Paul was the first Humanist

[Excaliburton]

Wrong again Einstein. Herod was not allowed, but other members of his "family" were. And Paul's mother was one of them that was...not only that!, but she and her husband (a Roman) insisted that Saul be schooled and taught by the best, and learn Judeasm on all fronts...they spared nothing for Saul. Truly grand parents. And that, is how he became a Pharasee. Oh, there is something wrong with that picture, now isn't there...not if he was allowed to be one by birth right...and he was in fact one, so your arguments about his birth right are flawed.

Oh, sorry. Bruce L. Shelley. Title of book "Church History in plain language" is one.

Yeah, you gather correctly. I take particular issue with people coming here claiming to be so smart that the rest of us are like some ant colony.

I may sound stupid to the likes of you...until I'm not.

And I assure you, I am not stupid...neither are the rest of us.

Look at it this way (if you can). Let's say you are fifty years old, with oh 45 years of bible training under your belt. That is quite a lot. But considering there are over 500 Bible believing Christians here with say an average of 10 years of bible training under their belts, or even 2 years...that puts you in a position of overwhelming minority (if you wished to pit your knowledge against all of theirs)...because each one of them has learned something the others haven't, but combined, why that is almost 2000 years to your 45!

I believe that is something worth considering. See, I learn something new everyday (even from you). You should consider trying to learn something new as well, from us.

Is CR a hostile place? Hostile is as hostile does. We dialogue here. We don't 'disembowel'.

Hat in hand goes much farther than chip on shoulder...

See you around.

v/r

Q

I am glad you have learned some things from me, and I am hoping to learn some things from you, specifically at this point, I am trying to learn of your sources that Paul had a Herodian/Edomite [read as:Hittite] mother. I do agree with you that Paul's mother was a Herodianess.

The emotional tone of my posts has been meticulously neutral and devoid of condescending or abusive or sarcastic or defensive language as I have been a moderator on other forums and must be an example to others.

But please support your claims in this statement of yours:

Wrong again Einstein. Herod was not allowed, but other members of his "family" were. And Paul's mother was one of them that was...not only that!, but she and her husband (a Roman) insisted that Saul be schooled and taught by the best, and learn Judeasm on all fronts...they spared nothing for Saul. Truly grand parents. And that, is how he became a Pharasee. Oh, there is something wrong with that picture, now isn't there...not if he was allowed to be one by birth right...and he was in fact one, so your arguements about his birth right are flawed.

Or are you saying that all of the above is documented in this Bruce Shelley book? I may order this book if you are sure it asserts Paul's mother was an Herodianess.

Oh, sorry. Bruce L. Shelley. Title of book "Church History in plain language" is one.

Thank you!

 

[Quahom1]

I am glad you have learned some things from me, and I am hoping to learn some things from you, specifically at this point, I am trying to learn of your sources that Paul had a Herodian/Edomite [read as:Hittite] mother. I do agree with you that Paul's mother was a Herodianess.

The emotional tone of my posts has been meticulously neutral and devoid of condescending or abusive or sarcastic or defensive language as I have been a moderator on other forums and must be an example to others.

But please support your claims in this statement of yours:



Or are you saying that all of the above is documented in this Bruce Shelley book? I may order this book if you are sure it asserts Paul's mother was an Herodianess.



Thank you!

Go find it on the web, or check into the local library, as I am not yours. I don't have to support anything...you have to prove me wrong...that is the way it goes. king's rook, to king's bishop three...check.

 

[Excaliburton]

Go find it on the web, or check into the local library, as I am not yours. I don't have to support anything...you have to prove me wrong...that is the way it goes. king's rook, to king's bishop three...check.

Actually I agree with what you're saying. . . that Paul had Edomite roots, but most mainstream Christians object to such an idea.

Realize that if Paul was part Edomite, that means he was part Hittite and part Hivite, the tribes the Israelites were commanded to destroy lest they be infected with their pagan idolatry.

 

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Seattlegal!

Um, wasn't Matthias the one chosen to take Judas Iscariot's place? (Acts 1) Stephen was one of seven appointed to oversee the distribution of food. (Acts 6)

I suppose, it has been a long time, I can make mistakes. The ol' memory isn't what it used to be. The point remains, a "replacement" for Judas was chosen. (still find it interesting...which came first, the collection of Jesus disciples, or the pagan coven?)

 

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Excaliburton!

Realize that if Paul was part Edomite, that means he was part Hittite and part Hivite, the tribes the Israelites were commanded to destroy lest they be infected with their pagan idolatry.

Just curious, do you believe we all are guilty of our father's crimes?

Seems to me the curse of the Ten Commandments was on those who hated G-d. For those who love G-d, that curse is removed, and blessings are showered. Are you trying to say there were, and are, those for whom there is no hope for redemption? Under any circumstances?

In other words, there is only one path up the mountain, and you know for a guaranteed fact you are on it, and anyone else is in deep doo-doo?

Just curious...

 

[Excaliburton]

Kindest Regards, Excaliburton!

Just curious, do you believe we all are guilty of our father's crimes?

Seems to me the curse of the Ten Commandments was on those who hated G-d. For those who love G-d, that curse is removed, and blessings are showered. Are you trying to say there were, and are, those for whom there is no hope for redemption? Under any circumstances?

In other words, there is only one path up the mountain, and you know for a guaranteed fact you are on it, and anyone else is in deep doo-doo?

Just curious...

Hittites and Hivites were among the 7 OT Canaanite tribes with whom Israel was commanded to avoid any covenant forever, and I guess you can interpret that to mean they are not of God and were never to be allowed to mix and mingle with the Israelites. Nehemiah and Ezra confirm this when they commanded the Israelites to divorce their strange wives and strange children.

 

[Excaliburton]

Like I said, you might want to contemplate the entire chapter that Peter has written, and carefully consider the message contained therein.

That sounds nebulous. If you do not make a point, then how can it be refuted or even discussed? With all due respect, that seems evasive.

I would welcome hearing specific talking points that affirm that 2 Peter supports that Paul was considered to be an apostle by Peter (or at least by the author of 2 Peter since many scholars view the book as a pseudograph).

 

[Excaliburton]

Kindest Regards, Excaliburton!

Just curious, do you believe we all are guilty of our father's crimes?

Seems to me the curse of the Ten Commandments was on those who hated G-d. For those who love G-d, that curse is removed, and blessings are showered. Are you trying to say there were, and are, those for whom there is no hope for redemption? Under any circumstances?

In other words, there is only one path up the mountain, and you know for a guaranteed fact you are on it, and anyone else is in deep doo-doo?

Just curious...

I cannot find anything in the OT to support a case that the 7 accursed Canaanite tribes or their seed were eligible for any kind of redemption. YHWH had ordered Israel to destroy them all. And the Hittite and Hivites that comprised Edom were especially singled out for destruction.

Oba 1:18 And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be [any] remaining of the house of Esau; for the LORD hath spoken [it].