The Sainthood and Martyrdom of St. Paul

[sky]

Originally Posted by inavalan

I don't know enough of that man to have an opinion, but I believe that it is a mistake to judge people out of context.

If he were around today he might be an activist for a cause you support or don't, and you'll call him a good man or a thug.

We can be sure that we do something today that will be considered wrong sometimes in the future.

He persecuted others that had different beliefs to his,


' This is the very first mention of Saul. The witnesses essentially asked Saul to "keep an eye on their clothes" as they shed their outer garments, implying that Saul himself intended only to observe rather than participate. Stephen's "trial" had no official verdict, of course, since the reaction of the crowd precluded any deliberation or casting of ballots. Had a vote been taken, Acts 8:1 indicates that Saul would have voted in favor of the stoning.

Later, Saul (by then known as Paul) made this admission:

Acts 22:20 - 'And when the blood of Your martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by consenting to his death, and guarding the clothes of those who were killing him.'


He stood by and watched a Man being stoned to death, reminds me of a certain
' Religious ' group still practicing this barbaric custom today.....

[sky]

Originally Posted by BigJohn

In Christianity, forgiveness is taught and practiced.

Not all people believe that as is evident when people vilify the Apostle Paul. But there is more to the scene.

There is no evidence Paul participated in the stoning of Stephen, but many people look at that act as a big smear on Christianity. When that event occurred, Paul was a Jew and Christianity had not come into existence. Those who would later become Christians at that time, considered themselves Jews and still worshiped in the Temple.

Paul is considered by some to be a 'thug' but in many cases those making such accusations, seem to stir peoples' emotions to the point that some might lash out physically. Their actions and Paul's actions before his conversion are uncanny similar.

Sure, Paul established at least 14 Churches, but what stands out in my mind about Paul is his unbelievable progressive thinking after his conversion. In many cases, it was Paul that brought an end to many long time traditions of the Law. He elevated women but unfortunately is remembered by many on his view on head coverings and teaching by women. Those same people do not seem to realize that under Paul, much liberties became available that the people never had before.

' There is no evidence Paul participated in the stoning of Stephen '


He stood and watched a Man being Stoned to Death, the evidence is there... He admitted it himself....

Calling someone a ' Thug ' and watching a Man being Murdered are very different things.....





Acts 8:1 indicates that Saul would have voted in favor of the stoning.

Later, Saul (by then known as Paul) made this admission:

Acts 22:20 - 'And when the blood of Your martyr Stephen was shed, I also was standing by consenting to his death, and guarding the clothes of those who were killing him.'

[sky]

[quote=BigJohn]In Christianity, forgiveness is taught and practiced.

Not all people believe that as is evident when people vilify the Apostle Paul. But there is more to the scene.

There is no evidence Paul participated in the stoning of Stephen, but many people look at that act as a big smear on Christianity. When that event occurred, Paul was a Jew and Christianity had not come into existence. Those who would later become Christians at that time, considered themselves Jews and still worshiped in the Temple.

Paul is considered by some to be a 'thug' but in many cases those making such accusations, seem to stir peoples' emotions to the point that some might lash out physically. Their actions and Paul's actions before his conversion are uncanny similar.

Sure, Paul established at least 14 Churches, but what stands out in my mind about Paul is his unbelievable progressive thinking after his conversion. In many cases, it was Paul that brought an end to many long time traditions of the Law. He elevated women but unfortunately is remembered by many on his view on head coverings and teaching by women. Those same people do not seem to realize that under Paul, much liberties became available that the people never had before.[/QUOTE

Double Posting...

[Joe Mc]

Well one of the most understandable, relatable and profitable teachings of the Bible is contained in Corinthians 13. To a man like myself I might add these words are very inspiring. Do they cast light on what has been claimed and counter claimed here about Paul/Saul ? I cant really say. However, as a teaching in their own right they are a match for any teaching in any faith or religious or non religious path. Simply wonderful and wise words. God bless. Joe.

13 If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and give over my body to hardship that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.
Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. 9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part, 10 but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. 11 When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. 12 For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

13 And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.

******************************************

Originally Posted by BigJohn

Do you really believe this about Christians"They overlook it when others who are often fleeing persecution, as Christians once did, are denigrated, beaten, imprisoned, and have their children taken away and caged"?


..........Seems like you trying to politicize this?

If I didn't know better............

Trying to politicize Christianity? Why Big J, I am far far far too late for that. Here in the US, certain forms of Christianity could easily be mistaken for political parties. They espouse their values and then use them as a club against some, but fall silent or say "well you have to look at the whole picture" to excuse others. A single issue may be used as a litmus test to oppose one, but all other issues combined may be excused of another. One has to look beyond the hypocrisy to try to tease out whether their Christian faith is guiding their political beliefs, or whether their political beliefs are shaping where and when their Christian faith is important to them. While ol Karl Marx may have had many utopian dream flaws in his theories, he did say one thing that resounds true in many instances, though not all, religion can truly be an opiate for the masses. Asking God to damn your lawn mower for not starting when you need it is not the inspiration behind the 3rd commandment. Religion, whatever else it may be, can make a wonderful cowbell to help ensure the herd follows in the direction they are led. Yet, it is not really a question of politics here is it? We mustn't give in to that black and white (or blue and red) thinking just because it makes things easier. One must look a little deeper.

Christians, like all, must face that dilemma between God and Cesar. Between what they feel is right with respect to their neighbor, and what they feel they need to do for themselves. Few are strong enough to face crucifixion for the sake of what is right, and as we all (vast majority anyway) share such fears and weaknesses, we must not judge them too harshly lest we become hypocrites ourselves. We may feel that we must eat our bread to survive rather than share it with our neighbor, but must we then learn how to hate our neighbor to assuage our conscience?

It seems to me that some (many?) who label themselves as followers of Jesus believe they have found a way to have their cake and eat it too. The key to their method seems to be to limit one's definition of one’s neighbor, and for some one’s religio-political allies seems to be a handy place to make that cut. Those become the neighbors one must love, the rest can be feared and hated as enemies, even if the word hate is not officially used. As for loving thy enemies, well, that does make things uncomfortable doesn’t it. What helps is to reinvision those others as enemies of the worst sort. Pretend they are all coming to temp one’s children with drugs, rape one’s loved ones, take away one’s livilyhood and the bread from one’s family. Surely Jesus did not expect us to just allow enemies of this sort to do whatever they want! It would seem our moral obligations to our friends and family far outweigh any considerations for these human parasites descending upon us like a plague. “Sorry, no room in the country, you are evil anyway, go back to where you came from or we will take away your children and put them in a separate cage.” What a relief, for a while there it seemed like one might have to face a moral dilemma between one’s own needs and desires and the teachings of Jesus. All that was really needed was to reframe the picture of who is thy brother. Good thing those are not Samaritans threatening us, cause….you know… that could be a little more awkward to explain. Anyway, this reframing of one's enemies is a handy dandy little tool for massaging the conscience. Now lets see here, I am still feeling a pang or two of conscience, who else might need some reframing around here.

But I better head Big J off at the pass before that varmint gets the jump on me. It is not all who claim to follow Jesus who succumb so easily to such internal whitewashing over their fear with hate. Yet, there does seem to be a pretty strong inverse covariance, even if there is also strong standard deviation, between those who shout out the loudest for Christ, and those who follow the path that Jesus laid out in the greater body of his life and teachings. One wonders who in the end are they trying to persuade with the prosthelytizing in chapter and verse, others or themselves. They are quick to raise their swords against “Christ’s enemies” as they see them among others, but they seem to be blind to the devil who tempts them in the form of their own growling stomachs. Both God and Cesar want their tribute, which is fine when both can be paid with the same coin, but it seems all too often when they can’t, it is God who gets short changed.

The path to the kingdom leads within, and it is not always easy to see and follow. Love is touted as a guide to light the way, yet that does not mean the path lighted is always going to be the easy one. As many a 'martyr', St. Paul among the rest, could attest.

[Morpheus]

Paul was martyred by the Romans, who he appealed to as a Roman citizen.

Has anyone looked at St. Stephens speech to the Jewish court, which incited them to drag him out and stone him?

At the same time also, Paul was a young man who had grown up in the temple, who watched their clothing of those who stoned St. Stephen.

[BigJohn]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Trying to politicize Christianity? Why Big J, I am far far far too late for that. Here in the US, certain forms of Christianity could easily be mistaken for political parties. They espouse their values and then use them as a club against some, but fall silent or say "well you have to look at the whole picture" to excuse others. A single issue may be used as a litmus test to oppose one, but all other issues combined may be excused of another. One has to look beyond the hypocrisy to try to tease out whether their Christian faith is guiding their political beliefs, or whether their political beliefs are shaping where and when their Christian faith is important to them. While ol Karl Marx may have had many utopian dream flaws in his theories, he did say one thing that resounds true in many instances, though not all, religion can truly be an opiate for the masses. Asking God to damn your lawn mower for not starting when you need it is not the inspiration behind the 3rd commandment. Religion, whatever else it may be, can make a wonderful cowbell to help ensure the herd follows in the direction they are led. Yet, it is not really a question of politics here is it? We mustn't give in to that black and white (or blue and red) thinking just because it makes things easier. One must look a little deeper.

Christians, like all, must face that dilemma between God and Cesar. Between what they feel is right with respect to their neighbor, and what they feel they need to do for themselves. Few are strong enough to face crucifixion for the sake of what is right, and as we all (vast majority anyway) share such fears and weaknesses, we must not judge them too harshly lest we become hypocrites ourselves. We may feel that we must eat our bread to survive rather than share it with our neighbor, but must we then learn how to hate our neighbor to assuage our conscience?

It seems to me that some (many?) who label themselves as followers of Jesus believe they have found a way to have their cake and eat it too. The key to their method seems to be to limit one's definition of one’s neighbor, and for some one’s religio-political allies seems to be a handy place to make that cut. Those become the neighbors one must love, the rest can be feared and hated as enemies, even if the word hate is not officially used. As for loving thy enemies, well, that does make things uncomfortable doesn’t it. What helps is to reinvision those others as enemies of the worst sort. Pretend they are all coming to temp one’s children with drugs, rape one’s loved ones, take away one’s livilyhood and the bread from one’s family. Surely Jesus did not expect us to just allow enemies of this sort to do whatever they want! It would seem our moral obligations to our friends and family far outweigh any considerations for these human parasites descending upon us like a plague. “Sorry, no room in the country, you are evil anyway, go back to where you came from or we will take away your children and put them in a separate cage.” What a relief, for a while there it seemed like one might have to face a moral dilemma between one’s own needs and desires and the teachings of Jesus. All that was really needed was to reframe the picture of who is thy brother. Good thing those are not Samaritans threatening us, cause….you know… that could be a little more awkward to explain. Anyway, this reframing of one's enemies is a handy dandy little tool for massaging the conscience. Now lets see here, I am still feeling a pang or two of conscience, who else might need some reframing around here.

But I better head Big J off at the pass before that varmint gets the jump on me. It is not all who claim to follow Jesus who succumb so easily to such internal whitewashing over their fear with hate. Yet, there does seem to be a pretty strong inverse covariance, even if there is also strong standard deviation, between those who shout out the loudest for Christ, and those who follow the path that Jesus laid out in the greater body of his life and teachings. One wonders who in the end are they trying to persuade with the prosthelytizing in chapter and verse, others or themselves. They are quick to raise their swords against “Christ’s enemies” as they see them among others, but they seem to be blind to the devil who tempts them in the form of their own growling stomachs. Both God and Cesar want their tribute, which is fine when both can be paid with the same coin, but it seems all too often when they can’t, it is God who gets short changed.

The path to the kingdom leads within, and it is not always easy to see and follow. Love is touted as a guide to light the way, yet that does not mean the path lighted is always going to be the easy one. As many a 'martyr', St. Paul among the rest, could attest.

You seem to paint all Christians with the same brush.

Do you ever see any redeeming qualities with Christians?

[sky]

Originally Posted by Morpheus

Paul was martyred by the Romans, who he appealed to as a Roman citizen.

Has anyone looked at St. Stephens speech to the Jewish court, which incited them to drag him out and stone him?

At the same time also, Paul was a young man who had grown up in the temple, who watched their clothing of those who stoned St. Stephen.

Yes caring for the clothes of the Murderers seemed more important than caring for one who was to be Murdered.....

[sky]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Trying to politicize Christianity? Why Big J, I am far far far too late for that. Here in the US, certain forms of Christianity could easily be mistaken for political parties. They espouse their values and then use them as a club against some, but fall silent or say "well you have to look at the whole picture" to excuse others. A single issue may be used as a litmus test to oppose one, but all other issues combined may be excused of another. One has to look beyond the hypocrisy to try to tease out whether their Christian faith is guiding their political beliefs, or whether their political beliefs are shaping where and when their Christian faith is important to them. While ol Karl Marx may have had many utopian dream flaws in his theories, he did say one thing that resounds true in many instances, though not all, religion can truly be an opiate for the masses. Asking God to damn your lawn mower for not starting when you need it is not the inspiration behind the 3rd commandment. Religion, whatever else it may be, can make a wonderful cowbell to help ensure the herd follows in the direction they are led. Yet, it is not really a question of politics here is it? We mustn't give in to that black and white (or blue and red) thinking just because it makes things easier. One must look a little deeper.

Christians, like all, must face that dilemma between God and Cesar. Between what they feel is right with respect to their neighbor, and what they feel they need to do for themselves. Few are strong enough to face crucifixion for the sake of what is right, and as we all (vast majority anyway) share such fears and weaknesses, we must not judge them too harshly lest we become hypocrites ourselves. We may feel that we must eat our bread to survive rather than share it with our neighbor, but must we then learn how to hate our neighbor to assuage our conscience?

It seems to me that some (many?) who label themselves as followers of Jesus believe they have found a way to have their cake and eat it too. The key to their method seems to be to limit one's definition of one’s neighbor, and for some one’s religio-political allies seems to be a handy place to make that cut. Those become the neighbors one must love, the rest can be feared and hated as enemies, even if the word hate is not officially used. As for loving thy enemies, well, that does make things uncomfortable doesn’t it. What helps is to reinvision those others as enemies of the worst sort. Pretend they are all coming to temp one’s children with drugs, rape one’s loved ones, take away one’s livilyhood and the bread from one’s family. Surely Jesus did not expect us to just allow enemies of this sort to do whatever they want! It would seem our moral obligations to our friends and family far outweigh any considerations for these human parasites descending upon us like a plague. “Sorry, no room in the country, you are evil anyway, go back to where you came from or we will take away your children and put them in a separate cage.” What a relief, for a while there it seemed like one might have to face a moral dilemma between one’s own needs and desires and the teachings of Jesus. All that was really needed was to reframe the picture of who is thy brother. Good thing those are not Samaritans threatening us, cause….you know… that could be a little more awkward to explain. Anyway, this reframing of one's enemies is a handy dandy little tool for massaging the conscience. Now lets see here, I am still feeling a pang or two of conscience, who else might need some reframing around here.

But I better head Big J off at the pass before that varmint gets the jump on me. It is not all who claim to follow Jesus who succumb so easily to such internal whitewashing over their fear with hate. Yet, there does seem to be a pretty strong inverse covariance, even if there is also strong standard deviation, between those who shout out the loudest for Christ, and those who follow the path that Jesus laid out in the greater body of his life and teachings. One wonders who in the end are they trying to persuade with the prosthelytizing in chapter and verse, others or themselves. They are quick to raise their swords against “Christ’s enemies” as they see them among others, but they seem to be blind to the devil who tempts them in the form of their own growling stomachs. Both God and Cesar want their tribute, which is fine when both can be paid with the same coin, but it seems all too often when they can’t, it is God who gets short changed.

The path to the kingdom leads within, and it is not always easy to see and follow. Love is touted as a guide to light the way, yet that does not mean the path lighted is always going to be the easy one. As many a 'martyr', St. Paul among the rest, could attest.

I've Nominated you for Sainthood

[Morpheus]

Originally Posted by sky123

Yes caring for the clothes of the Murderers seemed more important than caring for one who was to be Murdered.....

So, after meeting the risen Lord, Paul did not well repent of his actions? Including suffered martyrdom, sky?
Did not confess and repent, to his guilt?

So now, where is your mercy and forgiveness?
See, it works both ways doesn't it.