Irenaeus Against Heresies, Book 3, Chapters 15 to 25

CHAPTER 15 -- REFUTATION OF THE EBIONITES, WHO DISPARAGED THE AUTHORITY OF ST. PAUL, FROM THE WRITINGS OF ST. LUKE, WHICH MUST BE RECEIVED AS A WHOLE. EXPOSURE OF THE HYPOCRISY, DECEIT, AND PRIDE OF THE GNOSTICS. THE APOSTLES AND THEIR DISCIPLES KNEW AND PREACHED ONE GOD, THE CREATOR OF THE WORLD.

1. But again, we allege the same against those who do not recognise Paul as an apostle: that they should either reject the other words of the Gospel which we have come to know through Luke alone, and not make use of them; or else, if they do receive all these, they must necessarily admit also that testimony concerning Paul, when he (Luke) tells us that the Lord spoke at first to him from heaven: "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me? I am Jesus Christ, whom thou persecutest; "(6) and then to Ananias, saying regarding him: "Go thy way; for he is a chosen vessel unto Me, to bear My name among the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel. For I will show him, from this time, how great things he must suffer for My name's sake."(7) Those, therefore, who do not accept of him [as a teacher], who was chosen by God for this purpose, that he might boldly bear His name, as being sent to the forementioned nations, do despise the election of God, and separate themselves from the company of the apostles. For neither can they contend that Paul was no apostle, when he was chosen for this purpose; nor can they prove Luke guilty of falsehood, when he proclaims the truth to us with all diligence. It may be, indeed, that it was with this view that God set forth very many Gospel truths, through Luke's instrumentality, which all should esteem it necessary to use, in order that all persons, following his subsequent testimony, which treats upon the acts and the doctrine of the apostles, and holding the unadulterated rule of truth, may be saved. His testimony, therefore, is true, and the doctrine of the apostles is open and stedfast, holding nothing in reserve; nor did they teach one set of doctrines in private, and another in public.

2. For this is the subterfuge of false persons, evil seducers, and hypocrites, as they act who are from Valentinus. These men discourse to the multitude about those who belong to the Church, whom they do themselves term "vulgar," and "ecclesiastic."(8) By these words they entrap the more simple, and entice them, imitating our phraseology, that these [dupes] may listen to them the oftener; and then these are asked(9) regarding us, how it is, that when they hold doctrines similar to ours, we, without cause, keep ourselves aloof from their company; and [how it is, that] when they say the same things, and hold the same doctrine, we call them heretics? When they have thus, by means of questions, overthrown the faith of any, and rendered them uncontradicting hearers of their own, they describe to them in private the unspeakable mystery of their Pleroma. But they are altogether deceived, who imagine that they may learn from the _script_ural texts adduced by heretics, that [doctrine] which their words plausibly teach.(10) For error is plausible, and bears a resemblance to the truth, but requires to be disguised; while truth is without disguise, and therefore has been entrusted to children. And if any one of their auditors do indeed demand explanations, or start _object_ions to them, they affirm that he is one not capable of receiving the truth, and not having from above the seed [derived] from their Mother; and thus really give him no reply, but simply declare that he is of the intermediate regions, that is, belongs to animal natures. But if any one do yield himself up to them like a little sheep, and follows out their practice, and their "redemption," such an one is puffed up to such an extent, that he thinks he is neither in heaven nor on earth, but that he has passed within the Pleroma; and having already embraced his angel, he walks with a strutting gait and a supercilious countenance, possessing all the pompous air of a cock. There are those among them who assert that that man who comes from above ought to follow a good course of conduct; wherefore they do also pretend a gravity [of demeanour] with a certain superciliousness. The majority, however, having become scoffers also, as if already perfect, and living without regard [to appearances], yea, in contempt [of that which is good], call themselves "the spiritual," and allege that they have already become acquainted with that place of refreshing which is within their Pleroma.

3. But let us revert to the same line of argument [hitherto pursued]. For when it has been manifestly declared, that they who were the preachers of the truth and the apostles of liberty termed no one else God, or named him Lord, except the only true God the Father, and His Word, who has the pre-eminence in all things; it shall then be clearly proved, that they (the apostles) confessed as the Lord God Him who was the Creator of heaven and earth, who also spoke with Moses, gave to him the dispensation of the law, and who called the fathers; and that they knew no other. The opinion of the apostles, therefore, and of those (Marks and Luke) who learned from their words, concerning God, has been made manifest.

I've read through the list of contradictory word of Paul and Messiah.

Strangly that many of the contradictions put forth are taken out of the context of what Paul is speaking about and has actually nothing in common with Messiah's word's that are quoted.

eg.

Articles
section 10 - Paul vs Jesus
Paul vs Jesus - A list of contradictory statements

1. On the time of the coming of the Lord:

Paul says:

Rom.13
[12] the night is far gone, the day is at hand.


Jesus says:

Luke.21
[8] Take heed that you are not led astray; for many will come in my name,
saying, . . . `The time is at hand!' Do not go after them.


You are lying to yourself and you're believing it!

Paul was speaking of the same day that Jesus and John was speaking of...

Matt:3
1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea, 2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand...

and now Paul in context...

Rom 13:11-12
11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. 12 The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light.

Both these text indicate the nearness of salvation. Not the nearness of the "The Day of the Lord" as when He is coming!

Truthseekers; you are actually doing exactly that wht you accuse Paul of doing

Twisting _script_ure

And another...

2. On the source of the Truth and the true gospel:


Paul says:

1Cor.2
[13] And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit.
Gal.1
[12] For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ.


Jesus says:

John.17
[14] I have given them thy word;
[17] Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth.


The context of Paul is again twisted.

Here is the JEsus' words that will tell you what Paul was speaking of

John14:
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you

Paul was speaking of the same day that Jesus and John was speaking of...

...
Both these text indicate the nearness of salvation. Not the nearness of the "The Day of the Lord" as when He is coming!


I think you should read this part of the same text, which you did not refer to :


The focus on context is important; however, in the case of Romans 13:11 we have a transition from the previous topic: Besides this . . ..


So, Paul is shifting to another topic, but one that is related in some way. There are two immediate problems with the Critique. We are told: "Paul is describing the time in which we live as being on of day and not night." But the text reads:
"The night is far spent and the day is at hand." It is still night, day is at hand. So Paul is definitely not saying that it is a time of Light. The Light (day) is at hand, but not yet!


The Critique also states: "He is saying that now we have received salvation,"

But what Paul writes within the same context is:


11: Besides this you know what hour it is, how it is full time now for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed;
12: the night is far gone, the day is at hand. Let us then cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light; 13: let us conduct ourselves becomingly as in the day, not in reveling and drunkenness, not in debauchery and licentiousness, not in quarreling and jealousy.


But, if we have received salvation now, how is it becoming nearer to us than when we first believed? That tells us that we have not received it as yet, not that we have now received it!


I present this first to emphasize how Paul's disciples, including this writer (who denies being a disciple of Paul) approach these things with blinders on, making texts say things they do not say, and that are, as in this case, the opposite of what the writer wishes them to say!


But this behind us, What does Paul mean when he says, "... the day is at hand?"


Is it the day of the Lord (of his appearing) as I have proposed, or is it simply referring to the time in which we live as being of the day and not night?


The immediate context will not tell us. To confirm that what I understand Paul to mean is correct, (that he speaks of the appearing of the Lord) we must investigate the wider context of Paul's epistles. This is easy to do by referring to other things Paul has written in a similar vein. Here is what I mean, from Paul's I Thessalonians 5::


1: But as to the times and the seasons, brethren, you have no need to have anything written to you.

2: For you yourselves know well that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night.

3: When people say, "There is peace and security," then sudden destruction will come upon them as travail comes upon a woman with child, and there will be no escape.

4: But you are not in darkness, brethren, for that day to surprise you like a thief.

5: For you are all sons of light and sons of the day; we are not of the night or of darkness.

6: So then let us not sleep, as others do, but let us keep awake and be sober.

7: For those who sleep sleep at night, and those who get drunk are drunk at night.

8: But, since we belong to the day, let us be sober, and put on the breastplate of faith and love, and for a helmet the hope of salvation.

9: For God has not destined us for wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ,

10: who died for us so that whether we wake or sleep we might live with him.


Now compare this with the text in question, Romans 13:


11: Besides this you know what hour it is, how it is full time now for you to wake from sleep. For salvation is nearer to us now than when we first believed;

12: the night is far gone, the day is at hand. Let us then cast off the works of darkness and put on the armor of light;

13: let us conduct ourselves becomingly as in the day, not in reveling and drunkenness, not in debauchery and licentiousness, not in quarreling and jealousy.

14: But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh, to gratify its desires.


It would be an insult to your intelligence should I detail the comparisons here. Is it not clear to you? Paul, in Romans 13, speaks of the day of the Lord, when according to him, we will obtain salvation. It is perfectly consistent with the immediate context.


The Critique also challenges my perception of Luke 21:8 as a reference to the day of the Lord. Let us examine this text. Here I repeat that potion of the Critique.


The early verses of Luke 21 are Jesus' response to a question put to Him by the disciples. He had just told them that a time would come when there would be not one stone of the temple left on top of another. The disciples then asked him, "When will this happen? and what signs will there be when this is about to happen? (V7)" In his response, Jesus includes "for many will come in my name, saying, . . . The time is at hand!" as one of these signs. It was not a reference to the coming of the Lord as the author suggest, but a sign of the destruction of the temple, which occurred in AD 70. There is nothing in Romans 13 to indicate that Paul was talking about this event.
Between the death of Jesus and the time of the invasion of Jerusalem, many Jews set up themselves to be deliverers and redeemers of the people of Israel: who had each of them their followers in great numbers, whom they imposed upon, and brought to destruction. It is of these persons that Jesus spoke. They included Theudas (not he that Gamaliel speaks of in Acts 5:36) who, when Cuspius Fadus was governor of Judea; persuaded a great number to follow him to the river Jordan, which he promised to divide, by a word of command, and give them a passage over; and thereby, as the historian Josephus observes, "he deceived many". There was another called the Egyptian, mentioned in Acts 21:38 who Josephus records made an uproar, and led four thousand cut-throats into the wilderness. This same man persuaded many to follow him to Mount Olivet, promising a free passage into the city; but he being vanquished by Felix, then governor of Judea; fled, and many of his followers were killed and taken. There were others also besides these who set up for deliverers, who called themselves by the name of the Messiah. Among these was Simon Magus, who proclaimed expressly that he was the word of God, and the Son of God, which were known names of the Messiah; Dositheus the Samaritan, asserted himself to be Christ; Menander affirmed, that no man could be saved, unless he was baptized in his name.


I have written extensively on this text, and agree that the immediate context speaks of the destruction of the temple. But to get the entire wider context of this transaction, one must go to the parallel passage in Matthew 24, where we read:


3: As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, "Tell us, when will this be, and what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?"


Luke provides the answer to this complete question, that looks all the way to the coming of the Lord, but he fails to make the distinction within the question itself, as did Matthew. So, when Jesus responded with the prophecy of many coming saying "the time is at hand," he was looking all the way to the day of his appearing at the close of the age. It is during that long expanse of history that the Lord's prophecy applies, and so it applies to Paul (who wrote, incidentally, prior to the destruction of the temple.). So, again, Jesus said:


Jesus says: Luke 21 [8] Take heed that you are not led astray; for many will come in my name, saying, . . . `The time is at hand!' Do not go after them.


Paul came, precisely as Jesus prophesied, saying that "the time (day) is at hand." And he came in the name of Jesus, as Jesus prophesied. We have, then, this commandment of the Lord that applies directly to Paul, among others:


Do not go after them.


The contradiction stands!

Berean wrote:

2. On the source of the Truth and the true gospel:


Paul says:

1Cor.2
[13] And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit.
Gal.1
[12] For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ.


Jesus says:

John.17
[14] I have given them thy word;
[17] Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth.




And again here :


The statement by Jesus is in the past tense:


I have given them thy word;


Paul came years later with his own words, as though Jesus had not given the word in its completion, requiring some later messenger to provide more words. Jesus spoke to his chosen apostles (the twelve) that did not include Paul. They had the Word, and the promise was that the Holy Spirit would lead them into all Truth. Yes, the Holy Spirit teaches Truth, but only by reference to the Word that Jesus gave to the Twelve.

Besides this, Paul is making himself a necessary intermediary, "interpreting spiritual truth to those who possess the spirit."

If one possesses the Spirit, the Spirit that teaches, why does one need Paul to interpret? That is the work of the Holy Spirit within the disciple, which Paul here acknowledges to be in the disciple's possession.

The contradiction stands!