Apostle Paul

[PBA]

Netzarim,
In Acts 23 Paul was saying he was of the Pharisee side that believe in the resurrection of the dead, and not of the Sadducee side who do not believe there would be any resurrection. Also you posted "which Jesus" regarding Paul's encounter.
I don't feel your posts deserve any further replies.

 

[ananda]

Netzarim,
In Acts 23 Paul was saying he was of the Pharisee side that believe in the resurrection of the dead, and not of the Sadducee side who do not believe there would be any resurrection. Also you posted "which Jesus" regarding Paul's encounter.
I don't feel your posts deserve any further replies.

No, Paul did not say "I am on the Pharisees' side". He said "I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee".

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Actually, it's listen to what they say when they preach from Moses (the Torah), and do not listen to their anti-Torah traditions.

Jesus advised us the age of the proclamation of the law and the prophets dispensed after John the Baptist .

When i read the Torah, something happens .. i look at it and i see what it looks like now that Jesus replaced the torah in basis of prophecy . this is also reflected when i read the prophets . anything that is "temple" i see Jesus instead . that's what Jesus finished .. on the cross .

 

[Gregory Thompson]

No, Paul did not say "I am on the Pharisees' side". He said "I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee".

he also said that he left that way of life behind and regarded it as rubbish .

 

[RDKirk]

he also said that he left that way of life behind and regarded it as rubbish .

Yet, the Pharisees got some things right--resurrection, for instance--which Jesus commended. So, to echo what many here have said, it's not a matter of "run from all things Pharisaic," but a matter of understanding better than they did what they had discovered of the Truth.

That's what Paul achieved.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Yet, the Pharisees got some things right--resurrection, for instance--which Jesus commended. So, to echo what many here have said, it's not a matter of "run from all things Pharisaic," but a matter of understanding better than they did what they had discovered of the Truth.

That's what Paul achieved.

Well .. he said he hadn't quite achieved it but he had run a good race . but what he was aiming for was something far more transcendent of the idea of this group vs that group .

 

[ananda]

Jesus advised us the age of the proclamation of the law and the prophets dispensed after John the Baptist .

Where does it say that?

I read "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." The last I checked, heaven and earth are still here

When i read the Torah, something happens .. i look at it and i see what it looks like now that Jesus replaced the torah in basis of prophecy . this is also reflected when i read the prophets . anything that is "temple" i see Jesus instead . that's what Jesus finished .. on the cross .

I see Messiah as the living embodiment of Torah manifested into man (John 1, 1John 1). What I see Messiah finishing on the cross are the prophecies regarding His first coming, and some of the sacrifices previously needed. "Finishing the prophecies and sacrifice" does not mean "do away with the Torah".

Something else to consider: Torah itself defines the way of redemption (substitutionary sacrifice) given by YHWH. If Torah is done away with, so also goes that way of redemption, thus Messiah's sacrifice becomes meaningless and useless. So "Messiah did away with Torah" is self-contradictory, no?

 

[ananda]

he also said that he left that way of life behind and regarded it as rubbish .

I do not recall Paul writing that he left behind his Phariseeism. On the contrary, the Acts 23 account records that Paul claimed that he continued to be a Pharisee well into the period of his "Christian ministry".

 

[RDKirk]

Well .. he said he hadn't quite achieved it but he had run a good race . but what he was aiming for was something far more transcendent of the idea of this group vs that group .

Paul did achieve a better understanding than the Pharisees, but he saw there was much more that he had not reached.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Where does it say that?

(luke 16:16)

I read "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." The last I checked, heaven and earth are still here

also in luke a variation in that saying (that must therefore be taken in context) says all that is written of him was fulfilled.

I see Messiah as the living embodiment of Torah manifested into man (John 1, 1John 1). What I see Messiah finishing on the cross are the prophecies regarding His first coming, and some of the sacrifices previously needed. "Finishing the prophecies and sacrifice" does not mean "do away with the Torah".

no . it makes it obsolete . it's still around . just what Jesus provided is better and replaces the torah .

Something else to consider: Torah itself defines the way of redemption (substitutionary sacrifice) given by YHWH. If Torah is done away with, so also goes that way of redemption, thus Messiah's sacrifice becomes meaningless and useless. So "Messiah did away with Torah" is self-contradictory, no?

Jesus replaces the law and the temple and the sacrifices

I do not recall Paul writing that he left behind his Phariseeism. On the contrary, the Acts 23 account records that Paul claimed that he continued to be a Pharisee well into the period of his "Christian ministry".

I recall him explaining that as being all things to all people so as to save some .

 

[ananda]

(luke 16:16)

I believe Messiah, in this verse, is stating that the Law and the Prophets were preached until John, and from thence the Reign of YHWH is now being announced. This is in harmony with Mt 5:18. It is not saying that the Law and the Prophets are now obsolete.

also in luke a variation in that saying (that must therefore be taken in context) says all that is written of him was fulfilled.

"Fulfilled" as in "fulfilled prophecies regarding Himself". Not "done away with the Law". Two different subjects!

no . it makes it obsolete . it's still around . just what Jesus provided is better and replaces the torah . Jesus replaces the law and the temple and the sacrifices

Yet I find Messiah preaching the opposite (cf Mt 23:23).

I recall him explaining that as being all things to all people so as to save some .

Isn't that the very definition of deceit, to present different faces to different people? I don't believe Messiah ever did such a thing.

"Their heart is divided; now shall they be found faulty" Hsa 10:2

 

[Norah63]

So many diverse ideas of Apostle Paul and his ministry, that Jesus called him to fulfill.
The Holy Spirit has much to tell us in Paul's writings, and yes some can seem hard to understand if sin stands in the way, blocking the view of Jesus. His books have delivered many from the modern 'no sin' gospel that stains our society today.
Thanks all for helping me to get better understanding.
May I ask another question? Those who don't believe in hell, or that it is thrown in the lake of fire, to be there forever, with all who have chosen that path.
Is that tied to the questioning of Paul also?

 

[ananda]

Those who don't believe in hell, or that it is thrown in the lake of fire, to be there forever, with all who have chosen that path. Is that tied to the questioning of Paul also?

Not to my knowledge. The concept of hell is found outside of Paul's writings.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I believe Messiah, in this verse, is stating that the Law and the Prophets were preached until John, and from thence the Reign of YHWH is now being announced. This is in harmony with Mt 5:18. It is not saying that the Law and the Prophets are now obsolete.

"Fulfilled" as in "fulfilled prophecies regarding Himself". Not "done away with the Law". Two different subjects!

Yet I find Messiah preaching the opposite (cf Mt 23:23).

Isn't that the very definition of deceit, to present different faces to different people? I don't believe Messiah ever did such a thing.

"Their heart is divided; now shall they be found faulty" Hsa 10:2

That's okay . i experience the law being obsolete in the supernatural . when the law is superceded by grace . the dark forces cannot cross that line .. so long as it is continuous . so though this has been an interesting philosophical bible discussion . the real world application for me has not changed .

 

[PBA]

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.
18 But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.
Note - Peter refers to Paul as a beloved brother here, who wrote according to wisdom. He also alludes to all Paul's epistles. Why would anyone not accept Paul and Paul's letters?

 

[PBA]

Is there any specific reason that some Christians will not receive the teachings of Paul? His teachings do not soft pedal sin, but why would anyone want a way to avoid so many scriptures.
Has anyone else notices this as they read the forums?

Those who are opposed to Paul are in opposition to the other Apostles also. The other apostles themselves accepted him and his doctrines. It would be wiser to seek to understand Paul, rather than waste time seeking to disqualify him as an apostle of Christ's.

 

[RDKirk]

I suggest someone can say the same about Joseph Smith!

No. Joseph Smith was never acknowledged by the early Church, by those people who had direct contact with the other apostles.

Paul is the earliest and first of the apostles referenced by the early church, both referenced and quoted as early as 90 and 95 AD.

Paul's letters had already been fully accepted by the Church in the first half of the second century by people who were no more than one or two degrees removed from the rest of the apostles. There are no documents or record in the Church of any of the other apostles opposing Paul, no record outside Acts (by a disciple of Paul) or Paul himself of any opposition.

There is no argument of the canon of scripture that Paul's documents should not have been included--the only debate had been whether a document was actually from Paul...but Pauline origin was itself a criterion by which a document would be acceptable.

 

[PBA]

Thanks for the added info.