Didacus Posted December 16, 2009 Posted December 16, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='16 December 2009 - 12:13 PM' timestamp='1260983626' post='2021795'] No. St. Paul met all the Apostles - including St. Peter - in Jerusalem (i.e., at the Council of Jerusalem) at which time the Apostles approved St. Paul's message as conforming to their own gospel teaching. The Apostles then composed a letter for him to take to the Christians in Antioch indicating the decision of the Apostolic Council, while also sending two representatives of the Church in Jerusalem to Antioch, one named Judas, called Barsab'bas, and the other one named Silas. St. Paul later interacted with again with St. Peter while working in Antioch (See Acts 15:4-35, Galatians 1:18-19 and 2:1-21). St. Paul and St. Peter were martyred around the same time in Rome. [/quote] sshhhhh... I want to see what the other guy is going to say...
mortify Posted December 17, 2009 Posted December 17, 2009 [quote name='dishdash' date='16 December 2009 - 08:29 AM' timestamp='1260970188' post='2021745'] Do you think the timeline is any reflection upon a text's veracity? [/quote] Yes. If you have to choose between a text written by eye witnesses or those who knew personally, or a text written 500 years later by a self proclaimed prophet totally unfamiliar with 1st century Judea, who would you choose? For me the answer is obvious, and it's why I don't accept Muhammad's false notion of a substitution on the cross.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now