Obmane i laži - četiri Pavla?!

The Quest for the Historical Paul

James Tabor Considers Biblical and External Accounts of the Apostle



What can we reliably know about Paul and how can we know it? As is the case with Jesus, this is not an easy question. Historians have been involved in what has been called the “Quest for the Historical Jesus” for the past one hundred and seventy-five years, evaluating and sifting through our sources, trying to determine what we can reliably say about him. As it happens, the quest for the historical Paul began almost simultaneously, inaugurated by the German scholar Ferdinand Christian Baur. Baur put his finger squarely on the problem: There are four different “Pauls” in the New Testament, not one, and each is quite distinct from the others. New Testament scholars today are generally agreed on this point.

Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792-1860)

Thirteen of the New Testament’s twenty-seven documents are letters with Paul’s name as the author, and a fourteenth, the book of Acts, is mainly devoted to the story of Paul’s life and career—making up over half the total text.[iv] The problem is, these fourteen texts fall into four distinct chronological tiers, giving us our four “Pauls”:

1) Authentic or Early Paul: 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans, Philippians, and Philemon (50s-60s A.D.)
2) Disputed Paul or Deutero-Pauline: 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians (80-100 A.D.)
3) Pseudo-Paul or the Pastorals: 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (80-100 A.D.)
4) Tendentious or Legendary Paul: Acts of the Apostles (90-130 A.D.)

Though scholars differ as to what historical use one might properly make of tiers 2, 3, or 4, there is almost universal agreement that a proper historical study of Paul should begin with the seven genuine letters, restricting one’s analysis to what is most certainly coming from Paul’s own hand. This approach might sound restrictive but it is really the only proper way to begin. The Deutero-Pauline letters, and the Pastorals reflect a vocabulary, a development of ideas, and a social setting that belong to a later time.[v] We are not getting Paul as he was, but Paul’s name used to lend authority to the ideas of later authors who intend for readers to believe they come from Paul. In modern parlance we call such writings forgeries, but a more polite academic term is pseudonymous, meaning “falsely named.”

Those more inclined to view this activity in a positive light point to a group of followers of Paul, some decades after his death, who wanted to honor him by continuing his legacy and using his name to defend views with which they assumed he would have surely agreed. A less charitable judgment is that these letters represent an attempt to deceive gullible readers by authors intent on passing on their own views as having the authority of Paul. Either way, this enterprise of writing letters in Paul’s name has been enormously influential, since Paul became such a towering figure of authority in the church.

The book of Acts, tier 4, presents a special problem in that it offers fascinating biographical background on Paul not found in his genuine letters as well as complete itineraries of his travels. The problem, as I mentioned in the Introduction, is with its harmonizing theological agenda that stresses the cozy relationship Paul had with the Jerusalem leaders of the church and its over-idealized heroic portrait of Paul. Many historians are agreed that it merits the label “Use Sparingly with Extreme Caution.”

Here is what we most surely know:

• He was once a member of the sect of the Pharisees. He advanced in Judaism beyond many of his contemporaries, being extremely zealous for the traditions of his Jewish faith (Philippians 3:5; Galatians 1:14).

• He zealously persecuted the Jesus movement (Galatians 1:13; Philippians 3:6; 1 Corinthians 15:9).

• Sometime around A.D. 37 Paul had a visionary experience he describes as “seeing” Jesus and received from him his Gospel message as well as his call to be an apostle to the non-Jewish world (1 Corinthians 9:2; Galatians 1:11-2:2).

• He made only three trips to Jerusalem in the period covered by his genuine letters; one three years after his apostolic call when he met Peter and James but none of the other apostles (around A.D. 40); the second fourteen years after his call (A.D. 50) when he appeared formally before the entire Jerusalem leadership to account for his mission and Gospel message to the Gentiles (Galatians 2:1-10), and a third where he was apparently arrested and sent under guard to Rome around A.D. 56 (Romans 15:25-29).

• Paul claimed to experience many revelations from Jesus, including direct voice communications, as well as an extraordinary “ascent” into the highest level of heaven, entering Paradise, where he saw and heard “things unutterable” (2 Corinthians 12:1-4).

• He had some type of physical disability that he was convinced had been sent by Satan to afflict him, but allowed by Christ, so he would not be overly proud of his extraordinary revelations (2 Corinthians 12:7-10).

• He claimed to have worked miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works that verified his status as an apostle (2 Corinthians 12:12).


Cijeli tekst:  http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/the-quest-for-the-historical-paul/

Vrlo zanimljiva i detaljna analiza.

von_Starhemberg wrote:The Quest for the Historical Paul

James Tabor Considers Biblical and External Accounts of the Apostle



What can we reliably know about Paul and how can we know it? As is the case with Jesus, this is not an easy question. Historians have been involved in what has been called the “Quest for the Historical Jesus” for the past one hundred and seventy-five years, evaluating and sifting through our sources, trying to determine what we can reliably say about him. As it happens, the quest for the historical Paul began almost simultaneously, inaugurated by the German scholar Ferdinand Christian Baur. Baur put his finger squarely on the problem: There are four different “Pauls” in the New Testament, not one, and each is quite distinct from the others. New Testament scholars today are generally agreed on this point.

Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792-1860)

Thirteen of the New Testament’s twenty-seven documents are letters with Paul’s name as the author, and a fourteenth, the book of Acts, is mainly devoted to the story of Paul’s life and career—making up over half the total text.[iv] The problem is, these fourteen texts fall into four distinct chronological tiers, giving us our four “Pauls”:

1) Authentic or Early Paul: 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans, Philippians, and Philemon (50s-60s A.D.)
2) Disputed Paul or Deutero-Pauline: 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians (80-100 A.D.)
3) Pseudo-Paul or the Pastorals: 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (80-100 A.D.)
4) Tendentious or Legendary Paul: Acts of the Apostles (90-130 A.D.)

Though scholars differ as to what historical use one might properly make of tiers 2, 3, or 4, there is almost universal agreement that a proper historical study of Paul should begin with the seven genuine letters, restricting one’s analysis to what is most certainly coming from Paul’s own hand. This approach might sound restrictive but it is really the only proper way to begin. The Deutero-Pauline letters, and the Pastorals reflect a vocabulary, a development of ideas, and a social setting that belong to a later time.[v] We are not getting Paul as he was, but Paul’s name used to lend authority to the ideas of later authors who intend for readers to believe they come from Paul. In modern parlance we call such writings forgeries, but a more polite academic term is pseudonymous, meaning “falsely named.”

Those more inclined to view this activity in a positive light point to a group of followers of Paul, some decades after his death, who wanted to honor him by continuing his legacy and using his name to defend views with which they assumed he would have surely agreed. A less charitable judgment is that these letters represent an attempt to deceive gullible readers by authors intent on passing on their own views as having the authority of Paul. Either way, this enterprise of writing letters in Paul’s name has been enormously influential, since Paul became such a towering figure of authority in the church.

The book of Acts, tier 4, presents a special problem in that it offers fascinating biographical background on Paul not found in his genuine letters as well as complete itineraries of his travels. The problem, as I mentioned in the Introduction, is with its harmonizing theological agenda that stresses the cozy relationship Paul had with the Jerusalem leaders of the church and its over-idealized heroic portrait of Paul. Many historians are agreed that it merits the label “Use Sparingly with Extreme Caution.”

Here is what we most surely know:

• He was once a member of the sect of the Pharisees. He advanced in Judaism beyond many of his contemporaries, being extremely zealous for the traditions of his Jewish faith (Philippians 3:5; Galatians 1:14).

• He zealously persecuted the Jesus movement (Galatians 1:13; Philippians 3:6; 1 Corinthians 15:9).

• Sometime around A.D. 37 Paul had a visionary experience he describes as “seeing” Jesus and received from him his Gospel message as well as his call to be an apostle to the non-Jewish world (1 Corinthians 9:2; Galatians 1:11-2:2).

• He made only three trips to Jerusalem in the period covered by his genuine letters; one three years after his apostolic call when he met Peter and James but none of the other apostles (around A.D. 40); the second fourteen years after his call (A.D. 50) when he appeared formally before the entire Jerusalem leadership to account for his mission and Gospel message to the Gentiles (Galatians 2:1-10), and a third where he was apparently arrested and sent under guard to Rome around A.D. 56 (Romans 15:25-29).

• Paul claimed to experience many revelations from Jesus, including direct voice communications, as well as an extraordinary “ascent” into the highest level of heaven, entering Paradise, where he saw and heard “things unutterable” (2 Corinthians 12:1-4).

• He had some type of physical disability that he was convinced had been sent by Satan to afflict him, but allowed by Christ, so he would not be overly proud of his extraordinary revelations (2 Corinthians 12:7-10).

• He claimed to have worked miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works that verified his status as an apostle (2 Corinthians 12:12).


Cijeli tekst:  http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/the-quest-for-the-historical-paul/

Vrlo zanimljiva i detaljna analiza.

Sranje,,kroz gusto granje!Što je tu zanimljivo,,okultisto?De ti po svom,,točku po točku napiši što je diskutabilno glede Pavla,,a ja ću te pobiti ,,u svim segmentima!
Ja sam ipak studirao teologiju ,za razliku od tebe koji si učio ,,iz lokve duhovne!

Molim da se komentira tekst i njegove stavke, ne onaj tko je otvorio temu. Zahvaljujem.

Patriot_1 wrote:

von_Starhemberg wrote:The Quest for the Historical Paul

James Tabor Considers Biblical and External Accounts of the Apostle



What can we reliably know about Paul and how can we know it? As is the case with Jesus, this is not an easy question. Historians have been involved in what has been called the “Quest for the Historical Jesus” for the past one hundred and seventy-five years, evaluating and sifting through our sources, trying to determine what we can reliably say about him. As it happens, the quest for the historical Paul began almost simultaneously, inaugurated by the German scholar Ferdinand Christian Baur. Baur put his finger squarely on the problem: There are four different “Pauls” in the New Testament, not one, and each is quite distinct from the others. New Testament scholars today are generally agreed on this point.

Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792-1860)

Thirteen of the New Testament’s twenty-seven documents are letters with Paul’s name as the author, and a fourteenth, the book of Acts, is mainly devoted to the story of Paul’s life and career—making up over half the total text.[iv] The problem is, these fourteen texts fall into four distinct chronological tiers, giving us our four “Pauls”:

1) Authentic or Early Paul: 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans, Philippians, and Philemon (50s-60s A.D.)
2) Disputed Paul or Deutero-Pauline: 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians (80-100 A.D.)
3) Pseudo-Paul or the Pastorals: 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (80-100 A.D.)
4) Tendentious or Legendary Paul: Acts of the Apostles (90-130 A.D.)

Though scholars differ as to what historical use one might properly make of tiers 2, 3, or 4, there is almost universal agreement that a proper historical study of Paul should begin with the seven genuine letters, restricting one’s analysis to what is most certainly coming from Paul’s own hand. This approach might sound restrictive but it is really the only proper way to begin. The Deutero-Pauline letters, and the Pastorals reflect a vocabulary, a development of ideas, and a social setting that belong to a later time.[v] We are not getting Paul as he was, but Paul’s name used to lend authority to the ideas of later authors who intend for readers to believe they come from Paul. In modern parlance we call such writings forgeries, but a more polite academic term is pseudonymous, meaning “falsely named.”

Those more inclined to view this activity in a positive light point to a group of followers of Paul, some decades after his death, who wanted to honor him by continuing his legacy and using his name to defend views with which they assumed he would have surely agreed. A less charitable judgment is that these letters represent an attempt to deceive gullible readers by authors intent on passing on their own views as having the authority of Paul. Either way, this enterprise of writing letters in Paul’s name has been enormously influential, since Paul became such a towering figure of authority in the church.

The book of Acts, tier 4, presents a special problem in that it offers fascinating biographical background on Paul not found in his genuine letters as well as complete itineraries of his travels. The problem, as I mentioned in the Introduction, is with its harmonizing theological agenda that stresses the cozy relationship Paul had with the Jerusalem leaders of the church and its over-idealized heroic portrait of Paul. Many historians are agreed that it merits the label “Use Sparingly with Extreme Caution.”

Here is what we most surely know:

• He was once a member of the sect of the Pharisees. He advanced in Judaism beyond many of his contemporaries, being extremely zealous for the traditions of his Jewish faith (Philippians 3:5; Galatians 1:14).

• He zealously persecuted the Jesus movement (Galatians 1:13; Philippians 3:6; 1 Corinthians 15:9).

• Sometime around A.D. 37 Paul had a visionary experience he describes as “seeing” Jesus and received from him his Gospel message as well as his call to be an apostle to the non-Jewish world (1 Corinthians 9:2; Galatians 1:11-2:2).

• He made only three trips to Jerusalem in the period covered by his genuine letters; one three years after his apostolic call when he met Peter and James but none of the other apostles (around A.D. 40); the second fourteen years after his call (A.D. 50) when he appeared formally before the entire Jerusalem leadership to account for his mission and Gospel message to the Gentiles (Galatians 2:1-10), and a third where he was apparently arrested and sent under guard to Rome around A.D. 56 (Romans 15:25-29).

• Paul claimed to experience many revelations from Jesus, including direct voice communications, as well as an extraordinary “ascent” into the highest level of heaven, entering Paradise, where he saw and heard “things unutterable” (2 Corinthians 12:1-4).

• He had some type of physical disability that he was convinced had been sent by Satan to afflict him, but allowed by Christ, so he would not be overly proud of his extraordinary revelations (2 Corinthians 12:7-10).

• He claimed to have worked miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works that verified his status as an apostle (2 Corinthians 12:12).


Cijeli tekst:  http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/the-quest-for-the-historical-paul/

Vrlo zanimljiva i detaljna analiza.

Sranje,,kroz gusto granje!Što je tu zanimljivo,,okultisto?De ti po svom,,točku po točku napiši što je diskutabilno glede Pavla,,a ja ću te pobiti ,,u svim segmentima!
Ja sam ipak studirao teologiju ,za razliku od tebe koji si učio ,,iz lokve duhovne!

Pokazi mu patriote znanje iz svoje lokve! 

von_Starhemberg wrote:Molim da se komentira tekst i njegove stavke, ne onaj tko je otvorio temu. Zahvaljujem.

Nitko tebe ne komentira,,samo daj mi svoje stavke o Pavlu,,svoje mišljenje,,,svoj stav a ne tamo nekih ,,iz magle izvučenih!Dakle,,ti kao Hrvat,,piši na Hrvatskom!

Patriot_1 wrote:

von_Starhemberg wrote:The Quest for the Historical Paul

James Tabor Considers Biblical and External Accounts of the Apostle



What can we reliably know about Paul and how can we know it? As is the case with Jesus, this is not an easy question. Historians have been involved in what has been called the “Quest for the Historical Jesus” for the past one hundred and seventy-five years, evaluating and sifting through our sources, trying to determine what we can reliably say about him. As it happens, the quest for the historical Paul began almost simultaneously, inaugurated by the German scholar Ferdinand Christian Baur. Baur put his finger squarely on the problem: There are four different “Pauls” in the New Testament, not one, and each is quite distinct from the others. New Testament scholars today are generally agreed on this point.

Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792-1860)

Thirteen of the New Testament’s twenty-seven documents are letters with Paul’s name as the author, and a fourteenth, the book of Acts, is mainly devoted to the story of Paul’s life and career—making up over half the total text.[iv] The problem is, these fourteen texts fall into four distinct chronological tiers, giving us our four “Pauls”:

1) Authentic or Early Paul: 1 Thessalonians, Galatians, 1 and 2 Corinthians, Romans, Philippians, and Philemon (50s-60s A.D.)
2) Disputed Paul or Deutero-Pauline: 2 Thessalonians, Ephesians, Colossians (80-100 A.D.)
3) Pseudo-Paul or the Pastorals: 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (80-100 A.D.)
4) Tendentious or Legendary Paul: Acts of the Apostles (90-130 A.D.)

Though scholars differ as to what historical use one might properly make of tiers 2, 3, or 4, there is almost universal agreement that a proper historical study of Paul should begin with the seven genuine letters, restricting one’s analysis to what is most certainly coming from Paul’s own hand. This approach might sound restrictive but it is really the only proper way to begin. The Deutero-Pauline letters, and the Pastorals reflect a vocabulary, a development of ideas, and a social setting that belong to a later time.[v] We are not getting Paul as he was, but Paul’s name used to lend authority to the ideas of later authors who intend for readers to believe they come from Paul. In modern parlance we call such writings forgeries, but a more polite academic term is pseudonymous, meaning “falsely named.”

Those more inclined to view this activity in a positive light point to a group of followers of Paul, some decades after his death, who wanted to honor him by continuing his legacy and using his name to defend views with which they assumed he would have surely agreed. A less charitable judgment is that these letters represent an attempt to deceive gullible readers by authors intent on passing on their own views as having the authority of Paul. Either way, this enterprise of writing letters in Paul’s name has been enormously influential, since Paul became such a towering figure of authority in the church.

The book of Acts, tier 4, presents a special problem in that it offers fascinating biographical background on Paul not found in his genuine letters as well as complete itineraries of his travels. The problem, as I mentioned in the Introduction, is with its harmonizing theological agenda that stresses the cozy relationship Paul had with the Jerusalem leaders of the church and its over-idealized heroic portrait of Paul. Many historians are agreed that it merits the label “Use Sparingly with Extreme Caution.”

Here is what we most surely know:

• He was once a member of the sect of the Pharisees. He advanced in Judaism beyond many of his contemporaries, being extremely zealous for the traditions of his Jewish faith (Philippians 3:5; Galatians 1:14).

• He zealously persecuted the Jesus movement (Galatians 1:13; Philippians 3:6; 1 Corinthians 15:9).

• Sometime around A.D. 37 Paul had a visionary experience he describes as “seeing” Jesus and received from him his Gospel message as well as his call to be an apostle to the non-Jewish world (1 Corinthians 9:2; Galatians 1:11-2:2).

• He made only three trips to Jerusalem in the period covered by his genuine letters; one three years after his apostolic call when he met Peter and James but none of the other apostles (around A.D. 40); the second fourteen years after his call (A.D. 50) when he appeared formally before the entire Jerusalem leadership to account for his mission and Gospel message to the Gentiles (Galatians 2:1-10), and a third where he was apparently arrested and sent under guard to Rome around A.D. 56 (Romans 15:25-29).

• Paul claimed to experience many revelations from Jesus, including direct voice communications, as well as an extraordinary “ascent” into the highest level of heaven, entering Paradise, where he saw and heard “things unutterable” (2 Corinthians 12:1-4).

• He had some type of physical disability that he was convinced had been sent by Satan to afflict him, but allowed by Christ, so he would not be overly proud of his extraordinary revelations (2 Corinthians 12:7-10).

• He claimed to have worked miraculous signs, wonders, and mighty works that verified his status as an apostle (2 Corinthians 12:12).


Cijeli tekst:  http://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/people-cultures-in-the-bible/people-in-the-bible/the-quest-for-the-historical-paul/

Vrlo zanimljiva i detaljna analiza.

Sranje,,kroz gusto granje!Što je tu zanimljivo,,okultisto?De ti po svom,,točku po točku napiši što je diskutabilno glede Pavla,,a ja ću te pobiti ,,u svim segmentima!
Ja sam ipak studirao teologiju ,za razliku od tebe koji si učio ,,iz lokve duhovne!

(Originally published in New Dictionary of Theology. David F. Wright, Sinclair B. Ferguson, J.I. Packer (eds), 496-499. IVP. Reproduced by permission of the author.)

PAUL. This article presents an overview of Paul’s life and work, his theology, place in early Christianity, and significance for today.

1. Life and work

The apostle Paul, a Jew from the tribe of Benjamin, was born a Roman citizen, in Tarsus of Cilicia, with the Heb. name Saul. Paul was most probably one of his Roman names. Brought up as a Pharisee, he became highly skilled in Jewish law and tradition (Gal. 1:14). While engaged in a violent persecution of the church, he was confronted, on the road to Damascus, with a blinding vision of the risen Jesus. He continued to Damascus, and there regained his sight and was baptized c. AD 34 (Acts 9:3-19). In obedience to his new Lord he began at once to preach Jesus as Messiah in the synagogues, and became in his turn the object of Jewish persecution (Acts 9:19-25; cf. 1 Thes. 2:14-16).

At this point he apparently spent some time in Arabia (Gal. 1:17), returning to Damascus for three years before going to Jerusalem (Acts 9:26-29). Persecution again followed, and Paul went to his home town, Tarsus, until brought by Barnabas to help in the growing multi-racial church in Antioch (Acts 11:19-26). From there the two made a further trip to Jerusalem (Acts 11:30) in order to provide famine relief (c. 46). It is fairly likely that this is the same trip as that described in Gal. 2:1-10, though some have identified the latter with the visit of Acts 15.

Back in Antioch, Barnabas and Paul were called by the Spirit to an itinerant preaching ministry (Acts 13-14), whose very success led to controversy over the terms of admission of non-Jews into the people of God (Gal.; Phil. 3:2-11; see Acts 15). Paul made two subsequent journeys with Silas and others, spending considerable time in Corinth on the first journey and Ephesus on the second (Acts 16-19). On his return to Jerusalem he was arrested and tried before the Sanhedrin and two successive Roman governors, a process which ended only when Paul used his right as a Roman citizen to appeal to Caesar. He was thereupon taken to Rome by boat, being ship-wrecked en route off Malta (Acts 20 - 28). The narrative of Acts ends with Paul preaching openly in Rome, mentioning neither trial nor execution. Later church accounts fill in the gap, telling of Paul’s martyrdom under Nero, c. 64.
The surviving letters formed a vital part of Paul’s ministry, being the principal means by which he could, even when absent, exercise pastoral authority over the churches he had founded. These letters raise three major questions: a. How is his theology to be understood? b. What role did he play in the development of early Christian thought? and c. How is he to be appropriated in the contemporary church?

2. Paul’s theology

a. Paul’s background. The basic affirmations of Jewish theology are monotheism (there is one God, the creator of the world) and election (this God has chosen Israel to be his people). This double doctrine finds classic expression in the covenant, whose focal point was the law (Torah). Israel’s task was to be faithful to God by keeping the Torah, and God for his part would be faithful to the covenant (‘righteous’) by delivering Israel from her enemies. As a Pharisee, Paul believed that this deliverance would take the form of a new age breaking in to the present (evil) age: Israel would then be vindicated (‘justified’, i.e. declared to be truly within the covenant) and those who had died faithful to the covenant would be raised from the dead to share in the new world order. In the meantime, Israel’s one hope lay in fidelity to Torah, and in consequent exclusiveness and separation from defilement, particularly through contact with Gentiles. It was the apparent loosening of these covenant obligations by the early Christians that led Paul to persecute them. His vision of the risen Jesus caused a total upheaval not only in his personal life, through his acknowledgment of Jesus as Lord, but also in his thinking. If God had raised Jesus from the dead, that meant that Jesus was the Messiah, Israel’s representative. This realization led at once to the reassessment of Paul’s whole theological scheme and practical vocation.

b. God and Jesus. Paul’s view of Jesus caused, and shaped, the revolution in his view of God. If God had vindicated the crucified Jesus as Messiah, then in him — in his suffering and vindication — God’s action to save his people had already occurred. Since the OT saw that action as essentially God’s own, Paul concluded that Jesus himself was God in action: ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself’ (2 Cor. 5:19, RSV). What Jesus did on the cross is something only God can do: so Jesus, who before becoming human was ‘in the form of God’, did not regard that equality with God as something to take advantage of, but revealed the true character of God by his self-abnegation, incarnation and death (Phil. 2:6-8). The resurrection is God’s affirmation that this self-giving love is indeed the revelation of his own life and character (Phil. 2:9-11; cf. Rom. 1:4). The God who would not share his glory with another has shared it with Jesus (Is. 45:22-25; cf. Phil. 2:9-11). Monotheism is thereby redefined, not abandoned: Paul draws on the Jewish metaphor about the ‘wisdom of God’ by which God made the world, to ascribe that agency in creation, as well as in new creation, to Jesus (1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:15-20), placing Jesus alongside ‘the Father’ in formulations which are themselves restatements of Jewish monotheism over against pagan polytheism. This striking new vision of God, highlighting especially the divine love, is filled out further by Paul’s view of the Spirit at work in men and women to accomplish that which God intends, the giving of true life (Rom. 8:1-11; 2 Cor. 3:3, 6, 17-18). Finally, Paul recognizes that monotheism cannot remain content with dividing the world into two halves. If there is one God, and one Lord, there must be one people (Rom. 3:27-30, 10:12; Gal. 3:19-20). His new view of God thus points to a new view of God’s people (cf. Church).

c. The new covenant. In recognizing Jesus as Messiah (‘Christ’ in Gk.), i.e. as the one in whom God’s purposes for Israel had been summed up, Paul was compelled to rethink the place of Israel, and of her law, in God’s over-all purposes. Unless God had changed his plans (which was unthinkable), that which had happened in Christ must have been God’s intention all along. The cross and resurrection gave Paul the clue: since the Messiah represents Israel, Israel herself must ‘die’ and be ‘raised’ (Gal. 2:15-21). Reading the Scriptures again with this in mind, Paul discovered that, in the very passage where the covenant promises were first made (Gn. 15), two themes stood out: God’s desire that ‘all nations’ should share in the blessing of Abraham, and the faith of Abraham as the sign that he was indeed God’s covenant partner (Rom. 4; Gal. 3). But this meant that Israel’s understanding of her role in God’s plan had been wrong. She had mistaken a temporary stage in the plan (her land, her law and her ethnic privileges) for the final purpose itself. The law, however, although coming from God and reflecting his holiness, could not be the means of life, because of sin. But now Christ, not Israel, took centre stage: and in Christ, God’s plan for a worldwide family was being enacted. Israel’s political enemies were merely a metaphor or symbol for the real enemies of God, namely sin and death (1 Cor. 15:26, 56), which held sway over not merely Israel but the whole world.

These ultimate enemies had been overcome in the cross and resurrection. As the innocent representative of Israel, and hence of the human race, the Messiah had allowed sin and death to do their worst to him, and had emerged victorious. Sin’s power had exhausted itself by bringing to his death the one human being who, himself without sin, could properly be vindicated by God after death (2 Cor. 5:21). The cross thus stands at the heart of Paul’s theology, as the basis of his mission (2 Cor. 5:14-21), and of his redefinition of the people of God. The fact of universal sin (Rom. 1:18-3:20) demonstrates the necessity for a saving act of pure grace (3:21-26): the divine wrath (1:18 - 2:16) is turned aside, as at the exodus, by the blood of sacrifice (3:24-6). Had Israel herself not been captive to sin, covenant membership would have been definable in terms of law and circumcision: but in that case Christ would not have needed to die (Gal. 2:11-21). The resurrection provides the basis for the true definition of God’s people. God has vindicated Jesus as Messiah, and has thereby declared that those who belong to him, who in the Heb. idiom are ‘in Christ’ (cf. 2 Sa. 19:43 - 20:2), are the true Israel. The marks of new covenant membership are the signs of the Spirit’s work, i.e. faith in Jesus as Lord, belief in his resurrection, and baptism as the mark of entry into the historical people of God (Rom. 10:9-10; Col. 2:11-12). ‘Justification’ is thus God’s declaration in the present that someone is within the covenant, a declaration made not on the basis of the attempt to keep the Jewish law but on the basis of faith: because faith in Jesus is the evidence that God has, by his Spirit, begun a new work in a human life which he will surely bring to completion (Rom. 5:1-5; 8:31-39; Phil. 1:6; 1 Thes. 1:4-10). The present divine verdict therefore correctly anticipates that which will be issued on the last day on the basis of the entire life of the Christian (Rom. 2:5-11; 14:10-12; 2 Cor. 5:10). This double verdict is thus based on two things — the death and resurrection of Jesus and the work of the Spirit: Christ and the Spirit together achieve ‘that which the law could not do’ (Rom. 8:1-4). ‘Justification’ thus redefines the people of God, and opens that people to all who believe, whatever their racial or moral background.

The whole world is thus the sphere of God’s redeeming action in Christ, and men and women without distinction are summoned by the gospel to submit to Jesus’ lordship and so to enjoy the blessings of life in the covenant community, both in the present world and in that to come. God’s people form, in Christ, that true humanity which Israel was called to be but by herself could not be. Paul expresses this appropriately by referring to the church, the people of the Messiah, as ‘the body of Christ’ (Rom. 12; 1 Cor. 12). This membership in Christ must be lived out by individual Christians allowing the Spirit to direct their actions, enabling them to live in the present as appropriate for the heirs of God’s future kingdom (Rom. 8:12-25; Gal. 5:16-26; Col. 3:1-11). Since they are already thus participating in the new age, the final return of Christ may be soon or late, but should find them ‘awake’, not asleep in sin (1 Thes. 5:1-11; cf. Phil. 3:17-21). And when that day comes, not only human beings, but the whole creation, will share in the renewal which the one God has planned for his world (Rom. 8:18-25).

d. The righteousness of God. This picture of the renewal of all creation through the work of Christ and the Spirit completes Paul’s picture of God himself. In the letter to Rome, Paul takes the standard Jewish question concerning God’s righteousness (If Israel is the people of God, why is she suffering?), intensifies it in the light of universal sin (If all, Israel included, are sinful, how can God be true to the covenant?), and answers it in the light of the gospel. The cross and resurrection, he declares, demonstrate that God is in the right: he has been true to the covenant with Abraham, he has been impartial in his dealings with Jew and Gentile alike, he has dealt with sin on the cross, and he now saves those who cast themselves on his mercy. The further question, whether God is righteous in thus apparently allowing the original covenant people to miss the messianic salvation, is answered in Rom. 9-11. God has been true to his promise, which always spoke of a worldwide family: Israel’s present casting away is a necessary part of the over-all divine purpose, since only so can Gentiles be welcomed in and Jews themselves saved, as they will continue to be, by grace alone. Paul explains the apparent oddities of the divine plan as the outworking of God’s love and mercy in the face of human, including Jewish, sin.
Paul’s theology thus effects a redefinition of monotheism and election, based on the death and resurrection of Jesus and the work of the Spirit. This theology is at every point characterized by love: the love of God for his world and his human creatures; the love of Jesus in his atoning death; and the love for God and for one another with which, by his Spirit, God is transforming the corporate and individual lives of his new covenant people, so that they become the fully human beings God intends, reflecting his own image, which is Jesus himself (2 Cor. 3:18; Col. 3:10).

3. Paul in early Christianity

It thus becomes clear that Paul was not responsible for the ‘Hellenization’ of early Christianity, i.e. the transformation some have postulated from a pure Jewish faith into a philosophical construct. Nor, on the other hand, was he simply using rabbinic methods to perpetuate a Jewish system of thought. He was putting into effect that Jewish redefinition of Judaism which came about through Jesus, allowing the cross and resurrection constantly to inform the Jewish message of worldwide salvation which he preached. He came to be mistrusted by those Christians who felt bound to uphold the special status of Jews even within the new covenant. Conversely, his ideas were misused by others (e.g. Marcion) to denigrate the Torah and portray the church as a purely Gentile entity. His work and writing nevertheless formed a key part of the foundation for the life and thought of the second, and subsequent, generations of the church.

4. Paul for today

Since the Reformation, it has been customary to read Paul as the enemy of ‘legalism’ in religion (see Law and Gospel). Though important in its own way, this issue does not represent Paul’s central thrust. Instead, the contemporary church would do well to learn from Paul the true significance of Christ-shaped monotheism and of the new covenant in the Spirit, which together provide the basis, rationale, content and pattern for the church’s life and, particularly, its responsibility for world-wide mission.

F. F. Bruce, Paul, Apostle of the Free Spirit (Exeter, 1977); W. D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism (Philadelphia, 1980); E. Käsemann, Perspectives on Paul (London, 1969); S. Kim, The Origin of Paul’s Gospel (Grand Rapids, MI, 1982); W. A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven, CT, 1983); H. N. Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology (Grand Rapids, MI, 1975); E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism (London, 1977).

(Originally published in New Dictionary of Theology. David F. Wright, Sinclair B. Ferguson, J.I. Packer (eds), 496-499. IVP. Reproduced by permission of the author.)

PAUL. This article presents an overview of Paul’s life and work, his theology, place in early Christianity, and significance for today.

1. Life and work

The apostle Paul, a Jew from the tribe of Benjamin, was born a Roman citizen, in Tarsus of Cilicia, with the Heb. name Saul. Paul was most probably one of his Roman names. Brought up as a Pharisee, he became highly skilled in Jewish law and tradition (Gal. 1:14). While engaged in a violent persecution of the church, he was confronted, on the road to Damascus, with a blinding vision of the risen Jesus. He continued to Damascus, and there regained his sight and was baptized c. AD 34 (Acts 9:3-19). In obedience to his new Lord he began at once to preach Jesus as Messiah in the synagogues, and became in his turn the object of Jewish persecution (Acts 9:19-25; cf. 1 Thes. 2:14-16).

At this point he apparently spent some time in Arabia (Gal. 1:17), returning to Damascus for three years before going to Jerusalem (Acts 9:26-29). Persecution again followed, and Paul went to his home town, Tarsus, until brought by Barnabas to help in the growing multi-racial church in Antioch (Acts 11:19-26). From there the two made a further trip to Jerusalem (Acts 11:30) in order to provide famine relief (c. 46). It is fairly likely that this is the same trip as that described in Gal. 2:1-10, though some have identified the latter with the visit of Acts 15.

Back in Antioch, Barnabas and Paul were called by the Spirit to an itinerant preaching ministry (Acts 13-14), whose very success led to controversy over the terms of admission of non-Jews into the people of God (Gal.; Phil. 3:2-11; see Acts 15). Paul made two subsequent journeys with Silas and others, spending considerable time in Corinth on the first journey and Ephesus on the second (Acts 16-19). On his return to Jerusalem he was arrested and tried before the Sanhedrin and two successive Roman governors, a process which ended only when Paul used his right as a Roman citizen to appeal to Caesar. He was thereupon taken to Rome by boat, being ship-wrecked en route off Malta (Acts 20 - 28). The narrative of Acts ends with Paul preaching openly in Rome, mentioning neither trial nor execution. Later church accounts fill in the gap, telling of Paul’s martyrdom under Nero, c. 64.
The surviving letters formed a vital part of Paul’s ministry, being the principal means by which he could, even when absent, exercise pastoral authority over the churches he had founded. These letters raise three major questions: a. How is his theology to be understood? b. What role did he play in the development of early Christian thought? and c. How is he to be appropriated in the contemporary church?

2. Paul’s theology

a. Paul’s background. The basic affirmations of Jewish theology are monotheism (there is one God, the creator of the world) and election (this God has chosen Israel to be his people). This double doctrine finds classic expression in the covenant, whose focal point was the law (Torah). Israel’s task was to be faithful to God by keeping the Torah, and God for his part would be faithful to the covenant (‘righteous’) by delivering Israel from her enemies. As a Pharisee, Paul believed that this deliverance would take the form of a new age breaking in to the present (evil) age: Israel would then be vindicated (‘justified’, i.e. declared to be truly within the covenant) and those who had died faithful to the covenant would be raised from the dead to share in the new world order. In the meantime, Israel’s one hope lay in fidelity to Torah, and in consequent exclusiveness and separation from defilement, particularly through contact with Gentiles. It was the apparent loosening of these covenant obligations by the early Christians that led Paul to persecute them. His vision of the risen Jesus caused a total upheaval not only in his personal life, through his acknowledgment of Jesus as Lord, but also in his thinking. If God had raised Jesus from the dead, that meant that Jesus was the Messiah, Israel’s representative. This realization led at once to the reassessment of Paul’s whole theological scheme and practical vocation.

b. God and Jesus. Paul’s view of Jesus caused, and shaped, the revolution in his view of God. If God had vindicated the crucified Jesus as Messiah, then in him — in his suffering and vindication — God’s action to save his people had already occurred. Since the OT saw that action as essentially God’s own, Paul concluded that Jesus himself was God in action: ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself’ (2 Cor. 5:19, RSV). What Jesus did on the cross is something only God can do: so Jesus, who before becoming human was ‘in the form of God’, did not regard that equality with God as something to take advantage of, but revealed the true character of God by his self-abnegation, incarnation and death (Phil. 2:6-8). The resurrection is God’s affirmation that this self-giving love is indeed the revelation of his own life and character (Phil. 2:9-11; cf. Rom. 1:4). The God who would not share his glory with another has shared it with Jesus (Is. 45:22-25; cf. Phil. 2:9-11). Monotheism is thereby redefined, not abandoned: Paul draws on the Jewish metaphor about the ‘wisdom of God’ by which God made the world, to ascribe that agency in creation, as well as in new creation, to Jesus (1 Cor. 8:6; Col. 1:15-20), placing Jesus alongside ‘the Father’ in formulations which are themselves restatements of Jewish monotheism over against pagan polytheism. This striking new vision of God, highlighting especially the divine love, is filled out further by Paul’s view of the Spirit at work in men and women to accomplish that which God intends, the giving of true life (Rom. 8:1-11; 2 Cor. 3:3, 6, 17-18). Finally, Paul recognizes that monotheism cannot remain content with dividing the world into two halves. If there is one God, and one Lord, there must be one people (Rom. 3:27-30, 10:12; Gal. 3:19-20). His new view of God thus points to a new view of God’s people (cf. Church).

c. The new covenant. In recognizing Jesus as Messiah (‘Christ’ in Gk.), i.e. as the one in whom God’s purposes for Israel had been summed up, Paul was compelled to rethink the place of Israel, and of her law, in God’s over-all purposes. Unless God had changed his plans (which was unthinkable), that which had happened in Christ must have been God’s intention all along. The cross and resurrection gave Paul the clue: since the Messiah represents Israel, Israel herself must ‘die’ and be ‘raised’ (Gal. 2:15-21). Reading the Scriptures again with this in mind, Paul discovered that, in the very passage where the covenant promises were first made (Gn. 15), two themes stood out: God’s desire that ‘all nations’ should share in the blessing of Abraham, and the faith of Abraham as the sign that he was indeed God’s covenant partner (Rom. 4; Gal. 3). But this meant that Israel’s understanding of her role in God’s plan had been wrong. She had mistaken a temporary stage in the plan (her land, her law and her ethnic privileges) for the final purpose itself. The law, however, although coming from God and reflecting his holiness, could not be the means of life, because of sin. But now Christ, not Israel, took centre stage: and in Christ, God’s plan for a worldwide family was being enacted. Israel’s political enemies were merely a metaphor or symbol for the real enemies of God, namely sin and death (1 Cor. 15:26, 56), which held sway over not merely Israel but the whole world.

These ultimate enemies had been overcome in the cross and resurrection. As the innocent representative of Israel, and hence of the human race, the Messiah had allowed sin and death to do their worst to him, and had emerged victorious. Sin’s power had exhausted itself by bringing to his death the one human being who, himself without sin, could properly be vindicated by God after death (2 Cor. 5:21). The cross thus stands at the heart of Paul’s theology, as the basis of his mission (2 Cor. 5:14-21), and of his redefinition of the people of God. The fact of universal sin (Rom. 1:18-3:20) demonstrates the necessity for a saving act of pure grace (3:21-26): the divine wrath (1:18 - 2:16) is turned aside, as at the exodus, by the blood of sacrifice (3:24-6). Had Israel herself not been captive to sin, covenant membership would have been definable in terms of law and circumcision: but in that case Christ would not have needed to die (Gal. 2:11-21). The resurrection provides the basis for the true definition of God’s people. God has vindicated Jesus as Messiah, and has thereby declared that those who belong to him, who in the Heb. idiom are ‘in Christ’ (cf. 2 Sa. 19:43 - 20:2), are the true Israel. The marks of new covenant membership are the signs of the Spirit’s work, i.e. faith in Jesus as Lord, belief in his resurrection, and baptism as the mark of entry into the historical people of God (Rom. 10:9-10; Col. 2:11-12). ‘Justification’ is thus God’s declaration in the present that someone is within the covenant, a declaration made not on the basis of the attempt to keep the Jewish law but on the basis of faith: because faith in Jesus is the evidence that God has, by his Spirit, begun a new work in a human life which he will surely bring to completion (Rom. 5:1-5; 8:31-39; Phil. 1:6; 1 Thes. 1:4-10). The present divine verdict therefore correctly anticipates that which will be issued on the last day on the basis of the entire life of the Christian (Rom. 2:5-11; 14:10-12; 2 Cor. 5:10). This double verdict is thus based on two things — the death and resurrection of Jesus and the work of the Spirit: Christ and the Spirit together achieve ‘that which the law could not do’ (Rom. 8:1-4). ‘Justification’ thus redefines the people of God, and opens that people to all who believe, whatever their racial or moral background.

The whole world is thus the sphere of God’s redeeming action in Christ, and men and women without distinction are summoned by the gospel to submit to Jesus’ lordship and so to enjoy the blessings of life in the covenant community, both in the present world and in that to come. God’s people form, in Christ, that true humanity which Israel was called to be but by herself could not be. Paul expresses this appropriately by referring to the church, the people of the Messiah, as ‘the body of Christ’ (Rom. 12; 1 Cor. 12). This membership in Christ must be lived out by individual Christians allowing the Spirit to direct their actions, enabling them to live in the present as appropriate for the heirs of God’s future kingdom (Rom. 8:12-25; Gal. 5:16-26; Col. 3:1-11). Since they are already thus participating in the new age, the final return of Christ may be soon or late, but should find them ‘awake’, not asleep in sin (1 Thes. 5:1-11; cf. Phil. 3:17-21). And when that day comes, not only human beings, but the whole creation, will share in the renewal which the one God has planned for his world (Rom. 8:18-25).

d. The righteousness of God. This picture of the renewal of all creation through the work of Christ and the Spirit completes Paul’s picture of God himself. In the letter to Rome, Paul takes the standard Jewish question concerning God’s righteousness (If Israel is the people of God, why is she suffering?), intensifies it in the light of universal sin (If all, Israel included, are sinful, how can God be true to the covenant?), and answers it in the light of the gospel. The cross and resurrection, he declares, demonstrate that God is in the right: he has been true to the covenant with Abraham, he has been impartial in his dealings with Jew and Gentile alike, he has dealt with sin on the cross, and he now saves those who cast themselves on his mercy. The further question, whether God is righteous in thus apparently allowing the original covenant people to miss the messianic salvation, is answered in Rom. 9-11. God has been true to his promise, which always spoke of a worldwide family: Israel’s present casting away is a necessary part of the over-all divine purpose, since only so can Gentiles be welcomed in and Jews themselves saved, as they will continue to be, by grace alone. Paul explains the apparent oddities of the divine plan as the outworking of God’s love and mercy in the face of human, including Jewish, sin.
Paul’s theology thus effects a redefinition of monotheism and election, based on the death and resurrection of Jesus and the work of the Spirit. This theology is at every point characterized by love: the love of God for his world and his human creatures; the love of Jesus in his atoning death; and the love for God and for one another with which, by his Spirit, God is transforming the corporate and individual lives of his new covenant people, so that they become the fully human beings God intends, reflecting his own image, which is Jesus himself (2 Cor. 3:18; Col. 3:10).

3. Paul in early Christianity

It thus becomes clear that Paul was not responsible for the ‘Hellenization’ of early Christianity, i.e. the transformation some have postulated from a pure Jewish faith into a philosophical construct. Nor, on the other hand, was he simply using rabbinic methods to perpetuate a Jewish system of thought. He was putting into effect that Jewish redefinition of Judaism which came about through Jesus, allowing the cross and resurrection constantly to inform the Jewish message of worldwide salvation which he preached. He came to be mistrusted by those Christians who felt bound to uphold the special status of Jews even within the new covenant. Conversely, his ideas were misused by others (e.g. Marcion) to denigrate the Torah and portray the church as a purely Gentile entity. His work and writing nevertheless formed a key part of the foundation for the life and thought of the second, and subsequent, generations of the church.

4. Paul for today

Since the Reformation, it has been customary to read Paul as the enemy of ‘legalism’ in religion (see Law and Gospel). Though important in its own way, this issue does not represent Paul’s central thrust. Instead, the contemporary church would do well to learn from Paul the true significance of Christ-shaped monotheism and of the new covenant in the Spirit, which together provide the basis, rationale, content and pattern for the church’s life and, particularly, its responsibility for world-wide mission.

F. F. Bruce, Paul, Apostle of the Free Spirit (Exeter, 1977); W. D. Davies, Paul and Rabbinic Judaism (Philadelphia, 1980); E. Käsemann, Perspectives on Paul (London, 1969); S. Kim, The Origin of Paul’s Gospel (Grand Rapids, MI, 1982); W. A. Meeks, The First Urban Christians: The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven, CT, 1983); H. N. Ridderbos, Paul: An Outline of His Theology (Grand Rapids, MI, 1975); E. P. Sanders, Paul and Palestinian Judaism (London, 1977).

Ono što Pavao piše u svojim poslanicama,i ono što govori u Djelima apostolskim ni u čemu se ne razlikuje.

albatros wrote:Ono što Pavao piše u svojim poslanicama,i ono što govori u Djelima apostolskim ni u čemu se ne razlikuje.

slažem se... rekao je da je lažov i lažov je...

Sefirot wrote:

albatros wrote:Ono što Pavao piše u svojim poslanicama,i ono što govori u Djelima apostolskim ni u čemu se ne razlikuje.

slažem se... rekao je da je lažov i lažov je...

Zamisli čovjek je progonio kršćane..zatvarao ih..stavljao na muke...bio gorljivi protivnik Isusa a onda je doživio obraćenje na putu u Damask!
Koji je to lažov zamisli...zapravo on nikada nije ni proganajo kršćane..on je bio židov kršćanin po vama!  

Vidim da ima i tvrdnji kako je Pavao također i ubojica, pa me zanima koga je on to osobno ubio ili čije je ubojstvo osobno naredio.

Savao (Pavao) je pristao da se Stjepan smakne. Pustošio je Crkvu, ulazio u kuće, odvlačio muževe i žene i predavao ih u tamnicu. Dakle; u svakom pogledu bio je mrzitelj kršćanstva i bio u osobnom ratu protiv Isusa! Sve je to zapisano u Djelima Apostolskim.

kingkong wrote:
Savao (Pavao) je pristao da se Stjepan smakne. Pustošio je Crkvu, ulazio u kuće, odvlačio muževe i žene i predavao ih u tamnicu. Dakle; u svakom pogledu bio je mrzitelj kršćanstva i bio u osobnom ratu protiv Isusa! Sve je to zapisano u Djelima Apostolskim.

To nije odgovor na moje gornje pitanje.
Ali nema veze, evo i novog. Je li išta od navedenog činio sam ili u sklopu dogovora sa tadašnjim vrhovnim židovskim vjerskim prvacima odnosno kao sastavni dio njihovog odnosa prema ranim kršćanima i politike prema njihovim zajednicama?

speare_shaker wrote:

kingkong wrote:
Savao (Pavao) je pristao da se Stjepan smakne. Pustošio je Crkvu, ulazio u kuće, odvlačio muževe i žene i predavao ih u tamnicu. Dakle; u svakom pogledu bio je mrzitelj kršćanstva i bio u osobnom ratu protiv Isusa! Sve je to zapisano u Djelima Apostolskim.

To nije odgovor na moje gornje pitanje.
Ali nema veze, evo i novog. Je li išta od navedenog činio sam ili u sklopu dogovora sa tadašnjim vrhovnim židovskim vjerskim prvacima odnosno kao sastavni dio njihovog odnosa prema ranim kršćanima i politike prema njihovim zajednicama?

To nema veze. On je sam svjedočio da je bio gorljivi protivnik kršćana...da nije; zar bi tako revno sudjelovao u progonima?! Znači ti sad hoćeš ovime dovesti u pitanje njegovo židovstvo..kad se kasnije stavio u službu Isusa Krista; i postao njegov "vojnik"?! Pročitaj njegovo svjedočanstvo i nemoj trabunjati o nečemu što uopće ne stoji!

kingkong wrote:
To nema veze. On je sam svjedočio da je bio gorljivi protivnik kršćana...da nije; zar bi tako revno sudjelovao u progonima?! Znači ti sad hoćeš ovime dovesti u pitanje njegovo židovstvo..kad se kasnije stavio u službu Isusa Krista; i postao njegov "vojnik"?! Pročitaj njegovo svjedočanstvo i nemoj trabunjati o nečemu što uopće ne stoji!

Jednom sam ti to rekao na starom forumu, a vidim da nisi ništa naučio u međuvremenu pa nema razloga da ti to ne ponovim još koji put.
Ti si najobičnija štetočina.
Ne samo to, ti si toliko patetičan u svom kakti kršćanskom aktivizmu da nisi ni svjestan kako ti je jedini cilj pri tome proslaviti vlastitu kakti pamet, da baš ne kažem guzicu, premda se to svodi na isto jer ti je sva pamet ionako u guzici.
A sad odgovori na moje početno pitanje:
Koga je Pavao osobno ubio ili čije je ubojstvo osobno naredio?
Ako to nisi u stanju, bolje ti je da začepiš umjesto da od sebe ovdje uporno radiš totalnog idiota.

Jesam ti lijepo rekao da je odobrio da se smakne Stjepan.
Ali ja tvoja bezobrazna i odvratna vrijedjanja ne želim slušati. Po prvi puta ću intervenirati ovdje kod admina jer neću dozvoliti da se ovako prema meni postupa. Tebe očigledno nitko nije naučio korektnoj komunikaciji...sad ćemo vidjeti; hoće li ti ovo dalje prolaziti!

jebate, ode je ka na pravon forumu

WTF? Malo me nema i padne prvi ban...koji je razlog?

von_Starhemberg wrote:WTF? Malo me nema i padne prvi ban...koji je razlog?

Ti?Spare je napisao istinu o tebi i dobio ban!
Ajd sad lipo na svom maternjem jeziku napiši ,,zašto misliš da je Pavao to što ti tvrdiš?

von_Starhemberg wrote:WTF? Malo me nema i padne prvi ban...koji je razlog?

Pa čovjek bi se trebao naučiti komuniciranju bez vrijedjanja. Ili se krenimo svi vrijedjati; pa da bude totalni raspašoj..ili ajmo naučiti biti odgovorni za svoje postupke i čine...