In any case, to call Paul a false teacher misses the point.
To be clear, agreed. I amended my comment as well because I also don’t think everything Paul wrote is taught falsely, just parts, and some of that varies by teacher. Snip snip, tweak tweak. Those little pieces have a huge impact, however.
It’s kinda done the same way [they] taught us the constitution. “Oh here’s a phrase for you to misconstrue that isn’t there”, “allow me to change the common understanding of this word’s meaning”, “let’s ignore this bit over here”, “here’s an unclear translation for you”, etc.
No disagreement with anything I know that Paul wrote, though. This is still why I wrote that nobody should take either my word, nor their church’s on these matters, but test things for themself. For some things, having a good Strong’s concordance is necessary, and discernment always.
To be clear, the above comment by me was in response to a former reply, that labelled Paul as a false teacher.
As is very often the case, there is some truth in any of the viewpoints that emerge. The challenge is to draw on those varied perspectives to increase the 'resolution' of the understanding, as it were. God Bless you, AE
No worries, with the downdoots on that first Paul comment, I just couldn’t tell if I worded my own comment poorly or not (and initially did), but yes I agree.
To be clear, agreed. I amended my comment as well because I also don’t think everything Paul wrote is taught falsely, just parts, and some of that varies by teacher. Snip snip, tweak tweak. Those little pieces have a huge impact, however.
It’s kinda done the same way [they] taught us the constitution. “Oh here’s a phrase for you to misconstrue that isn’t there”, “allow me to change the common understanding of this word’s meaning”, “let’s ignore this bit over here”, “here’s an unclear translation for you”, etc.
No disagreement with anything I know that Paul wrote, though. This is still why I wrote that nobody should take either my word, nor their church’s on these matters, but test things for themself. For some things, having a good Strong’s concordance is necessary, and discernment always.
To be clear, the above comment by me was in response to a former reply, that labelled Paul as a false teacher.
As is very often the case, there is some truth in any of the viewpoints that emerge. The challenge is to draw on those varied perspectives to increase the 'resolution' of the understanding, as it were. God Bless you, AE
No worries, with the downdoots on that first Paul comment, I just couldn’t tell if I worded my own comment poorly or not (and initially did), but yes I agree.