Why are Paul's writ tings in the bible, when he never met Jesus?

Question

I understand, Paul said he "met" Jesus on the road....but no one around him confirms this. It is just his word. How is this different than cult leaders saying they "met" Jesus? The Christian religion is significantly different if all the writtings of Paul are removed. Jesus' deciples took in Paul, Paul was one of the leading anti-christ killers. Were the deciples forced to accept Paul or be killed? Is Paul really the antichrist? How better to subvert a true religion by taking over the direction. I am interested to hear from any honest views.

No person reported seeing Paul meeting Jesus. Saying Paul talked to God is no different if I say God talked to me and said Christianity is the worship of Satan. If all of Paul's writings are removed, does this change Christianity? The disciples feared Saul, it was safer to go along to get along...to stay alive. Current Christianity structure depends on Paul's writings. No one knows what other writings were discarded by the early church. The decision to put Saul's writing was done by the church around 450 ad. I can understand including writings from people who knew Jesus. Saul or Paul's account is based purely on his say so.

Luke wrote Acts. Luke is another writer, whos books are questionable. What is his qualifications to write? If Luke and Saul were important, why didn't Jesus contact them to be deciples? Very little of the bible is writen by deciples.

Answer 1

It's in there because ancient church leaders got together and voted on what would be the bible.

Answer 2

All your questions are speculation. Im sure they are sincere qeustions but my honest assessment is there is no historical reason to suspect them. The difference between Paul saying he met Jesus and cult leaders is Paul's teaching adhered to Scripture whereas cult leaders twist Scripture. Also Paul's ministery was full of miracles. Cultists are con-artists and liars. If there were some reliable historical document that suggested Paul was a cultist or never met Jesus that would warrant your speculations. Jesus chose Paul precisely because he was so antagonistic towards the church. God always wants to show the world that he can still create something from nothing. He took and man who hated the church and turned him into a man who loved the church. There was no devotion to God in him. On the Damascus road God created that devotion. But as to whether the apostles had to accept him or be killed, or if he was the antichrist, why would you even think this? Im not being sarcastic. Seriously there must be a good reason beyond, 'I think it may have been like this.' Always ask if your suspicions are warranted by some evidence with the understanding that God is sovereign. Throughout the centuries God has provided evidence that condemned multitudes of false teachers and cultists. If we believe he has the power to preserve such evidence we can be sure if Paul were not who he said he was, we would be able to point to some historical evidence or early church document or extra-biblical writing.

Ok seriously, ask yourself this question because you are not thinking clearly. If Paul were still a bad guy who forced the apostles to take his Judiastic side why was Paul later persecuted by the Judiazers? Why were Paul's writings so Christian and not Judaism? You would fail as an attorney because your speculation can't link up to any plausible motive. And further why would Christianity after Paul be so anti-Judiasm if Paul the Judiazer forced the Christian apostles to go his way? This is what I mean when I say you are entertaining speculations with no historical reason whatsoever. I dont mind people questioning CHristianity or even doubting it but what drives me crazy is when people willfully choose to think irrationally. Where do you people come from?

Answer 3

The Apostle Paul who was an extraordinarly zealous christian was personally chosen by Jesus on the road to damascus to be an ambassador of the good news and he was also well accepted by the other Apostles who personally knew Jesus and since his writings are in harmony with the rest of the Bible and accepted by all Bible Scholars and have much value amd merit today as back then and no paul is not the anti christ as some poor deluded misinformed persons think people who come up with such bizzare ideas males me wonder what they are smoking or on as it is a totally irrational idea Gorbalizer

Answer 4

Jesus also appeared to Ananias and told him that Paul was to be a messanger for Christ. Ananias is a witness.

Also, the miracles that Paul could do (as witnessed by many) and his ability to give spiritural gifts through the laying on of apostolic hands, were confirmation of him and his message. (Acts 19:6, Acts 19:11, Acts 15:12) (The apostle Luke wrote Acts, so this means Luke was a wittness for him.)

Thirdly, the apostle Peter, when he wrote the book of First Peter with inspiration from God, called Paul a "brother" and said Paul wrote his epistles with wisdom given to him. He also equated these epistles with "the rest of the scripture" and Peter noted that those who distort these writings do so "unto their own destruction". (2 Peter 3:15-16)

God verified Paul with miracles. Ananias, Barnabus, Peter, Luke, and others also confirmed he was who he claimed to be, a fellow Christian, an apostle, and a servant of Christ!

Answer 5

it relatively is not plenty that he's in it - he's it. the hot testomony is in general letters that HE WROTE. And the rationalization it is so is that for the duration of the 1st century after Jesus' dying diverse writers wrote approximately him and a pair centuries later while the church in Rome have been given around to picking wich writings to collect as a "New testomony", curiously they loved what he wrote and did not like plenty what others wrote. And technically, in all probability ninety 9% of the people stated in the Bible by no skill met Jesus (which includes those stated in the old testomony).

Answer 6

They're in the bible because he was inspired to write them (2 Tim 3: 16, 17).

Saul was a horrible, violent anti-christian but the difference between him and the rest of the Pharisees that hated Jesus was that he was sincere in his beliefs and truly felt that what he was doing was the right thing at the time. When an angel appeared to him on behalf of Christ and took his sight and restored it, he knew that he'd been on the wrong path. He was just as zealous for good works after that point as he had been for bad (with good intentions) in the times prior.

He gave up a prominent career as a lawyer and a pharisee for the truth and devoted his life to setting up the first century Christian congregation. His writings deserve our consideration.

Answer 7

Paul reached to the third heaven and was destined to work for God. Paul as a Master of Law knew everything about it and even he has admitted it that his zeal for God made him persecute the apostles.
God looked at this zeal and converted Paul on the way to Damascus,so, that in the way he persecuted the Church, the same way he should preach the gospel with peace.

Answer 8

As Jesus promised, the Counselor - the Spirit of Truth - comes to those who do the will of God to confirm that the writings of Scripture are true and inspired of God. And Peter, whom Jesus chose to be the "rock" that would serve as the foundation for His church, confirms Paul's writings as well when he writes, "15Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him.
16He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction.
17Therefore, dear friends, since you already know this, be on your guard so that you may not be carried away by the error of lawless men and fall from your secure position..." (2 Pet 3)

Answer 9

Ahhh, good quesiton.

I haven't the time right now to go into any depth about it, but I would VERY STRONGLY recommend getting the book "The Mythmaker (Paul and the Invention of Christianity)" by Hyam Maccoby.

Mr. Maccoby contends that Jesus was no more the founder of Christianity than the historical Hamlet was the author of the play named for him. Christianity was the invention of Paul.

It's not a easy read. But it's rich in scholarship, and exacting in its methods.

Answer 10

Paul received third heaven revelation from Christ Himself. No one experienced Christ more than Paul did. This makes Him more of an expert than any other.
Without Paul's writings, the Bible may not measure up to the standards required for entrance into heaven and an eternal relationship with God.

Answer 11

I think Paul was more passionate about the gospel because he felt indebted to God for having persecuted His people. Doesn't the content of what Paul wrote bear God's signature? What I mean is, it confronts us with our sin, points to the Savior, and encourages us to have the faith of Abraham. And Paul was beheaded as a christian under Nero's reign. I think Paul was one of the finest chriistians that ever lived. If Paul "invented" christianity as suggested above, then he was surely a lunatic! Who would enjoy inventing a religion which would cause himself to be poor, stoned, rejected, constantly attacked, and eventually beheaded? No, Paul was for real. Fake philosophers can be found in their swimming pools making book deals for large sums of money, taking phone calls to "help" people for $700 per half hour or even appearing on the Montel show every Wednesday. Paul gave his life to prove his word. I doubt if Mr Maccobee would willing to prove his message by giving up his. Paul never got a book deal like Mr Maccobee did. Paul just wanted people to get to heaven.