alwaysreforming
Puritan Board Sophomore
I hear oft quoted something along the lines of:
"Well, you know Paul wasn't that good of a speaker. He was just an average guy. It even said that he came to the Corinthians with much fear and trembling. Appearantly he lacked confidence and eloquence."
Now this strikes me as odd considering Paul's fine education, training, and upbringing. Also, reading a book like Romans makes me think, not only was he not "average", he was probably a genius.
And point #2:
I hear people equating Paul with a "mass murderer" because he "persecuted the Church."
This doesn't seem right. I mean, after all, all he really did is guard the clothes of those who stoned Stephen, and outside of that he tried to have Christians shut down and persecuted. This is a far cry from "murdering people", although his approval on Stephen's death makes him somewhat of an accessory I imagine.
Am I correct in assuming that Paul was nothing close to a criminal? He explicitly states that according to the Law he was "faultless." There must have been no charge to bring to his account in the eyes of the law; he seemed to be acting in accordance with reasonable religious zeal in his outrage against what he felt was the truth.
What do we know about just how smart Paul was? Could he or could he not compete with the pagan orators and philosophers in Corinth should he have chosen so? (It seems his denial to do so was simply that the foolishness of the cross might shine forth all the more, not because he was incapable.)
And was Paul in any respect a murderer? I think this label is pushing the envelope. Especially "mass" murderer. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people parrot this same phrase. Was anyone he persecuted actually "murdered" besides Stephen?
"Well, you know Paul wasn't that good of a speaker. He was just an average guy. It even said that he came to the Corinthians with much fear and trembling. Appearantly he lacked confidence and eloquence."
Now this strikes me as odd considering Paul's fine education, training, and upbringing. Also, reading a book like Romans makes me think, not only was he not "average", he was probably a genius.
And point #2:
I hear people equating Paul with a "mass murderer" because he "persecuted the Church."
This doesn't seem right. I mean, after all, all he really did is guard the clothes of those who stoned Stephen, and outside of that he tried to have Christians shut down and persecuted. This is a far cry from "murdering people", although his approval on Stephen's death makes him somewhat of an accessory I imagine.
Am I correct in assuming that Paul was nothing close to a criminal? He explicitly states that according to the Law he was "faultless." There must have been no charge to bring to his account in the eyes of the law; he seemed to be acting in accordance with reasonable religious zeal in his outrage against what he felt was the truth.
What do we know about just how smart Paul was? Could he or could he not compete with the pagan orators and philosophers in Corinth should he have chosen so? (It seems his denial to do so was simply that the foolishness of the cross might shine forth all the more, not because he was incapable.)
And was Paul in any respect a murderer? I think this label is pushing the envelope. Especially "mass" murderer. I can't tell you how many times I've heard people parrot this same phrase. Was anyone he persecuted actually "murdered" besides Stephen?