Those who denounce Paul

[Hentenza]

Have I ever written that I do not sin?

Then you are at liberty to sin so you transgress the very law that you TRY to uphold.

I see you're not willing to answer my questions

I already have. Many times actually.

 

[ananda]

Then you are at liberty to sin so you transgress the very law that you TRY to uphold. I already have. Many times actually.

Do you try your best to worship YHWH only? A yes or no will suffice.

 

[Hentenza]

Do you try your best to worship YHWH only? A yes or no will suffice.

I don't have try, I do.

 

[ananda]

I don't have try, I do.

So, do you worship Him diligently, or perfectly?

 

[Hentenza]

So, do you worship Him diligently, or perfectly?

I worship Him perfectly not diligently. If I worshiped Him diligently then that would imply that there are times when I am not diligent in worshiping God only and would worship other gods.

 

[Metal Minister]

From what I gather (please correct me if I'm wrong netzarim) you throw out everything by Paul and Luke, and claim that Peter was in error when he called Paul's works scripture. You say the Holy Spirit is infallible (which everyone here wholeheartedly agrees with) yet claim that He allowed error into the scriptures in letting Peter call Paul's works scripture. Is that about right? If that is the case, then the bible is of no more use than a comic book. There might be truth in it, but there is also error, thus making the bible fallible. If God's word is fallible, it makes God either fallible, or a deceiver. He is neither. This is the end of the slippery slope you're proposing.

 

[Metal Minister]

I don't have try, I do.

Do or do not, there is no try. Hmmm. -Yoda

 

[Steve Petersen]

The law plays no part in the life of the Christian and it cannot (and never could) atone for sin. Only Christ can.

Straw man. No one here is saying the Law provides atonement.

 

[Metal Minister]

Then there is this:

Straw man. No one here is saying the Law provides atonement.

In context, you're example from acts is Paul explaining to those who were still pharisees, etc, that he was from birth a pharisee of pharisees. It was his connection to them so they could not claim he was ignorant of the law.

 

[Steve Petersen]

In context, you're example from acts is Paul explaining to those who were still pharisees, etc, that he was from birth a pharisee of pharisees. It was his connection to them so they could not claim he was ignorant of the law.

At his trial before Festus, Paul said this:

Acts 25:6 And when he had remained among them more than ten days, he went down to Caesarea. And the next day, sitting on the judgment seat, he commanded Paul to be brought. 7 When he had come, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood about and laid many serious complaints against Paul, which they could not prove, 8 while he answered for himself, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all.”

Now, if as you contend Paul's position was that the Law has no place in the life of a believer, then you must also contend that this idea is NOT an offense against the Law.

 

[ananda]

I worship Him perfectly not diligently. If I worshiped Him diligently then that would imply that there are times when I am not diligent in worshiping God only and would worship other gods.

Interesting. So you've never worshiped anything else in your heart.

 

[ananda]

From what I gather (please correct me if I'm wrong netzarim) you throw out everything by Paul and Luke, and claim that Peter was in error when he called Paul's works scripture. You say the Holy Spirit is infallible (which everyone here wholeheartedly agrees with) yet claim that He allowed error into the scriptures in letting Peter call Paul's works scripture. Is that about right? If that is the case, then the bible is of no more use than a comic book. There might be truth in it, but there is also error, thus making the bible fallible. If God's word is fallible, it makes God either fallible, or a deceiver. He is neither. This is the end of the slippery slope you're proposing.

No, that's not my position.

I follow Messiah when He warned me against the Pharisees, of which Paul is one.

I do not throw out Luke's writings, but I do not regard them as either Torah or Neviim (many Messianics, including myself, believe in three tiers of Scripture)
I do not believe Peter is infallible.
I do not believe Peter single-handedly - without witness - elevated Paul's works into the equivalent of Torah or Neviim. I believe Peter may have considered Paul's writings Ketuvim (the third tier, edifying but not necessarily inspired).
I do believe the Holy Spirit is infallible.
I do believe that YHWH sends false prophets to test us (e.g. Deu 13:3). I also believe He placed the tree in the Garden to test Adam and Eve, and I believe Messiah chose Judas, who was the traitor, for a reason.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

At his trial before Festus, Paul said this:

Acts 25:6 And when he had remained among them more than ten days, he went down to Caesarea. And the next day, sitting on the judgment seat, he commanded Paul to be brought. 7 When he had come, the Jews who had come down from Jerusalem stood about and laid many serious complaints against Paul, which they could not prove, 8 while he answered for himself, “Neither against the law of the Jews, nor against the temple, nor against Caesar have I offended in anything at all.”

Now, if as you contend Paul's position was that the Law has no place in the life of a believer, then you must also contend that this idea is NOT an offense against the Law.

So let me get this straight.
Paul kept the Torah, but he is accused of preaching against it by some here?

http://www.christianforums.com/t7676177-53/
the Apostle Paul kept the Torah!

Originally Posted by tzadik Fire, there is ZERO proof of Paul breaking the Law of God.
It's all assumed.

Scriptures only show Paul keeping the Torah.

Originally Posted by LittleLambofJesus

Of course.
He was a Jew

Philipp 3:4 though I also have [cause of] trust in flesh. If any other one doth think to have trust in flesh, I more;
5 circumcision on the eighth day! of the race of Israel! of the tribe of Benjamin! a Hebrew of Hebrews! according to law a Pharisee!
6 according to zeal persecuting the assembly! according to righteousness that is in law becoming blameless!

Paul keeping the Torah was brought up in the thread quoted above by a member.
​

Can anyone here prove Paul didn't keep the Torah?

.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

No, that's not my position.

I follow Messiah when He warned me against the Pharisees, of which Paul is one.

I do not throw out Luke's writings, but I do not regard them as either Torah or Neviim (many Messianics, including myself, believe in three tiers of Scripture)
.

Neither do the unbelieving non-Christians of today.
Seens as if Paul was successful in converting a lot of the OC Jews to the Son of God, Jesus the Christ.


Act 13:43
and the synagogue having been dismissed, many of the Jews and of the devout proselytes did follow Paul and Barnabas, who, speaking to them, were persuading them to remain in the grace of God.


http://www.christianforums.com/t7589368/
Traditional Hatred by the Jewish synagogue toward the Holy Spirit

Reve 3:9 Behold! I-am-giving out of the synagogue/sun-agwghV <4864> of the Satan, the ones saying themselves Judeans to be and not they are, but are false.
Behold! I shall be making them that they shall be arriving, and they shall be worshipping before the feet of thee, and they may be knowing that I love thee.



.

 

[Metal Minister]

No, that's not my position.

I follow Messiah when He warned me against the Pharisees, of which Paul is one.

I do not throw out Luke's writings, but I do not regard them as either Torah or Neviim (many Messianics, including myself, believe in three tiers of Scripture)
I do not believe Peter is infallible.
I do not believe Peter single-handedly - without witness - elevated Paul's works into the equivalent of Torah or Neviim. I believe Peter may have considered Paul's writings Ketuvim (the third tier, edifying but not necessarily inspired).
I do believe the Holy Spirit is infallible.
I do believe that YHWH sends false prophets to test us (e.g. Deu 13:3). I also believe He placed the tree in the Garden to test Adam and Eve, and I believe Messiah chose Judas, who was the traitor, for a reason.

Interesting that you have such a contradiction. You do not view Luke's words as scripture, yet you give acts the infallibility in claiming Paul counted himself as a pharisee. Very interesting.

 

[Hentenza]

Interesting. So you've never worshiped anything else in your heart.

Once God called me into His fold, no. There are no other gods.

 

[Hentenza]

Interesting that you have such a contradiction. You do not view Luke's words as scripture, yet you give acts the infallibility in claiming Paul counted himself as a pharisee. Very interesting.

His NT is very thin. In fact, he agreed in another post in another thread that he developed his own canon.

 

[from scratch]

The question is this:

Should we try our best to do what YHWH defined is "right"?

Or (as you're teaching), should we avoid what YHWH commanded because we can't do it perfectly at all?

Do you worship YHWH to the best of your ability? Do you worship Him alone? Do you refrain from committing adultery, from stealing, for honoring your parents? Or have you abandoned those commandments?

I think you're accusing the promotion of sin by not being obligated to the law. This simply isn't true on the part of a believer. Read Gal 5.

 

[from scratch]

The same covenant preached by Messiah.

Which is... Remember JN 1:17?

 

[from scratch]

Liberty to do righteousness, not liberty from sin.

Are you really saying liberty to obey the law? That is bondage and not liberty also called freedom.