Paul's limited understanding!

[aieyiamfu]

Actually, many of Paul's epistles were only applicable to a specific church being addressed to...

What this means is NOT all of Paul's teachings apply to us. We're not supposed to be teaching them all in churches! They were very specific for a time period and for a specific culture. Certainly not ours!

As Apostle Peter have said, many have misunderstood Paul's letters in their time......And we are still doing it TODAY!

Many Christian denominations that don't agree with each other, helloooo! That's -1 for misusing Paul's epistles. Now let's make a headcount on who will be saved..... Probably just very few...

Who made them part of the bible then, and what effect does that have on the idea of the Inerrancy of scripture?

 

[St_Worm2]

Paul was not called an apostle by Jesus; it was his self-claim like many others.

Did Jesus call anybody, "Apostle"

 

[ac28]

A quote for RT from my #1 mentor, Charles H. Welch.

"Much of the failure to understand the Scriptures arises from the fact that we approach its pages thinking that we have to explain the Bible, instead of realizing that the Bible has been written to explain things to us."

 

[Righttruth]

You are certainly proof of that. There's not one shred of truth in anything you've written about Paul.

I presume the self-claims of Paul are truths for you. Pity!

 

[Righttruth]

Did Jesus call anybody, "Apostle"

Luke 6
13 And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles;

 

[St_Worm2]

Ahh, thanks

 

[Righttruth]

A quote for RT from my #1 mentor, Charles H. Welch.

"Much of the failure to understand the Scriptures arises from the fact that we approach its pages thinking that we have to explain the Bible, instead of realizing that the Bible has been written to explain things to us."

" .....the majority of men do not think in order to understand the truth but in order to persuade themselves that they already have the truth, and to assure themselves that the life they are living and that is pleasant and habitual to them, coincides with it." ------- Leo Tolstoy in ' The Kingdom Of God Is Within You.'

 

[anonymouswho]

I used to quote Paul as though he spoke the word of God, and now I know this was very wrong of me. There is only one man that I believe spoke the word of God.

However, this does not exclude Paul from speaking the truth. I'll just show three of my issues for now, but the list is very long.

First, I believe Yeshua was a man. I do not believe in the virgin birth because it wasn't in the Hebrew book of Matthew, nothing in historical records says a slaughtering of children happened during this time (Flavius and especially Luke), Matthew and Luke's genealogies contradict (I believe Luke's to be accurate), Luke chapter 3 definitely sounds like the beginning of a story, and several other reasons. I believe he was a man and he was ressurected as a flesh and blood man.

My first issue is...what did Paul see on the outskirts of Damascus? The Apostles clearly saw a flesh and blood man, and they had several witnesses to testify to this. Paul saw a beam of light (spiritual being) that spoke to him. The only witnesses were the two men with him, and Luke records a contradiction from Acts 9:7 and Acts 22:9.

My second issue is that Paul says...

"For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh" Romans 8:3

Why does Paul say Yeshua was in the "likeness" of sinful flesh. I may be wrong, but this seems to imply that Yeshua was not an actual human, but he only appeared to be a human. John says...

"Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in ([the] no definite article in Greek) flesh is of God:
And every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in [the] flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world." 1 John 4:1

My third problem is that Paul accuses Adam of transgression. I cannot find a single verse that says Adam transgressed. Adam did not have the knowledge of good and evil and the Law says nothing about "forbidden fruit", so I don't understand how he transgressed. The Scriptures say..

וּמֵעֵ֗ץ (but of the tree) הַדַּ֙עַת֙ (of the knowledge) ט֣וֹב (of good) וָרָ֔ע (and evil) לֹ֥א (not) תֹאכַ֖ל (eat) מִמֶּ֑נּוּ (of)

God did not say Adam "shall not" eat of. He simply told them, don't do it. I do not see this as a commandment, but rather a suggestion based on the fact that death would begin. God had just said they may eat of "every" tree in the garden. They had to eat it, because God said "let us make man in our image", and then after they eat, he says "behold, man has become as one of us".

The closest I can find is Hosea 8:7. The newer translations say "like Adam they have transgressed the covenant", but the KJV and Hebrew (without the dagesh) say...

"But they like men have transgressed the covenant: there have they dealt treacherously against me."

If this is correct, and I believe it is based on everyone else's silence on the matter, then Paul is the only person that accuses Adam of transgression.

The Scriptures say...

"One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth: at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established." Deuteronomy 19:15

Thank you.

 

[St_Worm2]

"For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh" Romans 8:3

Why does Paul say Yeshua was in the "likeness" of sinful flesh. I may be wrong, but this seems to imply that Yeshua was not an actual human, but he only appeared to be a human.

Hey AW, I can't reply to your entire thread at the moment, but quickly, St. Paul said in the, "likeness of SINFUL flesh". IOW, while He was 'fully man' from His Incarnation forward, He only "appeared" to be exactly like the rest of us in regard to our sinful nature, our "sinful flesh". Though He was fully man, He was not fallen or sinful like the rest of us (because He came from better "Stock" than we do ).

That's what His virgin birth prevented Him from having, a fallen, sinful nature .. like the rest of us have. He was like us in humanity, but He wasn't, "by nature, a child of wrath", like we are (Ephesians 2:3).

Yours and His,
David

 

[anonymouswho]

Hey AW, I can't reply to your entire thread at the moment, but quickly, St. Paul said in the, "likeness of SINFUL flesh". IOW, while He was 'fully man' from His Incarnation forward, He only "appeared" to be exactly like the rest of us in regard to our sinful nature, our "sinful flesh". Though He was fully man, He was not fallen or sinful like the rest of us (because He came from better "Stock" than we do ).

That's what His virgin birth prevented Him from having, a fallen, sinful nature .. like the rest of us have. He was like us in humanity, but He wasn't, "by nature, a child of wrath", like we are (Ephesians 2:3).

Yours and His,
David

Thank you David. Yes, I've considered it was only "sinful" flesh as well. However, Paul also says..

"But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" Phillipians 2:7


When we compare this to Acts 9, where Paul sees a spiritual being, this makes me wonder...

"And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:
And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?" Acts 9:3

Yeshua said...

"For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
Behold, I have told you before.
Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." Matthew 24:24

Yeshua is saying that many false Messiahs will appear, even saying "I am the Messiah". He says the false Messiah's and the false prophets will show great signs and wonders...

"And God wrought special (οὐ τὰς τυχούσας: not the ordinary...NKJV says unusual) miracles by the hands of Paul:
So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them." Acts 19:11

Yeshua also says that the son of man appearing shall be as lightening shining in the east, and seen in the west. This means a lot of people were going to see him return. He says if anyone tells you he is in the "secret chambers" don't believe them. This seems to mean "if anyone says I am in his head"...

"For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." Galatians 1:12

Paul did not learn his Gospel from the 12 Apostles. He didn't learn it from anyone. Why would Yeshua spend three years with the Apostles, when he could have simply come to then as a bright light and they would have known everything?

So if we were to compare all of this to Deuteronomy 13...

"If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the YHVH your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the YHVH your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
Ye shall walk after the YHVH your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him." Deauteronomy 13:1

Now, I do not believe in an "incarnation", nor do I believe in the virgin birth. I think there are enough contradictions and omissions from both Matthew and Luke that God made it pretty easy for us to see it doesn't belong. It took me many years to let go of it, but I simply said...."I'm going to read the third chapter of Luke, and if this is where he starts his Gospel, please show me". After that, I found many more things wrong with the first two chapters of both Gospels. But that's for another thread.

I guess what I'm really trying to say is...

"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him." 1 John 2:27

...and...

"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him." James 1:5

There is no reason for us to quote Paul as though he spoke the word of God. The word of God is the word of God. He talks a lot in the Scriptures, and He sent His Messiah to teach us His word, just like His word said He would do. Thank you and God bless you.

 

[St_Worm2]

Thank you David. Yes, I've considered it was only "sinful" flesh as well. However, Paul also says.."But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men" Phillipians 2:7

When we compare this to Acts 9, where Paul sees a spiritual being, this makes me wonder...

"And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:
And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?" Acts 9:3

Hi AW, why do you believe Jesus was a "spiritual" only Being at that point (Acts 9) The Lord took on a second, human, nature at His Incarnation and has remained the God/man ever since. He rose from the grave "bodily" and remains both God AND man in Heaven (with a glorified physical body) to this very day.

In both St. Luke's and St. Paul's accounts, what is seen is a "bright light that flashed from Heaven" and a "voice" speaking that only St. Paul could understand. The text no where speaks of Jesus coming down from Heaven, but of "a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining all around me and those who were journeying with me." Acts 9:3/Acts 22:6/Acts 26:13

As for the "likeness of men" statement, that is correct. Jesus, being a divine person, was made in the "likeness of men", but He will never be 'just' a human being in the same way we are. Rather, He was, is and remains a "divine" Person, but now with two natures, both divine and human. But we, even though we were created in His image, will never be "divine" like He is (Isaiah 43:10b; Isaiah 45:5). Jesus is God come here in the flesh. To say otherwise is to speak with the voice of the antichrist (i.e. 2 John 7).

Yeshua said...

"For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.
Behold, I have told you before.
Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not.
For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." Matthew 24:24

Yeshua is saying that many false Messiahs will appear, even saying "I am the Messiah". He says the false Messiah's and the false prophets will show great signs and wonders...

"And God wrought special (οὐ τὰς τυχούσας: not the ordinary...NKJV says unusual) miracles by the hands of Paul:
So that from his body were brought unto the sick handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the evil spirits went out of them." Acts 19:11

Yeshua also says that the son of man appearing shall be as lightening shining in the east, and seen in the west. This means a lot of people were going to see him return. He says if anyone tells you he is in the "secret chambers" don't believe them. This seems to mean "if anyone says I am in his head"...

The Lord did not "return" when He spoke with St. Paul from Heaven. Nor did St. Paul or any of the men who were with him claim that He did. Stephen saw the Lord (Father & Son) in his vision earlier in Acts, but this wasn't the sign of His return either.

"For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." Galatians 1:12

Paul did not learn his Gospel from the 12 Apostles. He didn't learn it from anyone. Why would Yeshua spend three years with the Apostles, when he could have simply come to them as a bright light and they would have known everything?

I hate answering questions with questions, but I think it's necessary here, why do you believe that Jesus came here? Why was it 'necessary' for Him to do so?

So if we were to compare all of this to Deuteronomy 13...

"If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder,
And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them;
Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the YHVH your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the YHVH your God with all your heart and with all your soul.
Ye shall walk after the YHVH your God, and fear him, and keep his commandments, and obey his voice, and ye shall serve him, and cleave unto him." Deauteronomy 13:1

Now, I do not believe in an "incarnation", nor do I believe in the virgin birth. I think there are enough contradictions and omissions from both Matthew and Luke that God made it pretty easy for us to see it doesn't belong. It took me many years to let go of it, but I simply said...."I'm going to read the third chapter of Luke, and if this is where he starts his Gospel, please show me". After that, I found many more things wrong with the first two chapters of both Gospels. But that's for another thread.

No "Incarnation" I assume that you do not believe that Jesus is God if that's the case, right? And if there was no "virgin birth" and Jesus is a man with not one, but two human parents, then Jesus was born "by nature, a child of wrath" just like all the rest of us (Psalms 51:5; Ephesians 2:3), IOW, a sinner, and therefore incapable of saving Himself, much less us!

This also means that it is YOU, not God, who decides which parts of the Bible are actually the "breathed" words of God and which are not

How handy for you (because by believing this is true you can "prove" that all of your presuppositions are true ... at least in your own eyes ).

What you are also saying is that our immanent/omnipotent God, who created space/time and everything in it (John 1:3; Colossians 1:16), and continues today to bind every bit of it together (Colossians 1:17), was incapable of making sure that the Bible (which is 'far and away' His principle means of communication with His people) said exactly what He wanted it to say!!

I guess what I'm really trying to say is...

"But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him." 1 John 2:27

...and...

"If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him." James 1:5

There is no reason for us to quote Paul as though he spoke the word of God. The word of God is the word of God. He talks a lot in the Scriptures, and He sent His Messiah to teach us His word, just like His word said He would do. Thank you and God bless you.

So you believe that God sent His Son here to teach us His word? What was Israel using for nearly 2,000 yrs then that they believed to be the words of God? As important as God's word is to us, the NT could have been delivered to us just like the OT was delivered to Israel, through prophets. So there must have been another, more important purpose for God to send us His one and only Son

What was that purpose?

Thanks!

--David
p.s. - I'll discuss 1 John 2:27/James 1:5 and the word of God/words of God in the 1st Person with you a little later, but there's a ton here already, so let's take a look at all of this first

 

[MWood]

Hi AW, why do you believe Jesus was a "spiritual" only Being at that point (Acts 9) The Lord took on a second, human, nature at His Incarnation and has remained the God/man ever since. He rose from the grave "bodily" and remains both God AND man in Heaven (with a glorified physical body) to this very day.

In both St. Luke's and St. Paul's accounts, what is seen is a "bright light that flashed from Heaven" and a "voice" speaking that only St. Paul could understand. The text no where speaks of Jesus coming down from Heaven, but of "a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining all around me and those who were journeying with me." Acts 9:3/Acts 22:6/Acts 26:13

As for the "likeness of men" statement, that is correct. Jesus, being a divine person, was made in the "likeness of men", but He will never be 'just' a human being in the same way we are. Rather, He was, is and remains a "divine" Person, but now with two natures, both divine and human. But we, even though we were created in His image, will never be "divine" like He is (Isaiah 43:10b; Isaiah 45:5). Jesus is God come here in the flesh. To say otherwise is to speak with the voice of the antichrist (i.e. 2 John 7).



The Lord did not "return" when He spoke with St. Paul from Heaven. Nor did St. Paul or any of the men who were with him claim that He did. Stephen saw the Lord (Father & Son) in his vision earlier in Acts, but this wasn't the sign of His return either.



I hate answering questions with questions, but I think it's necessary here, why do you believe that Jesus came here? Why was it 'necessary' for Him to do so?



No "Incarnation" I assume that you do not believe that Jesus is God if that's the case, right? And if there was no "virgin birth" and Jesus is a man with not one, but two human parents, then Jesus was born "by nature, a child of wrath" just like all the rest of us (Psalms 51:5; Ephesians 2:3), IOW, a sinner, and therefore incapable of saving Himself, much less us!

This also means that it is YOU, not God, who decides which parts of the Bible are actually the "breathed" words of God and which are not

How handy for you (because by believing this is true you can "prove" that all of your presuppositions are true ... at least in your own eyes ).

What you are also saying is that our immanent/omnipotent God, who created space/time and everything in it (John 1:3; Colossians 1:16), and continues today to bind every bit of it together (Colossians 1:17), was incapable of making sure that the Bible (which is 'far and away' His principle means of communication with His people) said exactly what He wanted it to say!!



So you believe that God sent His Son here to teach us His word? What was Israel using for nearly 2,000 yrs then that they believed to be the words of God? As important as God's word is to us, the NT could have been delivered to us just like the OT was delivered to Israel, through prophets. So there must have been another, more important purpose for God to send us His one and only Son

What was that purpose?

Thanks!

--David

To fulfill the promise that God made to Abram, That his seed would be a blessing to the whole world.
To fulfill the promise that God made to Israel, His Chosen People. That He would send a prophet of their kindred that is not unlike Moses. Spoken to Moses by God Himself, Prophesied by the prophets, from Samuel and all the prophets that followed after Samuel, written in the Psalms by King David.

This is the purpose of God sending His Son.

 

[St_Worm2]

To fulfill the promise that God made to Abram, That his seed would be a blessing to the whole world.
To fulfill the promise that God made to Israel, His Chosen People. That He would send a prophet of their kindred that is not unlike Moses. Spoken to Moses by God Himself, Prophesied by the prophets, from Samuel and all the prophets that followed after Samuel, written in the Psalms by King David.

This is the purpose of God sending His Son.

Hi MWood, why was it necessary for us that the Lord lived a perfect, sinless life while He was among us, that He died on the Cross, and that He rose again from the dead?

Thanks!

--David

"He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on
our behalf, so that we might become the
righteousness of God in Him"
2 Corinthians 5:21

​

 

[MWood]

Hi MWood, why was it necessary for us that the Lord lived a perfect, sinless life while He was among us, that He died on the Cross, and that He rose again from the dead?

Thanks!

--David

"He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on
our behalf, so that we might become the
righteousness of God in Him"
2 Corinthians 5:21

​

For Him to be a sacrifice for the world, He had to be like the sacrificial lamb, without spot or blemish. His death on the cross was that sacrifice that forgave the sins of the world, and for the redemption of the world. His resurrection was for our justification.

 

[St_Worm2]

For Him to be a sacrifice for the world, He had to be like the sacrificial lamb, without spot or blemish. His death on the cross was that sacrifice that forgave the sins of the world, and for the redemption of the world. His resurrection was for our justification.

Hi MWood, so the Lord came here in fulfillment of a promise that God made, because it was foretold that He would, and because it was absolutely necessary for us that He did (if we were to have any hope of salvation). I agree, that's all true

The Bible teaches that we are saved by God's grace And I believe that He bases His gracious choice to do so solely upon the meritorious work of His Son (His life/death/resurrection), through our belief/faith/trust in God that He will save us on that basis (saving faith itself being a "gift" from God .. Ephesians 2:8), and apart from works of any kind on our parts (good works being the 'result' of our being saved, not the 'cause' of it .. i.e. Ephesians 2:10). Salvation is all about God, yes

We are justified before God when He "declares" us so (a "declaration" made possible because He credits our sins to His Son's account, and His Son's righteousness to our accounts .. i.e. 2 Corinthians 5:21 ).

Are we on the same page about all of this?

Thanks!

Yours and His,
David

"To the one who does not work, but believes in
Him who justifies the wicked, his faith
is credited as righteousness"
Romans 4:5
​

 

[anonymouswho]

Hi AW, why do you believe Jesus was a "spiritual" only Being at that point (Acts 9) The Lord took on a second, human, nature at His Incarnation and has remained the God/man ever since. He rose from the grave "bodily" and remains both God AND man in Heaven (with a glorified physical body) to this very day.

In both St. Luke's and St. Paul's accounts, what is seen is a "bright light that flashed from Heaven" and a voice speaking that only St. Paul could understand. The text no where speaks of a 'spirit' come down from Heaven, but of "a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining all around me and those who were journeying with me." Acts 9:3/Acts 22:6/Acts 26:13

As for the "likeness of men" statement, that is correct. Jesus, being a divine person, was made in the "likeness of men", but He will never be 'just' a human being in the same way we are. Rather, He was, is and remains a "divine" Person, but now with two natures, both divine and human. But we, even though we were created in His image, will never be "divine" like He is (Isaiah 43:10b; Isaiah 45:5). Jesus is God come here in the flesh. To say otherwise is to speak with the voice of the antichrist (i.e. 2 John 7).

Thank you David. I do not believe Yeshua ever existed a spiritual being. I believe he was and is a man. Paul said that he had seen Yeshua, and that makes him an apostle.

"Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?" 1 Corinthians 9:1

So this means Paul understood the "light" to be Yeshua, and a light is not a flesh and blood human. We could say it was Yeshua in a "glorified body", but we only have the words of Paul to indicate there will be a glorified body anyways.

I'm sure it's obvious that I do not believe in the trinity. So terms such as God-Man give me the chills. I actually believe that to say Yeshua was anything other than a flesh and blood man is the spirit of the antichrist. The Messiah lived as a man and was ressurected as a man, so to make him anything other than a man would introduce us to "another Messiah", which is what antichrist literally means. If someone says Yeshua was not a flesh and blood man, but only appeared in the "likeness of men", then they have missed the purpose (which I will get to shortly).

The Lord did not "return" when He spoke with St. Paul from Heaven. Nor did St. Paul or any of the men who were with him claim that He did. Stephen saw the Lord (Father & Son) in his vision earlier in Acts, but this wasn't the sign of His return either.

This would make sense to me if Paul did not claim to see Yeshua. If Paul would have simply said he had a vision and was a disciple of Yeshua, then that would be fine. But Paul says he saw Yeshua, and he claims to be an Apostle. There are only twelve Apostles, and Peter and the others had the authority to choose Matthias as the twelfth.

No "Incarnation" I assume that you do not believe that Jesus is God if that's the case, right? And if there was no "virgin birth" and Jesus is a man with not one, but two human parents, then Jesus was born "by nature, a child of wrath" just like all the rest of us (Psalms 51:5; Ephesians 2:3), IOW, a sinner, and therefore incapable of saving Himself, much less us!

No I do not believe in "original sin". Psalm 51:5 does not mean David was sinful since his birth, otherwise...

"(For from my youth he was brought up with me, as with a father, and I have guided her from my mother's womb" Job 31:18

...would mean that Job has always guided this woman from the moment he was born. This is impossible, because he was just a baby.

Also, David said it was from his mother's womb brought him into sin. If Yeshua's biological father was God, and his biological mother was Mary, he would still have this "original sin" from Mary. Unless Mary was also sinless, but then her mother (and all generations) would have to be sinless, and there was no point in what Messiah accomplished. Mary's family had already accomplished it!

Here is an article from a regular Christian website... https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/276-original-sin-and-a-misapplied-passage

This also means that it is YOU, not God, who decides which parts of the Bible are actually the "breathed" words of God and which are not

How handy for you (because by believing this is true you can "prove" that all of your presuppositions are true ... at least in your own eyes ).

What you are also saying is that our immanent/omnipotent God, who created space/time and everything in it (John 1:3; Colossians 1:16), and continues today to bind every bit of it together (Colossians 1:17), was incapable of making sure that the Bible (which is 'far and away' His principle means of communication with His people) said exactly what He wanted it to say!!

Believe me my friend, it is not convenient for me whatsoever. I did not just read the bible one day and then decide I didn't like this or that. There are things in the bible that do not belong, such as John 5:4. If there was an angel that could stir some water and heal people, why did anyone flock to Yeshua? For this verse, we need to compare the various manuscripts, think logically about it, and decide if it makes any sense. The oldest manuscript of Luke does not have the first two chapters...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papyrus_75

And the Hebrew book of Matthew, which is most likely the original and used by the Ebionites, also did not have the first two chapters. I won't dwell on all my reasons for denying the virgin birth here, because this thread is about Paul. But I do not just get rid of whatever. If it wasn't there, nobody in any bible ever mentions it except for the beginning of two books that sound nothing alike, and it contradicts so many things, then we need to get rid of it.

The Scriptures are what Paul said are God-breathed, not the Gospels nor any of the Epistles. Yeshua said the Scriptures cannot be broken. The Scriptures are the Hebrew Scriptures, they are not a collection of Greek manuscripts about Yeshua or anything ever written by Paul. Even if we think Paul was a true Apostle, we should never say his word is Scripture.

Yes, I believe God is able to put exactly what He wants in the bible....

"And if the prophet be deceived when he hath spoken a thing, I YHVH have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand upon him, and will destroy him from the midst of my people Israel." Ezekiel 14:9

I do find it interesting that you ask this question about God's sovereignty. Christians believe God created mankind, then a few days later the man used something called a "freewill" to thwart God's "original purpose", thus "bringing sin into the world" in what is called "the fall". None of these things are mentioned in Genesis or any part of Scripture.

So you believe that God sent His Son here to teach us His word? What was Israel using for nearly 2,000 yrs then that they believed to be the words of God? As important as God's word is to us, the NT could have been delivered to us just like the OT was delivered to Israel, through prophets. So there must have been another, more important purpose for God to send us His one and only Son

What was that purpose?

Thanks!

--David

What was the purpose? I love this question. First, Israel was using the Scriptures just like we use the bible...reading it constantly and not having the slightest clue what it's about. If they understood, then there would have been no need for Yeshua to tell them otherwise, over and over again.

"How do ye say, We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us? Lo, certainly in vain (שֶׁ֥קֶר) made he it; the pen of the scribes is in vain (שֶׁ֥קֶר falsehood, lying)." Jeremiah 8:8

This is a whole other issue as well, but the original Hebrew Scriptures have been corrupted. Things have been added and taken away, but God has provided us with the resources and a spirit of discernment. The original Hebrew did not contain any degash marks (the dots and accent marks surrounding a word). These were added by the Masoretes. Here is one example...

רָשָׁע this word means "wicked", and רֶ֫שַׁע this word means "wickedness". Notice how they have different dots and dashes, but the stroke is the exact same. In Ancient Hebrew, the strokes are the only thing you would see, so it is up to the translator and interpreter to decide which is more appropriate.

Consider this as well...

"Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Put your burnt offerings unto your sacrifices, and eat flesh.
For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices:
But this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people: and walk ye in all the ways that I have commanded you, that it may be well unto you.
But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels and in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward." Jeremiah 7:21

God says he did not speak to the Israelites about sacrifices, but the Law says He did. The Jews were very serious about their sacrifices, and they believed God required this from them. But notice in Leviticus it says...

"And YHVH called unto Moses, and spake unto him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, IF any man of you bring an offering unto YHVH, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock." Leviticus 1:1

God has no desire for sacrifices...

"For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering.
The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." Psalm 51:16

"But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." Matthew 9:13

So the purpose has nothing to do with sacrifices, it has nothing to do with redeeming "fallen man" by God becoming a man and dying, and it has nothing to do with mankind making a freewill decision based on a multiple choice question from God- one that sends you to a place called "heaven" and another to an eternal torture chamber called "hell". The purpose is simple and beautiful...

"And God said, Let us make (נַֽעֲשֶׂ֥ה: accomplish) man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." Genesis 1:26

"And YHVH God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:" Genesis 3:22

"For unto the angels hath he not put in subjection the world to come, whereof we speak.
But one in a certain place testified, saying, What is man, that thou art mindful of him? or the son of man, that thou visitest him?
Thou madest him a little lower than the angels; thou crownedst him with glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands:
Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.
But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man." Hebrews 2:5

The purpose, the reason, the logos...is mankind.

Ἐν(in) ἀρχῇ (first) [no definite article just like b'reshit in Genesis 1:1] ἦν (was) ὁ (the) λόγος (reason), καὶ (and) ὁ (the) λόγος (reason) ἦν (was) πρὸς (moving towards) τὸ (the) θεόν (God), καὶ (and) θεὸς (divine) ἦν (was) ὁ (the) λόγος (reason)

οὗτος (it) ἦν (was) ἐν (in) ἀρχῇ (first) πρὸς (moving towards) τὸν (the) θεόν (God)

πάντα (all) δι' (because of) αὐτοῦ (it) ἐγένετο (emerges) καὶ (and) χωρὶς (without) αὐτοῦ (it) ἐγένετο (emerges) οὐδὲ (not) ἕν (one) ὃ (that) γέγονεν (has emerged)....

.....οὗτός (he) ἐστιν (it is) ὑπὲρ (on behalf of) οὗ (which) ἐγὼ (I) εἶπον (said) Ὀπίσω (after) μου (me) ἔρχεται (comes) ἀνὴρ (a man) ὃς (who) ἔμπροσθέν (precedence) μου (of me) γέγονεν (has), ὅτι (because) πρῶτός (before) μου (me) ἦν (he was)

(Clicking on the blue words will take you to a concordance)

God made absolutely everything for mankind. This is a true purpose, because the Scriptures are so true, nothing else can compare. God wanted to make man in His image, He accomplished this when man recieved the knowledge of good and evil, and then he had a man accomplish all that was righteous and good.

"Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil;
And deliver them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage.
Not surely indeed somewhere angels he helps, but seed of Abraham he helps*
Wherefore in all things it behoved (was necessary) him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted**, he is able to succour them that are tempted." Hebrews 2:14

*(This is a literal translation of the verse. The KJV says "For verily he took not on [him the nature of] angels; but he took on [him] the seed of Abraham..way too many italics to make this verse say something it does not say. The lying pen of the scribes)

**(Yacob [James] the brother of Yeshua, says in James 1:13 says "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man....here is an article that tries to explain this contradiction to the trinity https://carm.org/god-cannot-be-tempted-jesus-was-tempted... I consider this an epic fail, and rather than offer a coherent explanation, we're just loaded with other verses that are supposed to prove Yeshua is God and that Yacob was wrong).

Unfortunately, we cannot discuss the trinity here. If you'd like to private message me, we can discuss it if you'd like.

One more thing since this is a thread about Paul...

"But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." Romans 4:5

"Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not: for I will not justify the wicked." Exodus 23:7

It's interesting...Christianity has this whole web of ideas, where one doctrine is essential for another doctrine which is essential for another, and so on. I also have a web, but everything in my web is considered the worst of every heresy. It blows my mind everyday. I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you.

 

[MWood]

Hi MWood, so the Lord came here in fulfillment of a promise that God made, because it was foretold that He would, and because it was absolutely necessary for us that He did (if we were to have any hope of salvation). I agree, that's all true

The Bible teaches that we are saved by God's grace And I believe that He bases His gracious choice to do so solely upon the meritorious work of His Son (His life/death/resurrection), through our belief/faith/trust in God that He will save us on that basis (saving faith itself being a "gift" from God .. Ephesians 2:8), and apart from works of any kind on our parts (good works being the 'result' of our being saved, not the 'cause' of it .. i.e. Ephesians 2:10). Salvation is all about God, yes

We are justified before God when He "declares" us so (a "declaration" made possible because He credits our sins to His Son's account, and His Son's righteousness to our accounts .. i.e. 2 Corinthians 5:21 ).

Are we on the same page about all of this?

Thanks!

Yours and His,
David

"To the one who does not work, but believes in
Him who justifies the wicked, his faith
is credited as righteousness"
Romans 4:5
​

Yes indeed!

 

[ac28]

anonymouswho said:
"Thank you David. I do not believe Yeshua ever existed a spiritual being. I believe he was and is a man."

If you really believe this, it is impossible that you are a Christian. Why are you posting on a Christians Only section of the forum?

 

[St_Worm2]

Thank you David. I do not believe Yeshua ever existed a spiritual being. I believe he was and is a man.

Such a belief is certainly possible for anyone who chooses to accept certain passages, deny others, and change the meaning of the Scriptures to that which best suits their fancy. Of course, for those of us who believe that the Bible is the actual word of God, it makes doing such a thing a bit more difficult

"I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me." ~John 6:38

"For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist." ~2 John 1:7

“I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you about these things for the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star.” ~Revelation 22:16
​

Paul said that he had seen Yeshua, and that makes him an apostle.

Pilate saw Jesus and talked to Him face to face. Does that make Pilate an Apostle too

"Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord?" 1 Corinthians 9:1

So this means Paul understood the "light" to be Yeshua, and a light is not a flesh and blood human. We could say it was Yeshua in a "glorified body", but we only have the words of Paul to indicate there will be a glorified body anyways.

The light that blinded St. Paul was, no doubt, the glorious brilliance emanating forth from Jesus who, as the risen Lord, now ascended back to Glory, was both man AND God (see Revelation 21:23).

St. Paul NEVER tells us that the Lord "returned" to earth in glory at that time or that He was the Christ or that the Christ could now be found over here or over there (i.e. Matthew 24), only that He had seen and heard Him and that Jesus had chosen, called and sent him, "to bear His name before the Gentiles and kings and the sons of Israel".

Gotta go for a bit. I'll be back later to finish replying to the rest.

--David

 

[anonymouswho]

anonymouswho said:
"Thank you David. I do not believe Yeshua ever existed a spiritual being. I believe he was and is a man."

If you really believe this, it is impossible that you are a Christian. Why are you posting on a Christians Only section of the forum?

Thank you for replying. I post on a Christian forum because you guys read the same books I read. If I wanted to talk about these books, where else would I go?

You're right, I'm not "a Christian" in any sense of the religion. Christian is an adjective, not a noun. It supposedly means "follower of Christ" in Greek, but since this term was coined in Antioch, there's no sure way of knowing what it means. It was a derogatory term used by pagan Gentiles to describe the men they thought were ignorant and strange for not indulging in their wickedness. Yeshua called his followers disciples and brothers.

"For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother." Matthew 12:50

Peter says...

"But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or as a thief, or as an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men's matters.
Yet if [any man suffer] as (Greek: like) a Christian, let him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God on this behalf." 1 Peter 4:15

He didn't give us a stamp of approval for this word. It's like if someone told me "If you must suffer as a cracker, don't be ashamed".

Here's an article that doesn't condemn the word, but offers great insight into what it means..

http://ichthys.com/mail-the-name-Christian.htm

Thank you.