How should we read Paul?

[Extraneous]

extraneous,
Where did I say that no teacher would dare teach that sermon? I said the whole bible is for us in the proper perspective.
The sermon on the mount is full of spiritual principles. As christians we are in a spiritual war and can be caught off guard at any time. Why would a preacher not preach on being pure in heart or a peacemaker etc.
The problem is most people do not understand the KOH and the KOG message and what it is about and they just like at Jesus teachings are under the context of moral law alone or the new covenant when they were under the Mosaic law period.
Now if you think you know something tell me what the KOH and the KOG in connection with the Mosaic law and why that is important to understand before you go expounding what it means to new covenant believers in the church. Jerry Kelso

I don't feel like i need to explain anything to you. You said not teacher would dare preach the sermon in the mount. You didn't say that they wouldn't dare use it to teach OT law, that's not what you said at all. My ignore list seems to be getting larger these days.

 

[Foghorn]

Sir, you keep saying the above but never point them out.

It's because he can't.

 

[Foghorn]

Any person can hear the Gospel, that doesnt mean that they actually hear it though.

IMO Your absolutely correct.

As long as they can twist it to conform to what their idol factory has created, that they accept.

 

[Lulav]

What Peter uttered was not evil, but an ignorant response wishing for the well being of his Master with a love to protect Him.

That's what I was trying to say, it is 'evil' in ignorance.

What is evil is what is in adversity to God, the words ra' and Satan are related.

However we may do things that we believe God would sanction but if they are against His plan, His word, then we to in that moment become the adversary.

 

[Foghorn]

Yes, this is very true. The reason for that is because God gave us a gift of free will. And like the wheat and tares, good and evil, they look the same, and it's hard to distinguish which is why we need the comforter to lead us.

There is no free will, if man had free will and wanted to deceive we would have an even more difficult time. God does not give man that power.

We also need to be careful not to judge to quickly, there are those who's fruit is so small and new we cannot see it, but God can because this person is in Christ whom is the Fount of every blessing.

Someone who is consistent and rejects Christ, this is different. That fruit is ripe

We need to see the Adversary in the eyes of G-d he that opposes Him also is used for testing His people. He (the Adversary) was sent to test Jesus, why would he not be sent to test us?

Yes, and we must remember he is God's devil and can only do what God allows, we shouldn't give him too much power.

 

[Lulav]

Your cult author displays his ignorance again and again. Let's start here:

1. The supposed "contradiction" between Saul's conversion accounts in Acts.
As has previously been shown, the word translated heard in both these accounts can mean either heard or understood. These accounts are easily reconciled by showing that those around did not understand the voice, though they heard the sound and recognized it as a voice.

2. The "inconsistency with Timothy" and his instructions to the church in Galatia.
Again, as has been previously shown, Paul instructed the Galatians not to be circumcised because the Jews were saying that they had to in order to be saved. Paul affirmed Jesus' own words that the only requirement for salvation was belief in the only begotten Son of God.
When Paul had Timothy circumcised, he did it not for salvation, but so that Timothy could accompany him on his missionary journey to the Jews. The Bible even tells us this. It was not for Timothy's salvation, and I'm sure Timothy knew that. This is neither inconsistency nor contradiction.

3. The treatment of Paul as ignorant of the Old Testament
Paul was a Pharisee. He learned from Gamaliel, one of the most respected pharisees. In order to be a pharisee, one had to know the Torah, the Prophets, and the Wisdom writings to the point of having most of them memorized. He was not ignorant of Old Testament law, and he was a Jew. If anyone had a reason to boast in their works, it was Paul. But instead he preached the good news of salvation by faith alone. Paul would have learned the writings in their original Hebrew, not in the Greek septuagint. To make the claim that Paul knew only the septuagint puts the author's ignorance on full display.

4. The suggestion that Paul's claim of salvation by faith alone is unscriptural
There are many direct quotes from Jesus that can be used to demonstrate the fallacy of this, but the most commonly known one is this:
"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved."
Similarly, there are the words uttered to the thief on the cross - a sinner who repented in what were quite literally the last hours of his life:
"Truly I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise."
According to the law, there is no way that Jesus could say that to the thief. He had no chance to atone for his sins. He had no chance to prove his faith by works. Yet Jesus told him that he would be with Him in paradise that very day.

5. The suggestion that Paul's usage of the phrase "there is none righteous" is wrong.
Jesus Himself said "Why do you call me good? There is none good but God." He also demonstrated, as is affirmed by James and Paul, that whoever breaks even one little part of the law is a sinner and guilty of all of it. The only righteousness any of us have is the righteousness of Christ.

This list could go on and on, with plenty of scriptural and contextual rebuttals. Your author, like you, starts with the premise that Paul is wrong - and why? Because he wants to be one of the "righteous" and wants people who don't agree with him to be numbered among the "wicked." And he wants to be able to prove his "righteousness" by his works, and the "wickedness" of others by their lack thereof or merely their disagreement with him.

I could write a rebuttal for each of those but it would only further argue a misunderstood point.

The point is that there are many who have come to similar conclusions, but thinking they have come to the end of the puzzle when in reality they have only discovered the long hidden pieces. Paul gives clues throughout his writings but they must be separated out to understand their meaning. It is not like a code or cipher but is rather more complex as it must be gleaned from a great body of writings not just one document. But the outcome is worth the detail involved.

It is wise to be well versed in the Proverbs and in this case, this one

It is the glory of God to conceal a matter; to search out a matter is the glory of kings. Pro 25:2

 

[Lulav]

There is no free will, if man had free will and wanted to deceive we would have an even more difficult time. God does not give man that power.

We also need to be careful not to judge to quickly, there are those who's fruit is so small and new we cannot see it, but God can because this person is in Christ whom is the Fount of every blessing.

Someone who is consistent and rejects Christ, this is different. That fruit is ripe

Yes, and we must remember he is God's devil and can only do what God allows, we shouldn't give him too much power.

There has been free will since the Garden. Choices were placed before mankind and the wrong choice was made. Today we still have the choice of those two trees and our eternal life is predicated on which we choose now in this life.

H

 

[Righttruth]

Your cult author displays his ignorance again and again. Let's start here:
1. The supposed "contradiction" between Saul's conversion accounts in Acts.
As has previously been shown, the word translated heard in both these accounts can mean either heard or understood. These accounts are easily reconciled by showing that those around did not understand the voice, though they heard the sound and recognized it as a voice.

KJV is considered authoritative and normally accepted. No need to go for convenient and biased translations.

2. The "inconsistency with Timothy" and his instructions to the church in Galatia.
Again, as has been previously shown, Paul instructed the Galatians not to be circumcised because the Jews were saying that they had to in order to be saved. Paul affirmed Jesus' own words that the only requirement for salvation was belief in the only begotten Son of God.
When Paul had Timothy circumcised, he did it not for salvation, but so that Timothy could accompany him on his missionary journey to the Jews. The Bible even tells us this. It was not for Timothy's salvation, and I'm sure Timothy knew that. This is neither inconsistency nor contradiction.

So Paul acted a drama to skirt his theology! That proves his true color against the backdrop of Peter's behavior.

3. The treatment of Paul as ignorant of the Old Testament
Paul was a Pharisee. He learned from Gamaliel, one of the most respected pharisees. In order to be a pharisee, one had to know the Torah, the Prophets, and the Wisdom writings to the point of having most of them memorized. He was not ignorant of Old Testament law, and he was a Jew. If anyone had a reason to boast in their works, it was Paul. But instead he preached the good news of salvation by faith alone. Paul would have learned the writings in their original Hebrew, not in the Greek septuagint. To make the claim that Paul knew only the septuagint puts the author's ignorance on full display.

Boasting yes, Paul excelled in that. Faith alone theology is counterfeit. Faith and good works are two sides of the same coin. One without the other is fraud.

4. The suggestion that Paul's claim of salvation by faith alone is unscriptural
There are many direct quotes from Jesus that can be used to demonstrate the fallacy of this, but the most commonly known one is this:
"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved."

That is piece wise understanding. Only those who believe and remain obedient to cultivate the fruit of the Spirit will be saved. (John 15:1,2)

Similarly, there are the words uttered to the thief on the cross - a sinner who repented in what were quite literally the last hours of his life:
"Truly I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise."
According to the law, there is no way that Jesus could say that to the thief. He had no chance to atone for his sins. He had no chance to prove his faith by works. Yet Jesus told him that he would be with Him in paradise that very day.

Are you going to be a thief on the cross to claim that?

5. The suggestion that Paul's usage of the phrase "there is none righteous" is wrong.
Jesus Himself said "Why do you call me good? There is none good but God." He also demonstrated, as is affirmed by James and Paul, that whoever breaks even one little part of the law is a sinner and guilty of all of it. The only righteousness any of us have is the righteousness of Christ.

It doesn't mean Jesus was unrighteous. There were righteous people too in Jesus' time when He came to save the sinners.

This list could go on and on, with plenty of scriptural and contextual rebuttals. Your author, like you, starts with the premise that Paul is wrong - and why? Because he wants to be one of the "righteous" and wants people who don't agree with him to be numbered among the "wicked." And he wants to be able to prove his "righteousness" by his works, and the "wickedness" of others by their lack thereof or merely their disagreement with him.

No wonder people like sugar coated candy of Paul without support from the Lord!

 

[Foghorn]

There has been free will since the Garden. Choices were placed before mankind and the wrong choice was made. Today we still have the choice of those two trees and our eternal life is predicated on which we choose now in this life.

H

man can only choose according to his nature. Paul teaches the natural man (the unregenerate) cannot even appraise the things of the spirit, let alone choose. Jesus taught unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.

The fall of Adam, was predetermined.

 

[Foghorn]

man can only choose according to his nature. Paul teaches the natural man (the unregenerate) cannot even appraise the things of the spirit, let alone choose. Jesus taught unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.

The fall of Adam, was predetermined.

Besides, Adam was deceived. Satan did not say, choose this or that.

 

[Righttruth]

righttruth,
The Sermon on the Mount was addressed directly to Israel only. This is why in Matthew 10 Jesus said go to the lost sheep of Israel and not to the gentiles.
This does not mean that the sermon has no value to us because all the bible is for us in the proper perspective.
You tell me what you know about the KOH and the KOG message was about according to the nation of Israel and then I will be glad to address it. Jerry Kelso

So you want the cake and eat it too. Have you made it a point to preach the Gospel without the Sermon on the Mount with colorful speculations on things about KOH and KOG. Jesus defines who can enter that. I don't have to take extra classes from you on that. It could be illusion or delusion.

 

[Righttruth]

Why should we take the word of the author?

What theological training does he have?



About the Author
The author is a retired principal and professor of mechanical engineering having served in a couple of engineering colleges in the state of Karnataka. He had his education both in India as well as in the U.S.A., with degrees of Master of Engineering from Bangalore University and Master of Science from the University of Cincinnati, USA. He is a fellow of the Institution of Engineers (India) and a member of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers. He has been listed in “Who is Who in the World?” published by Marquis, U.S.A., Dictionary of International Biography, Cambridge, U.K., and Asia’s “Who is Who?” He is a freelancer. His letters and opinions have been published in almost all English Dailies (Deccan Herald, Times of India, New Indian Express, Hindu, Vijaya Times, Daily News Analysis, Free Press Journal, and Asian Age); weeklies (India Today, Outlook, Frontline, and The Week) and Reader’s Digest including ASME Mechanical Engineering Magazine. His books, “Wisdom, Human Spirit and Travel”, “Why I Am A Believer in Jesus” (A Story of a Hindu Devanga Brahmin), “Can A Christian Marry, Divorce, and Remarry” and “Artful Argentina and Awesome Antarctica” have been published by Notion Press.

What theological training Jesus and His chosen apostles had? It proves that you believe Paul more than the Lord.

 

[Righttruth]

Why I am a believer in Jesus : A Story of a Hindu Devanga Brahmin

by Devaprakash R. Shampur

ISBN: 978-93-83185-26-9

- See more at: https://notionpress.com/read/why-i-am-a-believer-in-jesus#.dpuf

A Hindu Devanga Brahmin is your source?

Yes, he is better source than a professional preacher who learns for a livelihood!

 

[Foghorn]

What theological training Jesus and His chosen apostles had? It proves that you believe Paul more than the Lord.

Jesus needed theological training?

 

[Righttruth]

Because hereditary Pagan priests from the most notoriously cruel and self-serving of the privilege castes of India are obviously the most reliable source of theological exegesis on the subject of Christian doctrine.

I agree. Many Western Christians are, perhaps, not aware of the fact that Indian Brahmins were first to be converted to Christianity by none other than apostle Thomas. Thomas did not bring a bundle of Paul's epistles for his work.

 

[Righttruth]

Would you like to list which miracles were from God and which are false?

I truly don't advise you to do so.

Yet you skirted the point.

The testimony of the TaNaKh and NT is God confirms His Word in Power through His prophets and apostles.

We can't make out. Nevertheless, a true believer in Christ will not give importance to miracles in his temporal life. He is a seeker of truth and more concerned about after life. How does it matter if a miracle can be attributed to God or to Devil?

 

[PsychoeDial]

Neither were you, so I guess we should question your post too.
And why are you so sure that Paul was not a witness (that is in the sense that you are so loosely using it)?
Who do you think the Rich young ruler was?

Do you think the rich young man, or ruler, to whom Jesus was speaking was Paul?

And Luke was not of the Twelve and neither was Mark and yet they are very much esteemed as Apostles.

Mark doesn't name its author even though some think it must have been Mark the evangelist who accompanied Peter on his journey. But that's not actually known.

The other synoptic book of Luke doesn't name its author. It is thought to be Luke the Evangelist that authored it and he was a companion of Paul. However, if that is the case there are also said to be scriptures in Luke that contradict those in Acts. But typically the scholars I've heard about don't attribute Luke to an actual disciple named Luke.

The True Gospel comes from Above and is of The Spirit, and if you knew this you would never have posted what you did or have to question someone like Paul.

I know of more than a few Christians that question Paul's claim to be a self-appointed apostle.

 

[redleghunter]

What theological training Jesus and His chosen apostles had? It proves that you believe Paul more than the Lord.

Jesus Christ was taught as any Jewish boy and young man would be taught. Same with His disciples.

Also don't forget Colossians 2:9.

 

[redleghunter]

Yes, he is better source than a professional preacher who learns for a livelihood!

You are taking the word of a man who does not embrace Christianity and still considers himself Hindu.

 

[redleghunter]

We can't make out. Nevertheless, a true believer in Christ will not give importance to miracles in his temporal life. He is a seeker of truth and more concerned about after life. How does it matter if a miracle can be attributed to God or to Devil?

You missed the entire point.

Throughout the Bible, OT and NT the verbal claims were validated with the Power of God.