2007-08-06 05:01:05 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Nope, Paul had insight into Jesus that even Jesus didn't have. That's why Paul and James didn't get along, James thought he knew Jesus better than Paul just because he was Jesus' brother, but Paul knew better. Paul had a vision, and that was much better than knowing Jesus in person. God's pleased Paul's religion won out. After all, he had it planned that way all along.
2007-08-06 05:08:36 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Paul was a false Prophet who sacrificed his life to save the covenant for Judaism.
He cut the renegade Jews (Christians) off of the covenant and disconnected them from the Law.
.
2007-08-06 05:06:24 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
maximum Christians are Conservatives certainly. a lot of those old testomony prohibitions alongside with issues having to do with homosexuality are nonetheless in use not unavoidably through fact he introduced it up. i'm undecided what you recommend that he replaced the account of the final Supper. They 4 Gospels; Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John have been all written in direction of distinctive people so as that they are going to be fairly distinctive. while Jesus replaced into speaking approximately fake prophets he replaced into generally speaking with reference to the top cases while we can see an excellent volume of fake prophets and we can could shelter ourselves a great deal. i'm hoping I cleared some issues up for you.
2016-10-09 08:15:21 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's presuming that Paul truly WAS a false prophet.
But let's look at the facts:
Luke, who wrote the gospel according to Luke, and also wrote the book of Acts, shows how Saul (aka Paul) met Jesus as he was travelling to Damascus to arrest Christians. So, that means that Luke was also a false prophet.
Not only that, but John the beloved, who wrote in his gospel that the Word which was both WITH God, and WAS God, becamse flesh, also wrote the book of Revelations, in which Jesus said things that confirmed things that Paul said, thus making John also a false prophet.
Where does it end? Taken to it's logical end, you eventually have to point back to Jesus.
No. Paul was not a false prophet, so your initial premise is wrong, and if your premise is wrong, then your conclusion must, likewise, be inaccurate.
2007-08-06 05:07:35 · answer #4 · answered by no1home2day 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Well we better hope that Paul was not a false "prophet" because the better half of the New Testament is attributed to him.
2007-08-06 05:04:55 · answer #5 · answered by SisterSue 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
How do you know Paul was a false prophet?
2007-08-06 05:05:23 · answer #6 · answered by Sick Puppy 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Paul was a real prophet. It's Ringo I'd be worried about.
2007-08-06 05:05:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
The false prophets are those who came after and started what we know today as the christian faith. That includes catholic and protestant.
They took the teachings of a man whom NEVER proclaimed himself to be a god and bilked ignorant peoples of life and fortunes for 1,500 years.
Jesus would spit on the churches of today and demand the heads of the leaders who continue to foster the lies on people today.
2007-08-06 05:06:21 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Paul wasn't a false prophet. he diligently fought for the faith.
2007-08-06 05:04:03 · answer #9 · answered by Cookyduster 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
No rebel, anger was divided over Peter, Paul, & Mary.
2007-08-06 05:04:35 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋