this quite well:

If we treat the Cretan’s assertion as true, and so assume that nothing true is ever asserted by a Cretan, it follows immediately that the Cretan’s assertion is false. If, however, we treat it as false, there is no way of deducing from this assumption that it is true. We can, therefore, consistently suppose it to be false, and this is all we can consistently suppose. But to suppose it false (considering what the assertion actually is) is to suppose that something asserted by a Cretan is true; and this of course can only be some other assertion than the one mentioned.[5]


A paradoxical statement has no discernable truth value, but the statement by Epimenides can be seen as having a truth value (i.e. it is false), and if that is the case we can reinterpret the statement as not being paradoxical. However, establishing a truth value for the statement does not escape the problem with Paul’s claim since the saying of Epimenides is false. As Prior noted above, we cannot consider the statement true (as Paul did). If sophisticated analysis determines after all that this statement by Epimenides is not paradoxical, and thus has a truth value, the only consistent supposition we can make is that it is false.

Conclusion

In the end, the following seven-point syllogism completes our argument:

Paul claims a Cretan uttered a certain proposition.
The proposition is not true.
Paul claims the proposition is true.
Paul’s claim is an error.
Paul’s writings are errant rather than inerrant.
Errant scripture is not inspired scripture, as held on by Muslims.
Therefore, Paul was not inspired.
Hence, whether the statement is meaningless or false, the basic argument which we have raised still stands. The conclusion of the seven point syllogism given above still rings true: Paul was not inspired.

And only God knows best!

Answer 1

By no means was he inspired. I must say, your argument has depth and insight.

Secondly, paul only later interfered in the teachings of Jesus to make them more easier. And what more easier way to say that, all mankind who only belive in Jesus being the son of god and dying on the cross, will go to heaven. No need to do anything now. Paul changed the bible and said all this so that now he, and then the later followers could do what ever they want, and follow their vain dirty desires.

Christians today are actually not chirstians, they are Paulians. Since they follow what paul said and wrote. For Jesus only preached the message of ONE GOD, no son no father.

And it is for all the dirty work that paul did to the teachings of Jesus (pbuf) that GOD felt it necassary to send in the final testament, that is the Quran and the final messanger to correct all misperceptions.

For Now God says in the Quran, that this time He Himself will guard the final message from corruptions.

Answer 2

Quite a lengthy dissertation to make a point on a simple, closed question: "Was Paul inspired?", you ask. And the answer ought to be a simpler 'Yes' or 'No'... But the question opens up a new can of worms, as in, inspired to do what?? Or, inspired by whom or by what? So let's not even go there.

Quite succintly, and without belaboring the point, I do take the road less traveled and look at Paul's actions in the NT--as it is written--with a jaundiced eye... and, my personal observations don't necessarily align with the common, popular view.

*[For those who may be interested or simply curious, I've discussed this at length in some of my earlier responses here. Sorry for the hassle.]*

Peace be with you.

Answer 3

As I mentioned in my answer to the question you're pertaining to: "This backs up my perception that JWs evaluate *all* inspired scriptures to formulate their ideals, while others do not. Paul's words have equivalent weight with Jesus' words, when you consider that they are all inspired of God." 2 Timothy 3:sixteen - "All Scripture is inspired of God." Peter lists Paul's letters with the "relax of the Scriptures" - 2 Peter 3:15, sixteen - "Paul in accordance to the know-how given him additionally wrote you, conversing approximately those issues as he does additionally in all his letters. In them, even though, are some issues problematic to comprehend, which the untaught and unsteady are twisting, as they do additionally the the remainder of the Scriptures." Jesus did not write any of the books of the NT, his words are recorded by ability of others, adult males like Paul. So if Paul's writings are by some ability dwindled because of the fact he isn't Jesus, then Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John's writings are the two suspect. no depend if that's maintained that by some ability Paul's comments colored the concept-approximately his writings, by some ability edging out the holy spirit, then a similar argument could be made against the writers of the Gospels, with equivalent logical weight. If God did certainly motivate the Bible, then *all* scriptures have equivalent wait, inspite of who the speaker is (given the context). you're able to desire to bear in mind that the Bible being "inspired" ability numerous issues to distinctive people. some have faith the Bible grew to become into "in general inspired," with God pointing the author in a favourite course, however the author's innovations and comments and human errors allowed to creep in. some have faith the Gospels are inspired yet Paul's writings are actually not. And there are different such ideals.

Answer 4

The Bible infers that the sun goes round the earth ,does it mean that all of the the Bible is rubbish.Truth will always rise above all hype because man is intelligent .Well! some are.
Jesus also said to Peter "get behind me Satan" .Why then did Peter end up becoming the First Pope?

Answer 5

Okay, okay, whatever you believe.

Paul had to have been inspired because he was walking down a road and was suddenly exposed to a very bright light and Jesus asked (Then named Saul) "Why do you persecute me?" Paul was blinded for several days, became a convert to Christianity and that is being inspired by God.

Your other stuff doesn't make any sense to me, sorry, just don't catch on.

Answer 6

I agree too.
Paul never met Jesus (pbuh), when Jesus(pbuh) was on this earth.
He claim him self Apostle after God Almighty raised Jesus(pbuh) to heavens.

Infact Paul was among those who opposed Jesus(pbuh).
If I go on streets, claiming I was an apostle of jesus, and I tell you people to worship Idols will you believe?

He did the same, He gave opposit ideas to innocent people. those ideas are in fact insult to Jesus(pbuh) and God Almighty as well.

How come we accept false teachings of some one which is deferent then teachings of Jesus(pbuh).

May God give us wisdom to find truth and to analyze false apostles and their false teachings, which cotradicts teachings of Mighty Prophet of God. Ameen.

Answer 7

You can raise all the arguments you want. Paul was inspired. He wrote part of the Bible and everyone (all 40) who wrote the Bible was inspired. That is why the Bible is relevant today.

Answer 8

Incredible amount of text. The answer to your question is yes, Paul was an apostle called by Jesus Christ.

P.S. Alot of words does not a valid point make.

Answer 9

You have to be kidding, as anyone who would take the time to write something as ridiculous as this would be kidding, unless they were serious, which would be a shame, unless they were really lying.

Answer 10

I can't ask Paul if he was inspired, because he is dead.
But I do know that you like to type