Anyone else here reads from the American Standard Version?

[OzSpen]

I answered your question - Messiah's atonement is only for those in YHWH's Covenant.

Because you reject the Pauline corpus, you reject God's revelation 1n 1 Tim. 2:3-4 that states:

This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (ESV), my emphasis.

Messiah's atonement is designed for the whole world and not just the elect as God's desire is for all people to be saved.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

netzarim,

You are correct, in a sense. However, the only material Messiah identified as Scripture was the Torah/Law and the Neviim/Prophets.

It is time that you got real with the evidence. It was an impossibility for Jesus, the Messiah, to identify the NT Scripture while he was here on earth as the NT Scriptures had not been written.

You used a red herring logical fallacy in this kind of statement.

Oz

 

[ananda]

Because you reject the Pauline corpus, you reject God's revelation 1n 1 Tim. 2:3-4 that states: Messiah's atonement is designed for the whole world and not just the elect as God's desire is for all people to be saved.

You misunderstand me.

I do believe that YHWH desires the whole world to be saved. I do not need Paul to tell me this. I read this in Isa 45:22, 49:6, Mt 28:19, Jn 3:16, Rev 14:6, etc.

Messiah's atonement is indeed offered to the whole world, but it will only apply to those who accepts YHWH's offer. How can one accept His offer? By walking in His narrow Path of salvation and embracing His covenant through trust, repentance, and obedience. They become Israel - "those who struggle with YHWH for His blessing" - just as YHWH changed Jacob into Israel.

Those who reject His offer will not receive Messiah's atonement.

 

[ananda]

netzarim, It is time that you got real with the evidence. It was an impossibility for Jesus, the Messiah, to identify the NT Scripture while he was here on earth as the NT Scriptures had not been written. You used a red herring logical fallacy in this kind of statement. Oz

Not so. Messiah could have easily delivered His endorsement through the Apostle John in the Revelation. But He didn't.

My argument stands. Only the Torah and Neviim is identified as Scripture by Messiah. Anything else is man's tradition.

Now, with that said, I'm not saying that the tradition is completely incorrect; I do believe that the canon we have today is essentially correct - with the exception of the Pauline writings.

 

[OzSpen]

Not so. Messiah could have easily delivered His endorsement through the Apostle John in the Revelation. But He didn't.

My argument stands. Only the Torah and Neviim is identified as Scripture by Messiah. Anything else is man's tradition.

Now, with that said, I'm not saying that the tradition is completely incorrect; I do believe that the canon we have today is essentially correct - with the exception of the Pauline writings.

So, for you human reason is superior to God's revelation. God gave us the Pauline writings, but you pick and choose.

We do not have common ground for discussion when you reject a large portion of the NT canon of Scripture, based on your fallible human reason.

Oz

 

[ananda]

So, for you human reason is superior to God's revelation. God gave us the Pauline writings, but you pick and choose./quote]

1. Prove that Elohim gave us the Pauline epistles as Scripture, and
2. Prove that Elohim did not send Paul as a false witness (cf Deu 13:3) to test our love for Him.

 

[OzSpen]

So, for you human reason is superior to God's revelation. God gave us the Pauline writings, but you pick and choose./quote]

1. Prove that Elohim gave us the Pauline epistles as Scripture, and
2. Prove that Elohim did not send Paul as a false witness (cf Deu 13:3) to test our love for Him.

Please prove to me that Elohim gave us Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, the Book of Acts, Hebrews, James, 1 & 2 Peter, 1 & 2 & 3 John, Jude and the Book of Revelation.

Oz

 

[ananda]

Please prove to me that Elohim gave us Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, the Book of Acts, Hebrews, James, 1 & 2 Peter, 1 & 2 & 3 John, Jude and the Book of Revelation. Oz

I'll answer that, but first you'll need to know how many Messianics, including myself, view the canon ...

Messianics have a different perspective on the authority of Scripture, as compared to mainstream Christians ("MC"). For example, MCs would probably say that each book in the whole Bible is equally inspired, from Genesis to Revelation.

Many Messianics would disagree. We would say that there are three tiers of Scripture - Torah/Law, Neviim/Prophets, and Ketuvim/Writings. These divisions were also recognized by Messiah Himself when He spoke about "The Law and the Prophets", or "The Law, Prophets, and Psalms".

As such, many Messianics, including myself, would classify the epistles of the apostles among the Ketuvim/Writings - the least important section. This section is considered edifying, but not necessarily directly inspired by Elohim - like any other good, godly sermon. Many Messianics would therefore place Paul's writings in this section. I personally exclude him altogether.

What would it take to upgrade a Writing into the Prophets section? Through fulfilled prophecy. If a book contains fulfilled prophecy, then it authenticates the book as definitely from YHWH, and can be then considered part of the Neviim/Prophets.

What is considered Torah? The direct Words of Elohim & Gen-Deu is considered that. I personally also consider the Words of Messiah to be Torah, since I believe Messiah to be YHWH.

You asked ...

Please prove to me that Elohim gave us Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, the Book of Acts, Hebrews, James, 1 & 2 Peter, 1 & 2 & 3 John, Jude and the Book of Revelation. Oz

The accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John concurs with the prior revelation and prophecies given in the Tanach (aka "Old Testament") regarding Messiah (cf Isa 8:20). Messiah's Words as recorded in those books also concur with prior established Scripture. Therefore, I accept these books as "Scripture", and Messiah's Words specifically as Torah.

Revelation does not conflict with prior scripture. Also, it contains fulfilled prophecy, in my eyes. Therefore I consider this book to be part of the Neviim/Prophets.

James, 1 Peter, 1-3 John, and Jude do not conflict with prior established Scripture (also Isa 8:20). However, I do not believe that they contain fulfilled prophecies; therefore, I consider them part of the Ketuvim/Writings.

Acts is inconsistent. There are accounts recorded in there that conflict with one another (such as Paul's various Damascus-road experiences). Also, Stephen's claim that Torah was given by angels. This conflicts with what Torah itself records. I have two choices with Acts: either 1. toss it out completely in obedience to Isa 8:20, or 2. consider it to only be a history book - flawed and to be taken with a grain of salt. I prefer option #2.

Regarding Hebrews: I do not consider Hebrews to be Scripture. Its contents conflict with prior established Scripture.

Finally, I also contend that the doctrines found in the Pauline epistles conflict with prior established Scripture, and with what Messiah taught. I therefore reject it in obedience to Deu 13:1-5, Deu 18, Isa 8:20, Jn 8:31, etc.

Your turn Prove to me that 1. Elohim gave us the Pauline epistles as Scripture, and 2. Prove that Elohim did not send Paul as a false witness to test our love for Him (Deu 13:3).

 

[OzSpen]

Finally, I also contend that the doctrines found in the Pauline epistles conflict with prior established Scripture, and with what Messiah taught. I therefore reject it in obedience to Deu 13:1-5, Deu 18, Isa 8:20, Jn 8:31, etc.

Your turn Prove to me that 1. Elohim gave us the Pauline epistles as Scripture, and 2. Prove that Elohim did not send Paul as a false witness to test our love for Him (Deu 13:3).

When you fail to give the specifics of where the Pauline epistles conflict with OT and NT Scripture, I have no basis on which to respond as you have provided no proof, no evidence. You are building a straw man logical fallacy when you make an accusation without evidence. That is your assertion, which provides no proof.

Paul’s epistles are of God for these reasons:

1 Corinthians 14:37:
If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord (ESV).

AND

Colossians 1:24-26:
24 Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I am filling up what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the church, 25 of which I became a minister according to the stewardship from God that was given to me for you, to make the word of God fully known, 26 the mystery hidden for ages and generations but now revealed to his saints.

AND

2 Timothy 4:2-5:
I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: 2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. 3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, 4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. 5 As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfil your ministry.

Sincerely, Oz

 

[ananda]

When you fail to give the specifics of where the Pauline epistles conflict with OT and NT Scripture, I have no basis on which to respond as you have provided no proof, no evidence. You are building a straw man logical fallacy when you make an accusation without evidence. That is your assertion, which provides no proof.

Here are a few contradictions:

Did or did not Paul claim to be the sole apostle to the Gentiles (Gal 2:7-9), contrary to how Messiah already commanded the eleven (Mt 28:19) to the Gentiles?

Did or did not Paul claim that Torah was done away with (all of Galatians), and that if one is circumcised (e.g. obedience to Torah), Messiah is of no use to you (Gal 5:2)? Isn't this contrary to what Messiah claimed, that the Torah and the Prophets would remain until heaven and earth passes away (Mt 5:18), and that all points of Torah should be obeyed (Mt 5:19, 19:17, 23:23)?

Paul’s epistles are of God for these reasons: 1 Corinthians 14:37: AND Colossians 1:24-26: AND 2 Timothy 4:2-5: Sincerely, Oz

You quoted Paul to witness Paul? As Messiah Himself said:

If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. - Jn 5:31

I will not hear Paul's own self-witness. If this applies to Messiah, I will also demand it of Paul, even moreso. You must provide two or more other first-hand witnesses to Paul's claims:

But if he hear thee not, take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three every word may be established. - Mt 18:16 cf Num 35:30, 19:15.

 

[OzSpen]

Here are a few contradictions:

Did or did not Paul claim to be the sole apostle to the Gentiles (Gal 2:7-9), contrary to how Messiah already commanded the eleven (Mt 28:19) to the Gentiles?

Did or did not Paul claim that Torah was done away with (all of Galatians), and that if one is circumcised (e.g. obedience to Torah), Messiah is of no use to you (Gal 5:2)? Isn't this contrary to what Messiah claimed, that the Torah and the Prophets would remain until heaven and earth passes away (Mt 5:18), and that all points of Torah should be obeyed (Mt 5:19, 19:17, 23:23)?

You quoted Paul to witness Paul? As Messiah Himself said:

If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. - Jn 5:31

I will not hear Paul's own self-witness. If this applies to Messiah, I will also demand it of Paul, even moreso. You must provide two or more other first-hand witnesses to Paul's claims:

But if he hear thee not, take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two witnesses or three every word may be established. - Mt 18:16 cf Num 35:30, 19:15.

Galatians 3:23-29 demonstrates what happened to the OT theocratic law for Israel:

23 Now before faith came, we were held captive under the law, imprisoned until the coming faith would be revealed. 24 So then, the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian, 26 for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave[a] nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise (ESV).

When you want to maintain the OT Law and exclude the Pauline epistles, you are not following God's revelation as a NT believer. You are still "held captive under law".

As I said to you in a previous post, you exalt your own human reason over NT revelation. You have made your reason to be your god and you subvert what the NT revelation is saying through God's revelation to Paul.

We cannot have a continuing discussion when you exalt your human reason like this and make you the judge of what ought to be in the NT.

Bye, Oz

 

[ananda]

Galatians 3:23-29 demonstrates what happened to the OT theocratic law for Israel ... When you want to maintain the OT Law and exclude the Pauline epistles, you are not following God's revelation as a NT believer. You are still "held captive under law".

Guess who else upheld the necessity of the Law? The Apostle John, who wrote the Revelation well after the "apostle" Paul:

"And the dragon waxed wroth with the woman, and went away to make war with the rest of her seed, that keep the commandments of θεοῦ/Father-YHWH/God and hold the testimony of Yehoshua:" Rev 12:17 - The dragon only concerned himself with warring against those who both reflected the life of Messiah and kept YHWH's Commandments!

"Here is the patience of the saints, they that keep the commandments of YHWH and the faith/faithfulness/trust of Yehoshua." - Rev 14:12 - Again, we see here that the saints both keep YHWH's Commandments and trust in Yehoshua. Both are required.

"Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city." - Rev 22:14 - Just as Adam & Eve was denied eternal life by being denied access to the Tree of Life in the Garden, the redeemed will have access to that very same life giving tree by virtue of the fact that they keep Elohim's commandments.

For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. - 1Jo 5:3 - John writes that we express our love for YHWH by obeying and keeping His Commandments.

Messiah commands us to be obedient. James concurs when he writes "faith without works is dead". Peter agrees in 1Pe 1:17 & 2Pe 3:17.

The only dissenter is Paul, and Hebrews.

I know who I believe - Messiah, and His authentic apostles. Not Paul and his unwitnessed doctrine which revises both Torah and Messiah.

 

[OzSpen]

Guess who else upheld the necessity of the Law? The Apostle John, who wrote the Revelation well after the "apostle" Paul:

"And the dragon waxed wroth with the woman, and went away to make war with the rest of her seed, that keep the commandments of θεοῦ/Father-YHWH/God and hold the testimony of Yehoshua:" Rev 12:17 - The dragon only concerned himself with warring against those who both reflected the life of Messiah and kept YHWH's Commandments!

"Here is the patience of the saints, they that keep the commandments of YHWH and the faith/faithfulness/trust of Yehoshua." - Rev 14:12 - Again, we see here that the saints both keep YHWH's Commandments and trust in Yehoshua. Both are required.

"Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city." - Rev 22:14 - Just as Adam & Eve was denied eternal life by being denied access to the Tree of Life in the Garden, the redeemed will have access to that very same life giving tree by virtue of the fact that they keep Elohim's commandments.

For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous. - 1Jo 5:3 - John writes that we express our love for YHWH by obeying and keeping His Commandments.

Messiah commands us to be obedient. James concurs when he writes "faith without works is dead". Peter agrees in 1Pe 1:17 & 2Pe 3:17.

The only dissenter is Paul, and Hebrews.

I know who I believe - Messiah, and His authentic apostles. Not Paul and his unwitnessed doctrine which revises both Torah and Messiah.

I know whom I believe and it is NT revelation over netzarim's human reason.

Bye, Oz

 

[ananda]

I know whom I believe and it is NT revelation over netzarim's human reason. Bye, Oz

Brother, we have many today who claim to be Apostles and Prophets. Have you added their writings to your Bible yet?

If Paul Smith came preaching on the streets of New York today, claiming to be an apostle appointed by Messiah and he brought with him a couple of new epistles, would you turn off your "human reason" & believe Paul Smith on his word alone & quickly add his writings to your Bible, or would you:

1. Demand two or more first-hand witnesses to his alleged commissioning, in addition to his testimony, and
2. Compare Paul Smith's message to what was established previously as Scripture?

Thank you

Or, let's put it this way. Instead of quickly and readily accepting all the words of a self-proclaimed 'Apostle Paul' of New York City in 2012 on simple faith, I'm going to go through all of what he says with a fine-toothed comb. Especially if he claims that he has a new message from Elohim. If he has any inconsistencies with what came before, then I'm going to hold a big question mark over him, and I will indeed demand two or more first-hand witnesses (Mt 18:16) to confirm his account & unique testimony. I will suspect him to be a wolf in sheep's clothing first until he and his words have proven himself, rather than giving him the benefit of the doubt. For someone claiming to be an apostle and prophet, I am indeed going to have an extremely high standard for him and his words, much more so than any other ordinary man who holds no claim for direct inspiration.

Shouldn't I hold the same standard for Paul of Tarsus of 60 a.d.?

 

[OzSpen]

Brother, we have many today who claim to be Apostles and Prophets. Have you added their writings to your Bible yet?

If Paul Smith came preaching on the streets of New York today, claiming to be an apostle appointed by Messiah and he brought with him a couple of new epistles, would you turn off your "human reason" & believe Paul Smith on his word alone & quickly add his writings to your Bible, or would you:

1. Demand two or more first-hand witnesses to his alleged commissioning, in addition to his testimony, and
2. Compare Paul Smith's message to what was established previously as Scripture?

Thank you

Or, let's put it this way. Instead of quickly and readily accepting all the words of a self-proclaimed 'Apostle Paul' of New York City in 2012 on simple faith, I'm going to go through all of what he says with a fine-toothed comb. Especially if he claims that he has a new message from Elohim. If he has any inconsistencies with what came before, then I'm going to hold a big question mark over him, and I will indeed demand two or more first-hand witnesses (Mt 18:16) to confirm his account & unique testimony. I will suspect him to be a wolf in sheep's clothing first until he and his words have proven himself, rather than giving him the benefit of the doubt. For someone claiming to be an apostle and prophet, I am indeed going to have an extremely high standard for him and his words, much more so than any other ordinary man who holds no claim for direct inspiration.

Shouldn't I hold the same standard for Paul of Tarsus of 60 a.d.?

You seem to err again. I have the complete OT and NT canon (including the Pauline epistles), by which to judge Paul Smith, John Dominic Crossan, Robert Funk, Marcus Borg, Bart Ehrman, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Mary, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Gospel of Nicodemus, the Shepherd of Hermas, Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland, Billy Graham, J I Packer, Wayne Grudem, D A Carson, netzarim and Oz.

Bye, Oz

 

[ananda]

You seem to err again. I have the complete OT and NT canon (including the Pauline epistles), by which to judge Paul Smith ...

I cannot follow a man who admitted that he engaged in deception in his ministry:

ἔστω δέ ἐγὼ οὐ κατεβάρησα ὑμᾶς ἀλλ᾽ ὑπάρχων πανοῦργος δόλῳ ὑμᾶς ἔλαβον - 2Cor 12:16 - But be it so, I did not myself burden you; but, being crafty, I caught you with dolos/deception/guile. (cf 1Cor 9:19-23)

Secondly, we read how Messiah commended the Asian congregation at Ephesus for rejecting false apostles (Rev 2:2). He also commended them for testing - which is what you're saying we should not do?! The only "apostle" we have on record that was rejected by all believers in Asia Minor is Paul himself, by his own admission (2Tim 1:15)!

All of chapters 2 & 3 of Revelation (Messiah's letters to the seven Asian congregations) seems, to me, to be veiled messages against Paul & Pauline doctrine (e.g. references to works, leaving their first love for another, Nicolaitians, false Jews, Baalam, eating idol foods, committing fornication, Jezebel, etc.)

It all boils down to this for me: If Paul is an authentic apostle, and I've ignored his writings, then I'm not worried - we can still be saved without Paul's doctrines (as evidenced throughout the Bible). If Paul is a false apostle, and I heed his doctrines, then I should be fearful for my eternal salvation. Either way, I don't need Paul.

We are saved by Yehoshua Messiah. Not by Paul.

 

[OzSpen]

I cannot follow a man who admitted that he engaged in deception in his ministry:

ἔστω δέ ἐγὼ οὐ κατεβάρησα ὑμᾶς ἀλλ᾽ ὑπάρχων πανοῦργος δόλῳ ὑμᾶς ἔλαβον - 2Cor 12:16 - But be it so, I did not myself burden you; but, being crafty, I caught you with dolos/deception/guile. (cf 1Cor 9:19-23)

Secondly, we read how Messiah commended the Asian congregation at Ephesus for rejecting false apostles (Rev 2:2). He also commended them for testing - which is what you're saying we should not do?! The only "apostle" we have on record that was rejected by all believers in Asia Minor is Paul himself, by his own admission (2Tim 1:15)!

All of chapters 2 & 3 of Revelation (Messiah's letters to the seven Asian congregations) seems, to me, to be veiled messages against Paul & Pauline doctrine (e.g. references to works, leaving their first love for another, Nicolaitians, false Jews, Baalam, eating idol foods, committing fornication, Jezebel, etc.)

It all boils down to this for me: If Paul is an authentic apostle, and I've ignored his writings, then I'm not worried - we can still be saved without Paul's doctrines (as evidenced throughout the Bible). If Paul is a false apostle, and I heed his doctrines, then I should be fearful for my eternal salvation. Either way, I don't need Paul.

We are saved by Yehoshua Messiah. Not by Paul.

Why do you twist what 2 Cor 12:16 in context states:

14 Here for the third time I am ready to come to you. And I will not be a burden, for I seek not what is yours but you. For children are not bound to save up for their parents, but parents for their children. 15 I will most gladly spend and be spent for your souls. If I love you more, am I to be loved less? 16 But granting that I myself did not burden you, I was crafty, you say, and got the better of you by deceit. 17 Did I take advantage of you through any of those whom I sent to you? 18 I urged Titus to go, and sent the brother with him. Did Titus take advantage of you? Did we not act in the same spirit? Did we not take the same steps? (ESV)

Literally, it says, 'being crafty with guile you'. The Corinthians were saying Paul was crafty and with guile. That was not Paul speaking.

Since you twist the Scriptures like this, I will not engage further with you on this topic.

Bye, Oz

 

[ananda]

Why do you twist what 2 Cor 12:16 in context states:

Sorry, but actually the ESV is twisting that verse here. There is absolutely no "you say" found in the Greek. The ESV translators added that, perhaps to save Paul.

Since you twist the Scriptures like this, I will not engage further with you on this topic. Bye, Oz

Thank you for the conversation thus far. May YHWH and Yehoshua guide your Way.

 

[OzSpen]

Sorry, but actually the ESV is twisting that verse here. There is absolutely no "you say" found in the Greek. The ESV translators added that, perhaps to save Paul.

You are wrong again. I happen to read, translate and exegete Greek. The ESV is translating accurately. It is you who is mistranslating Paul.

Oz

 

[ananda]

You are wrong again. I happen to read, translate and exegete Greek. The ESV is translating accurately. It is you who is mistranslating Paul.

Oz

Great - please show me which word(s) in that verse translates into "you say":

ἔστω δέ ἐγὼ οὐ κατεβάρησα ὑμᾶς ἀλλ᾽ ὑπάρχων πανοῦργος δόλῳ ὑμᾶς ἔλαβον

Thank you.