OP is an ignorant fellow. The numerous threads he's created of recent have shown how Antichrist he is.

How can you say Paul made mistakes in his teachings? Isn't that an admittance that the Bible contains errors?

Mind you, what you think Paul said when he locked against women preaching in church was also echoed by Jesus in revelations when he expressed his anger at one of the seven churches. The church's crime was allowing a woman to preach on church.

Revelations 2:20

Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

So far, the reaction to this topic has confirmed the fact that many of today's church are disciples of Paul and not truly that of Jesus, and that they view him as their lord and savior and the owner of the church. But not for those of who know that the church was already in full swing, before there was ever someone called Paul in the church, for he didn't even believe in Jesus the founder of the church while he was yet on earth, and hence wasn't part of the first set of disciples who Jesus' taught his word first hand, that went that went on the become the pillars and pioneers of the church he founded. So to us Paul will never and can never take his place as lord, master and saviour of our lives and so would never be seen as the owner of the church, for that Jesus is to us, and that is not variable but a constant. And so we view Paul as only a fellow disciple who made some mistakes in his teachings that ordinarily would've been ignored but for its significant misleading of the church who view it as God's word

Therefore the extent of the damaging effect of such mistakes on those of church as a result of the gross misconception that every word he said or wrote was inspired of God, makes it imperative for us to let the church know that just because Paul's writings were included in the Bible, doesn't mean that everyone of it was inspired of the Holy Spirit, for some were indeed inspired by his flesh and that he made some mistakes as a result. And also to point out some of those mistakes to prove that view true to such one of the church, so that they would stop viewing and observing it in it's entirety as the word of God, to avoid them repeating the same mistakes that Paul the apostle made so would still have a chance of being perfect as Jesus the master was who didn't make any, as every single one of his words were inspired of the Holy Spirit. So i have only giving just one of the many such mistakes in Paul's teachings, with several others to follow soon.

[s]

jesusjnr:
So far, the reaction to this topic has confirmed the fact that many of today's church are disciples of Paul and not truly that of Jesus, and that they view him as their lord and savior and the owner of the church. But not for those of who know that the church was already in full swing, before there was ever someone called Paul in the church, for he didn't even believe in Jesus the founder of the church while he was yet on earth, and hence wasn't part of the first set of disciples who Jesus' taught his word first hand, that went that went on the become the pillars and pioneers of the church he founded. So to us Paul will never and can never take his place as lord, master and saviour of our lives and so would never be seen as the owner of the church, for that Jesus is to us, and that is not variable but a constant. And so we view Paul as only a fellow disciple who made some mistakes in his teachings that ordinarily would've been ignored but for its significant misleading of the church who view it as God's word

[/s]


even Jesus didn't suffer any woman to be an apostle and also frawned on the church giving a false prophetess to rule the church. you submission had been trashed.
keep screaming paul!
you are not a follower of Christ just an apostate.

[s]

jesusjnr:
Therefore the extent of the damaging effect of such mistakes on those of church as a result of the gross misconception that every word he said or wrote was inspired of God, makes it imperative for us to let the church know that just because Paul's writings were included in the Bible, doesn't mean that everyone of it was inspired of the Holy Spirit, for some were indeed inspired by his flesh and that he made some mistakes as a result. And also to point out some of those mistakes to prove that view true to such one of the church, so that they would stop viewing and observing it in it's entirety as the word of God, to avoid them repeating the same mistakes that Paul the apostle made so would still have a chance of being perfect as Jesus the master was who didn't make any, as every single one of his words were inspired of the Holy Spirit. So i have only giving just one of the many such mistakes in Paul's teachings, with several others to follow soon.

[/s] not every words of Paul were inspired? wonderful you have the mouth of the beast.
2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:


Daniel 7:11 I beheld then because of the voice of the great words which the horn spake: I beheld even till the beast was slain, and his body destroyed, and given to the burning flame.

Revelation 13:6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.

WHAT DISTINGUISHED JESUS FROM MEN:

---

His ability to detect what virtually no other person could detect, and to also perfectly distinguish between the things of the Spirit(God) from those of the flesh(man). And one instance that perfectly illustrated this was that of one of his foremost disciples, even Peter, who's among the 1st three of the 1st twelve, and who Jesus made leader over his church before his departure. Now i could've simply said he's one of Jesus disciples but the extra info was deliberate to better illustrate my point. Moreover it's this Peter that once said something to Jesus that made Jesus say to him: "...flesh and blood hath not revealed it to you, but my father which is in heaven." Mt 16:17(KJV). Then only moments later this same Peter said something else to Jesus and this was Jesus response to him: "Get thee behind me Satan...for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men." Mt 16:23(KJV)

Perhaps it could be better understood why i'd gone the extra mile to reel out Peter's CV beforehand, because it was imperative that it's made very clear who Jesus made that statement to was the same Peter. For it didn't matter that it's his disciple, with all those stated credentials, who he just acknowledged spake something that was not revealed to him by the flesh but of the Spirit that just said that, all that mattered to Jesus was that the words that came out of his mouth on that occasion was'nt of God but of the flesh, hence his response. Now how many people of today's church would've been able to do that? For up till now i don't think most of them've been able to find any fault in what Peter the apostle of Jesus said there? It takes a rare level of the Spirit to be able to do what Jesus did on that occasion and distinguish the things that be of God from those of the flesh, from the words of such an apostle.Hence Jesus proved that in being a true apostle don't mean that all one words are inspired of God.

jesusjnr:
I very well know that i'm saying this concerning an apostle of christ who is highly respected by many in today's church, especially because of his teachings which is widely seen as the rulebook governing the church, and to some extent even more than the teachings of Jesus who himself founded the church. So i'm not oblivious to the fact that i am moving against the tide here, speaking of the mistakes of someone who many of the church view as faultless and consequently that his teachings were all inspired by the Holy Spirit, without a single mistake. But perhaps i can take solace in the fact the Lord deemed it needful to put "a thorn in his flesh" at some point etc., to prove that though Paul was truly his apostle, that he wasn't perfect and could also make mistakes, including in his teachings. So thank God for Apostle Paul, that the Lord is not like men who're not able to detect such imperfections and faults in such ones, but would praise them to their own destruction and downfall. Thank God also that so am i!

I pity you. When you think you're too intelligent, this is how you curse yourself. 2 Timothy 3:16,17 Go read and pray and fast for forgiveness of your madness

TruthHurts100:



I pity you. When you think you're too intelligent, this is how you curse yourself. 2 Timothy 3:16,17 Go read and pray and fast for forgiveness of your madness

Are you worried for me? Then you are extremely ignorant of the truth mr truthhurts, hence your soul is truly in danger of destruction. I'm perfectly fine as God is with me as we speak, i truly wish you could hear the voice of His Spirit right now speaking thru me, so the person you should be worried about is yourself who is deceiving himself that he truly knows the truth!

jesusjnr:
Are you worried for me? Then you are extremely ignorant of the truth mr truthhurts, hence your soul is truly in danger of destruction. I'm perfectly fine as God is with me as we speak, i truly wish you could hear the voice of His Spirit right now speaking thru me, so the person you should be worried about is yourself who is deceiving himself that he truly knows the truth!

LOL..... Who's spirit is speaking through you? Even Satan comes out like the angel of Light. If you are saying that same holy spirit God used to inspire Paul to write the Bible is wrong, then you must be very mad.

You need help.

TruthHurts100:


LOL..... Who's spirit is speaking through you? Even Satan comes out like the angel of Light. If you are saying that same holy spirit God used to inspire Paul to write the Bible is wrong, then you must be very mad.

You need help.

Please you can say anything against me but remember what Jesus said about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit! So even if you're ignorant of the truth, just restrict the expression of that your ignorance to me as a person, and do not bring the Holy Spirit into the matter. If it's because i mentioned him, forgive me for i do not wish such a repercussion on anyone. Just wanted to let you know that he's truly with me but since you are not able to handle that information, forget about that part of what i said.

jesusjnr:
Please you can say anything against me but remember what Jesus said about blasphemy against the Holy Spirit! So even if you're ignorant of the truth, just restrict the expression of that your ignorance to me as a person, and do not bring the Holy Spirit into the matter. If it's because i mentioned him, forgive me for i do not wish such a repercussion on anyone. Just wanted to let you know that he's truly with me but since you are not able to handle that information, forget about that part of what i said.

LOL, when you wake up, come back and talk. So, you agree that I understand the holy spirit better than you and I know how it works. And I can't be stupid enough to sin against it.

Tell me, What is the Holy Spirit? Cos, I can see you're using Him, he for the holy spirit.

Jesus said: "Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come." Mt 12:31-32(KJV).

MISTAKE NO. 2

---

"Wives, submit
yourselves unto your
own husbands, as
unto the Lord. For the husband is
the head of the wife,
even as Christ is the
head of the church:
and he is the saviour
of the body. Therefore as the
church is subject
unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in
every thing. Husbands, love your
wives, even as
Christ also loved the
church...let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife sees that she reverences the husband." Eph 5:22-33(KJV). This is yet another mistake of Paul's teachings that also stems from his chauvinistic mindset and not from God, for while the woman is told to submit herself to her husband and also to reverence him, the man's merely instructed to love his wife. So while man gets the easy part as usual, the woman gets the hardest part, for if men are giving same as the women and also told to submit himself to his wife, it wouldn't have been more appropriate in Paul's sight!

Except he was suggesting that the woman ought not love the man also but to hate him, then it would have been better even though not perfect. But then if the woman was also meant to love the husband but the husband not meant to submit himself to the wife, then that would prove beyond any possible doubt that there was clearly an all out agenda against the women. For how can the woman be meant to do everything inclusive of the man's part but the men just supposed to "love your wives", and it would yet be a justifiable saying concerning the women. However in spite of the glaring error of that saying shown to that extent, this saying of Paul is yet being observed by most of those of today's church as the word of God.

Now Paul tried very hard to justify that saying by using the illustration of Jesus and his church, with Jesus being the bridegroom(husband) and the church being his bride(wife), however i think that it was a huge disservice and an insult to the person of Jesus, as Jesus was the perfect bridegroom to his church and not any other random man that should be used to illustrate men who are usually very egoistic and evil their ways. Moreover even though Jesus was the lord, master, and bridegroom of the church, he didn't exercise authority and dominion over his bride as men usually do, but humbled himself and served and ministered unto her, such as was observed when he bent down washed the feet of his disciples. Therefore how many men would do that to their wives? So if Jesus and his relationship with his bride, the church, is going to be used as an illustration of a husband and his wife, it should only be in that respect, even that they ought to love, serve, respect, and submit to one another, and not otherwise!

And even though it is an exception in the church, there are those who are already also practising and preaching this very message instead of that saying of Paul, such as the officiating minister of a church wedding i attended some years back, who from his marital experience said that he would not expect something from his wife that he himself had not given to her. Therefore that for instance if he wanted his wife to submit herself to him, that he would first submit himself to his wife , for that was a strategy that he had proven to work for him in his marriage after all else failed inclusive of that Paul's saying. Hence he urged the bridegroom to do the same and submit himself to the wife and that the wife should also submit herself to him, and do the same in the respect of loving each other and every other thing they would expect from the other half. For respect, submission, love, sacrifice etc., is reciprocal, as that principle also applies in a marriage.

TruthHurts100:
I pity you.
When you think you're too intelligent, this is how you curse yourself. 2 Timothy 3:16,17
Go read and pray and fast for forgiveness of your madness

"Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers,
because you know that we who teach will be judged more severely than others."
- James 3:1

Especially when "teaching" what you dont have an idea and informed knowledge about, the koboko will more.
Truth really hurts 100%.

TruthHurts100:
LOL..... Who's spirit is speaking through you?
Even Satan comes out like the angel of Light.
If you are saying that same holy spirit God used to inspire Paul to write the Bible is wrong, then you must be very mad.

You need help.

Makes me remember, the African proverb about the hunter, the herding or hunting dog and the whistle.
If any man have ears to hear, let him hear!

MuttleyLaff:
"Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers,
because you know that we who teach will be judged more severely than others."
- James 3:1

Especially when "teaching" what you dont have an idea and informed knowledge about, the koboko will more.
Truth really hurts 100%.

Makes me remember, the African proverb about the hunter, the herding or hunting dog and the whistle.
If any man have ears to hear, let him hear!

Even the pharisees thought the same about Jesus when he came and identified the imperfections in their most revered law that they wanted to even destroy him for it. So this won't be the first time when the ignorants and those who are blind to the truth would see themselves as the otherwise but view those see and know the truth as being ignorant and blind. Ignorance and blindness means different things to different folks. So enjoy yourselves with what you view as knowledge and the truth, for it's allowed!

jesusjnr:
Even the pharisees thought the same about Jesus when he came and identified the imperfections in their most revered law that they wanted to even destroy him for it. So this won't be the first time when the ignorants and those who are blind to the truth would see themselves as the otherwise but view those see and know the truth as being ignorant and blind. Ignorance and blindness means different things to different folks. So enjoy yourselves with what you view as knowledge and the truth, for it's allowed!

"He (i.e. Paul) 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"
- 2 Peter 3:16

Even when no specific moniker is mentioned, a truthful post will prick a guilty conscience, every time enough, to respond to it!

I need say no more because you're smart enough to know, that a word to the wise is sufficient

MuttleyLaff:

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"
- 2 Peter 3:16

As much as i really respect Peter even much more than Paul, despite him being an unlearned man in the world sense, and that saying of his could cause me to have a rethink, not because of the destructive aspect but that this came from one who learnt from Jesus' feet, i also know that he'd also make a mistake in his judgment and words as Jesus himself showed in an instance i earlier pointed out when i distinguished the difference between Jesus and men. I can see that you mean well and not as some others here, for i can detect these things even though we may not agree, i want you to know it's ok to disagree on some, for even Paul himself also criticized Peter, despite Peter being an apostle long before him, and appointed leader of the church by Jesus. So it's ok!

jesusjnr:
As much as i really respect Peter even much more than Paul, despite him being an unlearned man in the world sense, and that saying of his could cause me to have a rethink, not because of the destructive aspect but that this came from one who learnt from Jesus' feet, i also know that he'd also make a mistake in his judgment and words as Jesus himself showed in an instance i earlier pointed out when i distinguished the difference between Jesus and men.

JJ, I accept your right or choice in respecting Peter over Paul,
however there really isn't a need to publicly make that known.

If left to Peter, you and I will be left languishing as a bloody gentile not to be publicly associated or socialised with.

Everybody have distinctive ways of writing, have distinctive styles in writing.
You have, I have and Paul is no different.
Paul is not misogynistic, where would he have learned that from.
Certainly not from Jesus nor not from the Holy Spirit.
If needed to, I can explain all those verses Paul is wrongly accused of about his stance on women.

jesusjnr:
As I can see that you mean well and not as some others here, for i can detect these things even though we may not agree, i want you to know it's ok to disagree on some, for even Paul himself also criticized Peter, despite Peter being an apostle long before him, and appointed leader of the church by Jesus. So it's ok!

You do know why
and what specifically Paul criticised Peter about?
Don't you?

MuttleyLaff:
If left to Peter, you and I will be left languishing as a bloody gentile not to be publicly associated or socialised with.

As you can see the difference between me and you, if i make a mistake i own up to it even if it gives you the opportunity to gloat. Maybe that's why we are on different pages concerning Paul's many mistakes in his writing for you feel to proud to admit your mistakes. I asked you to take back what you said erroneosly concerning Peter, or if not take off my own part because you are alone on that matter, you refused to do both, so i taken it off myself. And that's it for my exchanges with you as far as this matter's concerned. Peace!

MuttleyLaff:
If left to Peter, you and I will be left languishing as a bloody gentile not to be publicly associated or socialised with.
You do know why
and what specifically Paul criticised Peter about?
Don't you?

I know that there're different levels of spiritual understanding, so i appreciate the fact that you not able to grasp this yet, but what i'm about here is not subject to opinions as yours for it's already past that stage. Point of correction though that Paul brought the gospel to us, for that's so untrue. It seems you're one of those who's been deceived by the biblical coverage of his own experience, for the first ever converted gentile was the centurion who Jesus had sent Peter to meet for that purpose. And you also should know about John, Barnabas, Apollos, Philip etc. significant roles in that despite not getting as much coverage, it didn't mean any less. It seems sentimental to think it's okay for Paul to do it to Peter, but not for it to be done to him.

jesusjnr:
I know that there're different levels of spiritual understanding,
so i appreciate the fact that you not able to grasp this yet, but what i'm about here is not subject to opinions as yours for it's already past that stage.

What a pitiful comment to make
You need deliverance from your ego and self delusion

jesusjnr:
Point of correction though that Paul brought the gospel to us, for that's so untrue. It seems you're one of those who's been deceived by the biblical coverage of his own experience, for the first ever converted gentile was the centurion who Jesus had sent Peter to meet for that purpose. And you also should know about John, Barnabas, Apollos, Philip etc. significant roles in that despite not getting as much coverage, it didn't mean any less. It seems sentimental to think it's okay for Paul to do it to Peter, but not for it to be done to him.

You are going off on a tangent, doing a straw man and hopelessly just being unnecessarily defensive.

Please quote where I typed that Paul brought the gospel to us and if you are unable to, which I know you cant, then retract your remark and tender apologies.

Please re-read slowly and carefully again what I wrote about Peter and socialising with gentiles etcetera and then respond to my question about what was Paul criticised Peter over

MuttleyLaff:
If left to Peter, you and I will be left languishing as a bloody gentile not to be publicly associated or socialised with.

Sorry i thought you insinuated that, since were're talking Paul, so i'll remove Paul from the equation, but still maintain that your statement there about Peter's so not true and you can go back to my response to get my reason, for Peter broke that jinx even to the infuriation of his fellow Jews, hence i think you ought to take back that statement concerning him and give credit to whom it's due. If not just take out my part from it for i'm not with you on that. However despite that Peter's ahead of Paul in my scale, he's not my favorite, for my favorites are John and Stephen, and the reason is because they remind more about my master Jesus than the rest! But you don't need to tell me about your own favorite for it's well obvious. But i have no apologies, for it's a matter of eternal life and death, so do not waste time trying to stop me.

MuttleyLaff:
What a pitiful comment to make
You need deliverance from your ego and self delusion

Sorry i missed this part. So you could possibly think that someone is egoistic and yet you're going out of your way to defend someone who was clearly egoistic in a sense, from being tagged such. I'm beginning to be convinced that this your passionate defence of Paul and his sayings is purely sentimental and nothing else. For you already tried to dissuade me from going public with my criticism of Paul's sayings, yet you at the same time endorse his public criticism of Peter. Hence what i said on that occasion stands for you've proven my judgment right, or do you think what i'm talking about is intellectual, no my friend it' spiritual for unless God gives you such knowledge you won't have it. So if you like be claiming that you know so much and don't humble yourself as a little child so that God can give this knowledge which he hides from the wise and the prudent.

jesusjnr:
Sorry i thought you insinuated that, since were're talking Paul...

I am glad you admit to your own goal.
Imagine, if you are already misunderstanding Paul, who and what am I in the scheme of things

jesusjnr:
so i'll remove Paul from the equation, but still maintain that your statement there about Peter's so not true and you can go back to my response to get my reason, for Peter broke that jinx even to the infuriation of his fellow Jews, hence i think you ought to take back that statement concerning him and give credit to whom it's due. If not just take out my part from it for i'm not with you on that.

What statement exactly are you asking me to take back concerning Peter?

Do you know who exactly the credit goes to, for Peter being persuaded even though he still refused to play ball when advanced warned in a dream not to be prejudiced?

Do you know what event made the difference?

jesusjnr:
However despite that Peter's ahead of Paul in my scale, he's not my favorite, for my favorites are John and Stephen, and the reason is because they remind more about my master Jesus than the rest!

Your prerogative

jesusjnr:
But you don't need to tell me about your own favorite for it's well obvious. But i have no apologies, for it's a matter of eternal life and death, so do not waste time trying to stop me.

Funnily enough, now that you brought up mentioning favourites, come to think of, I never thought any or saw any of them in that way.

By the way, asides matter of eternal life and death, you will make account for every word

jesusjnr:
Sorry i missed this part. So you could possibly think that someone is egoistic and yet you're going out of your way to defend someone who was clearly egoistic in a sense, from being tagged such. I'm beginning to be convinced that this your passionate defence of Paul and his sayings is purely sentimental and nothing else. For you already tried to dissuade me from going public with my criticism of Paul's sayings, yet you at the same time endorse his public criticism of Peter. Hence what i said on that occasion stands for you've proven my judgment right, or do you think what i'm talking about is intellectual, no my friend it' spiritual for unless God gives you such knowledge you won't have it. So if you like be claiming that you know so much and don't humble yourself as a little child so that God can give this knowledge which he hides from the wise and the prudent.

" know that there're different levels of spiritual understanding,
so i appreciate the fact that you not able to grasp this yet, but what i'm about here is not subject to opinions as yours for it's already past that stage"
- by jesusjnr(m): 12:31pm

I see ego and self delusion written all over the above quote extract.
I also see you make the habit of going off tangent and doing strawmans

I defend anyone, speak up for anyone and speak out at injustice and against slander at anyone or wherever I see it

MuttleyLaff:
If left to Peter, you and I will be left languishing as a bloody gentile not to be publicly associated or socialised with.

As you can see the difference between me and you, if i make a mistake i own up to it even if it gives you the opportunity to gloat. Maybe that's why we are on different pages concerning Paul's many mistakes in his writing for you feel to proud to admit your mistakes. I asked you to take back what you said erroneosly concerning Peter, or if not take off my own part because you are alone on that matter, you refused to do both, so i taken it off myself. And i'm done with you as far as this matter's concerned. Peace!

jesusjnr:
As you can see the difference between me and you, if i make a mistake i own up to it even if it gives you the opportunity to gloat. Maybe that's why we are on different pages concerning Paul's many mistakes in his writing for you feel to proud to admit your mistakes. I asked you to take back what you said erroneosly concerning Peter, or if not take off my own part because you are alone on that matter, you refused to do both, so i taken it off myself. And i'm done with you as far as this matter's concerned. Peace!

You only admitted making a mistake, because you were caught and found out.

I asked you:
What statement exactly are you asking me to take back concerning Peter?

Instead of you repeating word for word what you're accusing me off, you wouldn't, you rather run away, as your lot usually does, when found out or caught standing on shaky grounds