# Question, do ya'll believe in Saint Paul the Apostle



## j_seph (Sep 9, 2019)

Curious


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2019)

Are you asking if we/I believe Paul was a real person?
Or
If that same Paul was an Apostle and a Saint?

Real person, yes.


----------



## j_seph (Sep 9, 2019)

bullethead said:


> Are you asking if we/I believe Paul was a real person?
> Or
> If that same Paul was an Apostle and a Saint?
> 
> Real person, yes.


If he was a real person. Just curious of y'alls take on him as to why he made a complete opposite change in his life. From condemning and murdering Christians to leading others to Christ.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 9, 2019)

was he a real person?  check

was he ordained by God to carry the message of salvation to the gentiles?  check


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2019)

j_seph said:


> If he was a real person. Just curious of y'alls take on him as to why he made a complete opposite change in his life. From condemning and murdering Christians to leading others to Christ.


He started his own religion and had to sell the part.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 9, 2019)

He was elected by God. He got a personal invite. An offer he couldn't refuse!


----------



## j_seph (Sep 9, 2019)

jollyroger said:


> I have no reason to doubt his existence.
> 
> Just out of curiosity, why do you ask?


I do not doubt his existence either. Just seems to me that it would be sort of hard to persecute and kill Christians, to hunt them down. Then become one yourself without an intervention as he had on the Road to Damascus. Why would someone who opposed Christians turn and become one himself if there was no intervention with Jesus Christ?


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2019)

j_seph said:


> I do not doubt his existence either. Just seems to me that it would be sort of hard to persecute and kill Christians, to hunt them down. Then become one yourself without an intervention as he had on the Road to Damascus. Why would someone who opposed Christians turn and become one himself if there was no intervention with Jesus Christ?


Paul was a founder, not a convert.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2019)

https://www.ancient.eu/Paul_the_Apostle/


----------



## Cmp1 (Sep 9, 2019)

Real person,,,,yes 

Apostle and Saint,,,,yes


----------



## j_seph (Sep 9, 2019)

bullethead said:


> https://www.ancient.eu/Paul_the_Apostle/


Paul of Tarsus was once Saul of Tarsus


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2019)

j_seph said:


> Paul of Tarsus was once Saul of Tarsus


Yes,..... Luke changed Paul's name.
Two names for the same person.

Yeshua/Joshua/Jesus are they the same person?

https://jmshistorycorner.wordpress.com/2018/11/13/did-saul-change-his-name-to-paul/


----------



## j_seph (Sep 9, 2019)

Yeshua is usually translated as “Jesus”, 

the name "Joshua" in Hebrew is the same name as "Jesus" in Greek

So I guess you could say yes the same person. Being the same person who died for our sins. The same one Paul who was once Saul met on the road to Damascus and changed his life forever.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2019)

j_seph said:


> Yeshua is usually translated as “Jesus”,
> 
> the name "Joshua" in Hebrew is the same name as "Jesus" in Greek
> 
> So I guess you could say yes the same person. Being the same person who died for our sins. The same one Paul who was once Saul met on the road to Damascus and changed his life forever.


Jesus did not name Saul, Paul.
Read on..


One of the often-thought-of “name changes” in the Bible is that of _Saul_ to _Paul_. The change is commonly linked to Saul’s conversion on the Damascus Road, when the Lord Jesus commissioned him to take the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 9:1–19). However, at the time of Saul’s conversion, Jesus still addressed him as “Saul.” Later, Jesus told Ananias to find “Saul” in Damascus and restore his sight. Acts 9 goes on to describe “Saul” as increasing in spiritual strength and understanding of Jesus as the Messiah. So, it was not Jesus who changed his name on the road to Damascus. If it wasn’t Jesus’ doing, how did the change from _Saul_ to _Paul_happen, and when?

The answer is that Saul’s name was also _Paul_. The custom of dual names was common in those days. Acts 13:9 describes the apostle as “Saul, who was also called Paul.” From that verse on, Saul is always referred to in Scripture as “Paul.”

Paul was a Jew, born in the Roman city of Tarsus. He was proud of his Jewish heritage, as he describes in Philippians 3:5: “Circumcised on the eighth day, of the race of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrew parentage, in observance of the law a Pharisee.” So zealous and devout was he that persecuting Christians was the natural way for him to show his devotion. He chose to use his Hebrew name, _Saul_, until sometime after he began to believe in and preach Christ. After that time, as “the apostle to the Gentiles” (Romans 11:13), he used his Roman name, _Paul_. It would make sense for Paul to use his Roman name as he traveled farther and farther into the Gentile world.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 9, 2019)

j_seph said:


> Paul of Tarsus was once Saul of Tarsus


Do you think that Jesus,  a Jew..gave Saul a Roman/Gentile name?


----------



## WaltL1 (Sep 10, 2019)

Real person? Sure.
Apostle/Saint? Sure from the aspect that those are titles. Titles can be given to anyone that the title givers want to.


> Why would someone who opposed Christians turn and become one himself if there was no intervention with Jesus Christ?


There are lots of examples of people doing complete 180s in their lives. A "Jesus intervention" is but 1 of many different reasons that can be given for that change.
It may be completely true that Jesus/Yeshua/Joshua was the catalyst for Paul/Saul to change his ways.
That doesnt prove anything other than exactly that.


----------



## atlashunter (Sep 10, 2019)

j_seph said:


> I do not doubt his existence either. Just seems to me that it would be sort of hard to persecute and kill Christians, to hunt them down. Then become one yourself without an intervention as he had on the Road to Damascus. Why would someone who opposed Christians turn and become one himself if there was no intervention with Jesus Christ?



Do you think that would be the only time in history that a persecutor of a religious group converted and became an adherent? If the logic is conversion demonstrates truth then you've got a lot of religions that must be true.


----------



## atlashunter (Sep 10, 2019)

Two possible explanations


bullethead said:


> Paul was a founder, not a convert.



^This.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Sep 23, 2019)

Personally, I don't think Paul murdered anyone. The greek says "persecuted as far as death",  It's not that I wish to preserve Paul's reputation.  The modern day translation  of murderer is not justified. The greek could be saying what we know as "to the point of death". As we are familiar with "beaten almost to death". Sure, people were stoned in the streets, and Paul once held the cloaks while others stoned, but that does not make him a murderer. We only have Acts 22-4 to go by here and it could be translated differently. "Murderer".... or "persecuted as far as death", you decide for yourself


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Sep 23, 2019)

I find it strange that the translators went this route. Nothing justifies it. Plus, Zealous for God, by way of murder, just don't go together. And if Paul could murder, then why bring anyone in to be locked up. And his letter he supposedly had, that said he was commissioned to round up Christians, it had to be a formal letter, which I'm sure did not allow vigilantly style round up. I  suppose Christianity wants to paint a huge change in Paul from murderer to saint. As if sinner to saved is not enough to make a good point.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 23, 2019)

Most likely he was willing to mistreat, abuse, oppress , harassand just treat them badly because their beliefs differed from his. I highly doubt he ever killed anyone for being a Christian,  although(and it doesn't change anything) I dont know if they were called Christians then...


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 23, 2019)

1gr8bldr said:


> Personally, I don't think Paul murdered anyone. The greek says "persecuted as far as death",  It's not that I wish to preserve Paul's reputation.  The modern day translation  of murderer is not justified. The greek could be saying what we know as "to the point of death". As we are familiar with "beaten almost to death". Sure, people were stoned in the streets, and Paul once held the cloaks while others stoned, but that does not make him a murderer. We only have Acts 22-4 to go by here and it could be translated differently. "Murderer".... or "persecuted as far as death", you decide for yourself



He was there, and may have instigated the stoning and death of Stephen


----------



## GunnSmokeer (Sep 26, 2019)

Maybe Paul knew that  he was part of the lynch mob in the past and in the more recent past he had been actively arresting and rounding up Christians who were to be persecuted and possibly killed. So he had a very active role in murdering early Christians.

Also,  Jesus taught that if you have lust in your heart it's the same as committing adultery.  And if you have murderous evil rage against another person in your heart, it's the same morally- in God's eyes --as being a murderer.  Perhaps  Paul examined his memory of how he felt as he hunted down Christians and gave aid and  encouragement to the Pharisees who would kill them,  and Paul knew that he had that murderous malice in his heart.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 27, 2019)

Does anyone think that Paul only chose one group to persecute?
"Christans" was not even a term until Luke included it in Acts 40 years after Jesus was dead.
Paul persecuted everyone who was not following Judaism. And, Jesus followed Judaism because he was a Jew. He never wanted anyone to worship anyone but God. Paul, on the other hand, took advantage of a new set of followers and created another God out of a man.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Sep 27, 2019)

I think there is enough biblical evidence to conclude that paul never murdered anyone. He had to obtain letters of authority to do what he was doing. He was commissioned, given letters confirming authority to do what he was doing. We also have the ambiguous answer as to whether he had names of those he was after, or... was his commission only to the synagogues in Damascus... or in Damascus? How would he know who? I believe he was given authority to bind and bring back... those found in the synagogues.. whom... he was able to determine by means of getting them to blaspheme God. That could be any simple question about the law. I don't believe Paul was a vigilantly. His zealousness for God, and the organization of Temple rules, etc, did not allow him to murder whom he wanted. They could not have blood on their hands. He could however cast his vote against this person that they be killed in their ruling of those whom commissioned him. See Acts 26... in and around verse 9


----------



## j_seph (Sep 27, 2019)

I retract the murdering comment I made. That was in my head as someone had made that comment before and I have to agree the Bible does not mention him murdering anyone.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Sep 27, 2019)

j_seph said:


> I retract the murdering comment I made. That was in my head as someone had made that comment before and I have to agree the Bible does not mention him murdering anyone.


it's strange to me the assumptions we apply to things, as if we need deprogramming from prior teachings. I was raised in church and the word murder was always used


----------



## j_seph (Sep 27, 2019)

1gr8bldr said:


> it's strange to me the assumptions we apply to things, as if we need deprogramming from prior teachings. I was raised in church and the word murder was always used


That is what our pastor and I talked about Wed night. Remember to beware of false preaching.


----------



## bullethead (Sep 27, 2019)

Many things are taught in ways to make the acts worse or sometimes for reasons that are not 100% true.
Like the "martyrs" and the Romans killing Christians for being Christians. The Romans killed a lot of people because they were not Romans or following Roman law. It just so happens the people were also of a different culture, religion, race or creed.
In Paul's case persecuted/persecution has many examples other than murder.


----------

