Comments:Chronological Reverse Threaded

reply
paji2 wrote on Aug 14, edited on Aug 14
This seems to be one of those open questions - open to debates - and indeed it has been debated, sometimes hotly. :)There is no evidence that Peter was ever in Rome, yet the Catholic Sea made that ruling and so it stands. Why then not take Paul at his word? As a Roman citizen, he may well have seen Caesar. And, as a Roman citizen, he had the right to be brought before him for judgment.

reply
mercedo wrote on Aug 14
He was a Jew born in Taurus, he was a tent-maker, he used to be a Pharisee and converted to Christian. He didn't ask help of God, or probably he did in private. But above all of things he was a Roman citizen. It was his citizenship not his faith that saved him in the face of great difficulty that threatened even to his life.

reply
flolin wrote on Aug 14
mercedo saidHe didn't ask help of God, or probably he did in private. But above all of things he was a Roman citizen. Hi Mer, thanks for sharing this very important post. Paul was a Roman officer given the authority to kill the Christians before conversion. If it was his citizenship or not which saved him in the face of calamities, or, if ever Paul met Cesar, cannot be proven here and now. I for one think and believe it was his strong faith that saved him.Reading the Bible and looking for answers to questions is different as believing in it wholly. The Bible - the New and the Old Testament - is the story about creation and how God tries to reach out to mankind over and over again after He sent them out of paradise until the birth, suffering, ressureccion and ascencion of Jesus - the greatest proof of His love. The apostles wrote about God by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (Jn 16:13-15; Acts 9:15-16), and Paul, whose mission was the conversion of Gentiles (in the logical and spiritual sense) was chosen by God the Son himself. And yet, all these are parts of the whole message - the Word of God, the Bible. The Bible translation process should only prove that it is what it is and there´s no such thing as coincidence. Was Paul jugdmental? If so, it´s because God gave him the authority to speak in His Name. If Paul was judgmental then, it´s because God was speaking in Paul. " If you judge, you have no time to love." -- Mother Theresa. Doesn´t God love us then? He does, but being judgmental is accorded to Him, only to Him.Conclusion: You can only love if you have hope, and you can only hope if you have faith in God. Thus, I believe that "Love is the passport to peace." "What we see now is like a dim image in a mirror; but then, we shall see face to face. What I know now is only partial, then it will be complete. ............. " Peace to everyone and God bless you!

reply
mercedo wrote today at 8:53 AM
One of my favourite Bible verses and probably for many other people7s too is 'Vengeance is mine' Deuteronomy 32:35, that emphasises the importance of the rule by law. Moses decalogue was a decree issued to rule Jewish people. It was originally connected to real political power.

reply
mercedo wrote today at 8:56 AM
mercedo saidHe was a Jew born in Taurus No one knows if he was really born under the zodiac sign of Taurus, but it is sure that he was born in Tarsus, Minor Asia.

reply
ullangoo wrote on Aug 14
I strongly doubt that "Caesar" literally meant that the emperor personally judged all those cases. Consider the amount of Roman citizens ---. There must have been magistrates/judges who represented Caesar. I've never really gone into the chronology of "Deeds". When is it supposed to have happened, under Nero? Then I doubt it even more, even if such things belonged to the emperor's duties. Claudius probably did his job, though. Do we know that Paul was actually saved? He's in a kind of house arrest when "Deeds" ends, isn't he?It's true that there were limits to how Roman citizens could be treated, but they were rather academic during Nero's reign.

reply
paji2 wrote today at 1:51 AM
ullangoo saidI strongly doubt that "Caesar" literally meant that the emperor personally judged all those cases. You may well be right about "Caesar" .. Perhaps in the same way as today an American in trouble in a foreign country might appeal to the Secretary of Sate. He would never know (unless you were a Paris Hilton or an oil company CEO) - his underlings in the Department would handle the problem.Similarly, an appeal to Caesar simply meant an appeal to the Roman laws and authority.Interestingly, even though Paul was under arrest, he had a great deal of freedom, as we can see from the number of letters he wrote and the company he received - so the appeal must have worked to some degree. :)

reply
ullangoo wrote on Aug 14, edited on Aug 14
He must have died in the early or mid 60es - his letters stopped (thank goodness).

reply
ullangoo wrote today at 5:35 AM
It's a good analogy, I think - the Secretary of State. I guess the point is that Paul had the right to a fair trial during which his defense was heard; he couldn't be punished according to some emergency law in a certain province. He wasn't considered a dangerous criminal, evidently. He was under a kind of "don't leave town and don't make trouble in it" orders. Apparently he never left it again - do you know what happened to him?

reply
paji2 wrote today at 6:02 AM
There is really no clear evidence in the Bible - obviously he was in failing health, it seems hie eyesight was failing, for he writes (1 Cor. 16:21) "The salutation with my own hand, Paul's." - Apparently his disciples wrote his letters, most likely Timothy as long as he was with Paul. So, he most likely died of old age or some sickness.

reply
ullangoo wrote today at 7:36 AM
Well, there are other sources than the Bible. Tradition recorded by some 2nd century writer? Anyway, I'm sure that if Paul had ever met Nero (?), we would have had 50 references to the event in later authors. Actually, if it had been likely, they'd probably have invented the meeting. Think of the possibilities! Moses facing Pharaoh once more.

reply
ullangoo wrote today at 10:17 AM
I wouldn't call that verse a favourite of mine - otherwise I agree completely with you.Since we're correcting each other (lol): the proper designation is Asia Minor.He could be a Taurus - Capricorn is more likely, in my opinion.

reply
mercedo wrote today at 11:35 AM
ullangoo saidAsia Minor. Asia was used originally for Anatolia region, what is now called Turkey. Later it had been used on the regions including what we call now Asia too. Asia Minor and Asia are the correct use as you pointed out.

reply
ullangoo wrote today at 12:52 PM
Yeah, well, it's Latin, and they put the adjective after the noun, as in homo sapiens. The French still do.I hadn't noticed that typing mistake at all; I just read "Tarsus". Your reply is sooo funny. :-)