Meat It's Paul...is it 'Scripture'?

[Mark C]

Paul says it outright. He is NOT speaking for YHVH, he speaks for himself when he says he wishes all men were celibate. It's not a commandment. (And it's not for me, BTW.)

It's his opinion, he says so.

A while back, in a thread having to do with studying His Instruction ['torah'] -- which I'm for, BTW -- I noted Paul's self-described opinion on celibacy, and made what I thought was the obvious quip that it HAD to be his personal opinion, because, as a commandment, it would conflict with essentially the first commandment in the Book. ('Be fruitful and multiply'. Kinda hard solo.)

But "is it Scripture!!!!" was the non-sequitur refrain. So, given that some in what I must refer to as "xtianity" [where 'scripture' seems to mean whatever fills the 501c(3) coffers this week] treat even hideous mis-translations of Paul as superior even to the Words in Red...

I offer this:
(it came to me while preparing for this afternoon's "Come out of her, My people" Show)

From his first letter to the Corinthians, chapter 14:34-35

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the [Written Torah] law.

Now, I realize these verses won't even surprise most here. But what I suggest is a bit of "compare and contrast."

Why do the same [licensed, usually!] 'churches' that seem to just worship every word of Paul -- when he appears to contradict the Written Scripture elsewhere, and the instruction of the Author and Messiah to boot -- sometimes just plain ignore what he says even He says? If they don't like it...

PS> Ironically, Paul himself answers that question, in the very next couple of verses. But those who claim to be able to re-Write what He said, because they know better [and hint - it isn't JUST polygyny and marriage in general... ] aren't about to read that either.

Is it still Scripture?

 

[MeganC]

My own opinion is Paul was a closeted homosexual who correctly and admirably chose celibacy over sin.

His personal comments make sense when you look at him that way.

 

[Michael Moon]

Is it still Scripture?

I tend to base my idea of what "scripture" is on the three divisions in Ezekial 7:26-27.

1. The Law (Torah, God's written instructions). I view the Torah (and by extension: Yeshua's words) as comprising this category of "scripture".

2. The Prophets. All of the "major" and "minor" prophets, and John. I also believe prophecy continues today, and so I have no problem with the idea of another prophetic writing, as long as it adheres to Torah.

3. The Writings of the Elders. I think the books of wisdom, history, poetry, and basically any letter in the new testament fall under this category. So I take Paul's writings as wisdom given to us by an elder. I also believe this category of "scripture" continues today, we just fail to write things down.

I don't believe adding to "scripture" is a bad thing. We continue to give each other wisdom and counsel. We continue to dream dreams and see visions. But in order for something to be "scripture" it cannot go against Torah.

Hope that made some sense.

My own opinion is Paul was a closeted homosexual who correctly and admirably chose celibacy over sin.

I find this idea very interesting.

 

[aineo]

My own opinion is Paul was a closeted homosexual who correctly and admirably chose celibacy over sin.

His personal comments make sense when you look at him that way.

What do you base this on? I’ve also heard others say he was estranged from his wife, but it all seems like conjecture to me. Not intending to debate or challenge this. I’m just curious how you developed your opinion.

 

[Mark C]

My own opinion is Paul was a closeted homosexual... make sense when you look at him that way.

What makes at least as much sense was that he gave his wife a 'get' knowing that he would probably leave her a widow anyway, and headed out alone.

But none of that was the intended 'meat' in this thread. Neither was re-hashing [again] what is or isn't 'scripture'.

It was intended to be about "picking and choosing."

...especially by a 'whore church' who calls it "all scripture" -- except when they say it isn't.

 

[FollowingHim]

From his first letter to the Corinthians, chapter 14:34-35

"Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the [Written Torah] law.

Now, I realize these verses won't even surprise most here. But what I suggest is a bit of "compare and contrast."

Why do the same [licensed, usually!] 'churches' that seem to just worship every word of Paul -- when he appears to contradict the Written Scripture elsewhere, and the instruction of the Author and Messiah to boot -- sometimes just plain ignore what he says even He says? If they don't like it...

You're dead right about the hypocrisy.

 

[Michael Moon]

But none of that was the intended 'meat' in this thread. Neither was re-hashing [again] what is or isn't 'scripture'.

It was intended to be about "picking and choosing."

I apologize if I got off-topic.

 

[phaedrus]

My own opinion is Paul was a closeted homosexual who correctly and admirably chose celibacy over sin.

His personal comments make sense when you look at him that way.

I've wondered the same thing.

 

[MeganC]

What do you base this on? I’ve also heard others say he was estranged from his wife, but it all seems like conjecture to me. Not intending to debate or challenge this. I’m just curious how you developed your opinion.

I grew up in California and knew a lot of openly gay people. They all had issues about sex. Paul clearly had issues of his own.

 

[frederick]

My own opinion is Paul was a closeted homosexual who correctly and admirably chose celibacy over sin.

His personal comments make sense when you look at him that way.

I would disagree because the evidence suggests otherwise. Paul wrote of his personal history saying, For we are the circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and boast in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh, although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless ( Phil. 3:3-6). "Blameless" is a bold claim to make when the Law plainly condemns the homosexual!

If he ever had been homosexual (in desire or practice), and there is no evidence to support such a claim, he had become a victor over such sin. Paul himself wrote; Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10).

To bear false witness against (Ex. 20:16) or speak evil of another (James 4:11) breaks God's commandments.
Proverbs 17:15 He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous, Both of them alike are an abomination to Yahweh.

 

[frederick]

Is it still Scripture?

Jesus chose Peter and appointed him an apostle (Mark 3:14-16; 2 Peter 1:1). Peter wrote, And be deeming the patience of our Lord salvation, according as our beloved brother Paul also writes to you, according to the wisdom given to him, as also in all the epistles, speaking in them concerning these things, in which are some things hard to apprehend, which the unlearned and unstable are twisting, as the rest of the scriptures also, to their own destruction. You, then, beloved, knowing this before, be on your guard lest, being led away with the deception of the dissolute, you should be falling from your own steadfastness. Yet be growing in grace and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To Him be glory now, as well as for the day of the eon. Amen! (CVNT)

Just because Paul wrote some things hard to apprehend doesn't mean they are not scripture. The unlearned and unstable twist Paul's writing just as much as the rest of the scriptures.

Peter refers to Paul as a beloved brother, writing according to the wisdom given to him, and ascribing to Paul's epistles the same authority as the rest of the scriptures. Peter wrote warning to be on your guard lest, being led away with the deception of the dissolute, you should be falling from your own steadfastness.

Brethren, heed the warning to be on guard, believe Peter regarding Paul rather than the unlearned and unstable who twist Paul's writings and the rest of the scriptures to their own destruction, and avoid being led away with the deception of the dissolute. Shalom

 

[Old Paths Gardener]

Paul also said that 'the things I speak are the commands of Christ' and 'follow me as I follow Christ' ... seems to fit with what some of you have already said.

 

[James Pease]

I would disagree because the evidence suggests otherwise. Paul wrote of his personal history saying, For we are the circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and boast in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh, although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless ( Phil. 3:3-6). "Blameless" is a bold claim to make when the Law plainly condemns the homosexual!

If he ever had been homosexual (in desire or practice), and there is no evidence to support such a claim, he had become a victor over such sin. Paul himself wrote; Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10).

To bear false witness against (Ex. 20:16) or speak evil of another (James 4:11) breaks God's commandments.
Proverbs 17:15 He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous, Both of them alike are an abomination to Yahweh.

You beat me to it! This exact thing came to mind!

 

[James Pease]

Paul also said that 'the things I speak are the commands of Christ' and 'follow me as I follow Christ' ... seems to fit with what some of you have already said.

I have actually used this a lot in conversation. When discussing keeping the Torah I point out to people the Paul said to follow him as he follows Christ. Interestingly enough they both kept the Torah, and Paul specifically makes a statement to show he keeps the law in Acts.

 

[MeganC]

I would disagree because the evidence suggests otherwise. Paul wrote of his personal history saying, For we are the circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God and boast in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh, although I myself might have confidence even in the flesh. If anyone else has a mind to put confidence in the flesh, I far more: circumcised the eighth day, of the nation of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the Law, a Pharisee; as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless ( Phil. 3:3-6). "Blameless" is a bold claim to make when the Law plainly condemns the homosexual!

If he ever had been homosexual (in desire or practice), and there is no evidence to support such a claim, he had become a victor over such sin. Paul himself wrote; Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-10).

To bear false witness against (Ex. 20:16) or speak evil of another (James 4:11) breaks God's commandments.
Proverbs 17:15 He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous, Both of them alike are an abomination to Yahweh.

"So to keep me from becoming conceited because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me, to keep me from becoming conceited."

- The Apostle Paul, 2 Corinthians 12:7

 

[The Revolting Man]

I have actually used this a lot in conversation. When discussing keeping the Torah I point out to people the Paul said to follow him as he follows Christ. Interestingly enough they both kept the Torah, and Paul specifically makes a statement to show he keeps the law in Acts.

Just to keep the peace, THIS IS NOT PROSELYTIZING FOR TORAH KEEPING! It’s just a place where the two topics legitimately intersect.

 

[James Pease]

Just to keep the peace, THIS IS NOT PROSELYTIZING FOR TORAH KEEPING! It’s just a place where the two topics legitimately intersect.

Thanks! You are correct!

 

[frederick]

"So to keep me from becoming conceited because of the surpassing greatness of the revelations, a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan to harass me, to keep me from becoming conceited."

- The Apostle Paul, 2 Corinthians 12:7

I might be missing something in the passage so I checked the Greek text and note homosexuality isn't mentioned. Speculation isn't a good study methodology.

 

[PeteR]

I noted Paul's self-described opinion on celibacy, and made what I thought was the obvious quip that it HAD to be his personal opinion, because, as a commandment, it would conflict with essentially the first commandment in the Book. ('Be fruitful and multiply'. Kinda hard solo.)

I've often wondered this and recently had some friends refer to Paul's advice re celibacy as an indicator of his illegitimacy. When I read your above quoted comment a thought hit me: Was not Jeremiah called to celibacy for the sake of his message and journey?

1¶The word of the LORD also came to me saying,
2“You shall not take a wife for yourself nor have sons or daughters in this place.”

Is it possible Paul's calling was similar? Or, at the least, he recognizes with the persecution he and others are enduring, they have support in Jeremiah to NOT marry in those circumstances...

Minimally, we see Yah commanding Jeremiah to NOT be fruitful and multiply...

 

[James Pease]

I've often wondered this and recently had some friends refer to Paul's advice re celibacy as an indicator of his illegitimacy. When I read your above quoted comment a thought hit me: Was not Jeremiah called to celibacy for the sake of his message and journey?

1¶The word of the LORD also came to me saying,
2“You shall not take a wife for yourself nor have sons or daughters in this place.”

Is it possible Paul's calling was similar? Or, at the least, he recognizes with the persecution he and others are enduring, they have support in Jeremiah to NOT marry in those circumstances...

Minimally, we see Yah commanding Jeremiah to NOT be fruitful and multiply...

It even brings to mind how Moses may have sent a wife away from possible dangers, and have her returned upon the news of safety. The Lord said I will show Paul how much he much suffer for my name. I believe Paul new ahead of time many of the things that would come upon him.