Paul, the False Apostle: Rebuttal of Point 3

[2ducklow]

phil 3. 5 Circumcised, the eighth day, of the race of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews,--regarding law, a Pharisee, 6 Regarding zeal, persecuting the assembly, regarding the righteousness that is in law, having become blameless. 7 But, whatever things, unto me, were gain, the same, have I accounted, for the Christ's sake, loss; (Rotherham)

According to phi. 3.5-7 Paul counted, persecuting the assembly and righteousness that is in law, and being a Pharisee as loss. The doctrine of the Pharisees was that righteousness was in the law, Paul no longer believed that, so his doctrine was not the doctrine of the Pharisees after he became a Christian.
Plus Paul counted being a Pharisee as refuse.

(Rotherham) Philippians 3:8 Yea, doubtless! and I account all things to be, loss, because of the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for the sake of whom, the loss, of all things, have I suffered, and do account them refuse, in order that, Christ, I may win,

Paul lost his Pharisee position, lost his Pharisee doctrine. and considered being a Pharisee as being refuse (dung in the KJV). So this should be considered when Paul said "I am a Pharisee" in acts. Because Paul considered being a Pharisee as refuse. Which either means that he is a Pharisee by birth and cannot escape it anymore than I can escape being an American, or Paul was still considered a Pharisee but an errant one by other Pharisees. At any rate, the main point is Pauls doctrine was not the doctrine of the Pharisees.

 

[TorahMan]

Jesus: "Let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No' (Matt 5:37)

Paul: "I am all things to all men" (a hypocrite) (1 Cor 9:22)

 

[IchoozJC]

Jesus: "Let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No' (Matt 5:37)

Paul: "I am all things to all men" (a hypocrite) (1 Cor 9:22)

Apple, meet orange.

Jesus was talking about oaths, and how we have no authority to make them.

Paul just demonstrated that he respected another's traditions, though he wasn't bound by them. I would go to a temple if I knew it would help lead someone to Christ. Nothing wrong with that.

Context amigo.

 

[Der Alte]

Jesus: "Let your 'Yes' be 'Yes,' and your 'No,' 'No' (Matt 5:37)

Paul: "I am all things to all men" (a hypocrite) (1 Cor 9:22)

I have explained this all to you before, but it appears you are so intent on maligning Paul that you adamantly will not consider that all Paul was saying was that as much as it was possible he was living peaceably with all men, see Rom 12:18. When Paul was with Jews he respected their customs and practices so as not to offend them, likewise with the gentiles, see Act 21:23-24.

Rom 12:18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.​

I give you once again my example. My wife was born in the far east, I am not being a hypocrite, but I have not worn shoes in my home for 30+ years. Although that is not my custom, I do it to respect her. When I meet any of our oriental friends when I greet them I bow slightly and shake hands with both hands. Whenever I hand her or any of our oriental friends something I always use both hands. It is an insult to use only one hand. There are many such customs I have had to learn. When I am around our American friends I do not use the oriental customs, when I am around our oriental friends I do. Now if you can prove to me that Paul was being a hypocrite, and he was not doing the same thing I do, I will listen but all I have seen so far are biased, baseless accusations. If you cannot PROVE your accusations against Paul then you are bearing false witness.

 

[drstevej]

Paul: "I am all things to all men" (a hypocrite) (1 Cor 9:22)

Your addition is not consistent with what Paul is saying. Is misrepresenting someone consistent with Torah? Der Alter has explained the text above. Will you retract your accusation against Paul?

 

[drstevej]

Paul lost his Pharisee position, lost his Pharisee doctrine. and considered being a Pharisee as being refuse (dung in the KJV). So this should be considered when Paul said "I am a Pharisee" in acts. Because Paul considered being a Pharisee as refuse. Which either means that he is a Pharisee by birth and cannot escape it anymore than I can escape being an American, or Paul was still considered a Pharisee but an errant one by other Pharisees. At any rate, the main point is Pauls doctrine was not the doctrine of the Pharisees.

Well said, 2ducklow.

 

[ananda]

... when Paul said "I am a Pharisee" in acts. Because Paul considered being a Pharisee as refuse. Which either means that [1] he is a Pharisee by birth and cannot escape it anymore than I can escape being an American, or [2] Paul was still considered a Pharisee but an errant one by other Pharisees.

There is a third option ... [3] being that he was "all things to all men", and whipped out his Pharisee card when it was advantageous, and denied his affiliation when it was not. "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways." Jam 1:8 & "purify your hearts, ye double minded." Jam 4:8

Point 1 is nonsensical. A Pharisee is not a nationality, but a religious identification.

Point 2 is irrelevant. If he claimed to remain a Pharisee (whether or not other Pharisees consider him errant), then we are still under the command by Messiah to reject his doctrines.

 

[Der Alte]

There is a third option ... [3] being that he was "all things to all men", and whipped out his Pharisee card when it was advantageous, and denied his affiliation when it was not. "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways." Jam 1:8 & "purify your hearts, ye double minded." Jam 4:8

Point 1 is nonsensical. A Pharisee is not a nationality, but a religious identification.

Point 2 is irrelevant. If he claimed to remain a Pharisee (whether or not other Pharisees consider him errant), then we are still under the command by Messiah to reject his doctrines.

Wrong! Can you prove, not just accuse that Paul was double minded? One out-of-context verse is not proof. Can you identify even one time Paul regularly associated with Pharisees, espoused Pharisiacal teachings, condemned anyone for not following Pharisaical teachings, etc? if not then you have have no, zero, none scriptural evidence to condemn Paul for anything. You want to throw accusatory scriptures at Paul and others. There is also a scripture which says "judge not that you be not judged." Do you have a proof text that exempts you from that verse? I am reposting two posts from above for your enlightenment.

I have explained this all to you before, but it appears you are so intent on maligning Paul that you adamantly will not consider that all Paul was saying was that as much as it was possible he was living peaceably with all men, see Rom 12:18. When Paul was with Jews he respected their customs and practices so as not to offend them, likewise with the gentiles, see Act 21:23-24.

Rom 12:18 If it be possible, as much as lieth in you, live peaceably with all men.​

I give you once again my example. My wife was born in the far east, I am not being a hypocrite, but I have not worn shoes in my home for 30+ years. Although that is not my custom, I do it to respect her. When I meet any of our oriental friends when I greet them I bow slightly and shake hands with both hands. Whenever I hand her or any of our oriental friends something I always use both hands. It is an insult to use only one hand. There are many such customs I have had to learn. When I am around our American friends I do not use the oriental customs, when I am around our oriental friends I do. Now if you can prove to me that Paul was being a hypocrite, and he was not doing the same thing I do, I will listen but all I have seen so far are biased, baseless accusations. If you cannot PROVE your accusations against Paul then you are bearing false witness.

phil 3. 5 Circumcised, the eighth day, of the race of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews,--regarding law, a Pharisee, 6 Regarding zeal, persecuting the assembly, regarding the righteousness that is in law, having become blameless. 7 But, whatever things, unto me, were gain, the same, have I accounted, for the Christ's sake, loss; (Rotherham)

According to phi. 3.5-7 Paul counted, persecuting the assembly and righteousness that is in law, and being a Pharisee as loss. The doctrine of the Pharisees was that righteousness was in the law, Paul no longer believed that, so his doctrine was not the doctrine of the Pharisees after he became a Christian.
Plus Paul counted being a Pharisee as refuse.

(Rotherham) Philippians 3:8 Yea, doubtless! and I account all things to be, loss, because of the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for the sake of whom, the loss, of all things, have I suffered, and do account them refuse, in order that, Christ, I may win,

Paul lost his Pharisee position, lost his Pharisee doctrine. and considered being a Pharisee as being refuse (dung in the KJV). So this should be considered when Paul said "I am a Pharisee" in acts. Because Paul considered being a Pharisee as refuse. Which either means that he is a Pharisee by birth and cannot escape it anymore than I can escape being an American, or Paul was still considered a Pharisee but an errant one by other Pharisees. At any rate, the main point is Pauls doctrine was not the doctrine of the Pharisees.

 

[catlynne333]

There is a third option ... [3] being that he was "all things to all men", and whipped out his Pharisee card when it was advantageous, and denied his affiliation when it was not. "A double minded man is unstable in all his ways." Jam 1:8 & "purify your hearts, ye double minded." Jam 4:8

Point 1 is nonsensical. A Pharisee is not a nationality, but a religious identification.

Point 2 is irrelevant. If he claimed to remain a Pharisee (whether or not other Pharisees consider him errant), then we are still under the command by Messiah to reject his doctrines.

 

[TorahMan]

Response to an adulterous situation:

Jesus: "I do not condemn you; go and sin no more" (John 8:11)

Paul: "In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh" (ambush and kill him) (1 Cor 5:4-5)

Nice one Paul. Not.

 

[drstevej]

Torah man your interpretation of Paul's words are persistent misrepresentations.

 

[TorahMan]

Resolving Disagreements Peacefully:

Jesus: "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother (Step 1). But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that 'by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established' (Step 2). And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church (Step 3). But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector" (Matt 18:15-17)

Paul: "To the churches of Galatia (i.e. spread this far and wide): When Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed ... he was a hypocrite ... he was not straightforward about the gospel" (Gal 1:2; 2:11-14)

What a mean, spiteful apology for a man.

 

[IchoozJC]

Resolving Disagreements Peacefully:

Jesus: "If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother (Step 1). But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that 'by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established' (Step 2). And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church (Step 3). But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector" (Matt 18:15-17)

Paul: "To the churches of Galatia (i.e. spread this far and wide): When Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed ... he was a hypocrite ... he was not straightforward about the gospel" (Gal 1:2; 2:11-14)

What a mean, spiteful apology for a man.

Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

Drastic times call for drastic measures, perhaps.

 

[IchoozJC]

Response to an adulterous situation:

Jesus: "I do not condemn you; go and sin no more" (John 8:11)

Paul: "In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when you are gathered together, along with my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, deliver such a one to Satan for the destruction of the flesh" (ambush and kill him) (1 Cor 5:4-5)

Nice one Paul. Not.

Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?

Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?

Doesn't sound very loving either, does it?

 

[TorahMan]

Originally Posted by Jesus

Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? (Matt 23:33)

Originally Posted by JtB

Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? (Matt 3:7)

Doesn't sound very loving either, does it?

Certainly doesn't! And guess who they were both addressing? The Pharisees!

Paul: "I am a Pharisee"; "I am a Pharisee" (present tense) (Acts 23:6; Php 3:5)

 

[Der Alte]

Certainly doesn't! And guess who they were both addressing? The Pharisees!

Paul: "I am a Pharisee"; [Irrelevant! DA] "I am a Pharisee" [Irrelevant! DA] (present tense) (Acts 23:6; Php 3:5)

Mat 3:7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?​

When did Paul ever routinely associate with Pharisees, teach Pharisaical doctrines, condemn people for not following pharisaical doctrines, etc? Can you identify even one teaching that Paul expounded that was Pharisaical and not scriptural?

 

[Sheraldo]

der Alter said:

"Can you identify even one teaching that Paul expounded that was Pharisaical and not scriptural?"

I'm thinking this might be one:

Paul says:

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, AS THE LAW SAYS.

As opposed to John 20:17 where Yeshua tells Mary:

Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father. Go instead to my brothers AND TELL THEM, 'I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.'"

 

[ananda]

The Pharisees taught observance of their own traditions in place of God's Law. Pharisee Paul did the same.

 

[drstevej]

The Pharisees taught observance of their own traditions in ADDITION TO God's Law.

 

[Der Alte]

The Pharisees taught observance of their own traditions in place of God's Law. Pharisee Paul did the same.

Prove it? If you cannot prove it, you are bearing false witness.