Jesus came to fulfil the Torah and the Law will Pass away on a certain Date.

[BobRyan]

Genesis through Deuteronomy are all law.

ok -

Certainly the priesthood being Changed and no longer is functioning either.

ok - Heb 7 says the OT priesthood is replaced by the priesthood of Christ in heaven as we see in Heb 8.

That does not mean the law has passed away,

Agreed. So then it is still a sin to take God's name in vain even for NT Christians and the law of God is written on the heart under the New Covenant as we are told in Jer 31:31-33, Heb 8:6-12

nor does disannuling carnal ordinances or command mean the law has passed away.

Agreed.

Good points all.

 

[Lulav]

No, this is not Paul’s opinion. Here he is differentiating between things he is saying that Jesus did not say on His life versus things He did say.

Trying to understand you here again.

You were addressing this:

***"Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you."​

​

You said 'he is differentiating between things he is saying that Jesus did not say on His life versus things He did say.'

Sorry, I've read this five times and still don't get what you are saying. I think the 'on his life' is what's throwing me. Did you mean during his life on earth? If that's it is still doesn't make sense. What part of *** did Jesus say during his life on earth?
All I see is Paul expressing his belief that circumcision has something to do with salvation, which it does not. It is about a covenant. I don't see where this makes sense. If it is true then millions of Jewish males have no hope for a Messiah then do they?

But he is saying it through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit: it is still God’s words flowing through Paul.

You also believe that his testimony in Acts is God speaking for him? And HE caused him to lie?

And what did Jesus tell the other Apostles when He sent them out? “Now when they bring you before the synagogues and the officials and the authorities, do not worry about how or what you are to speak in your defense, or what you are to say; 12 for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.” Luke 12:11-12

Yes they would speak things that were about the kingdom, not about themselves. They would not have spoken about Paul the way he is speaking about them.

Whatever anyone else dares to boast about—I am speaking as a fool—I also dare to boast about
22 Are they Hebrews? So am I.
Are they Israelites? So am I.
Are they Abraham’s descendants? So am I.
23 Are they servants of Christ? (I am out of my mind to talk like this.) I am more.
I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again.


I repeat: Let no one take me for a fool. But if you do, then tolerate me just as you would a fool, so that I may do a little boasting. 17 In this self-confident boasting I am not talking as the Lord would, but as a fool.
4 “I worked hard and killed men and women who believed as I believe today. I put them in chains and sent them to prison.



I doubt very much the LORD would say any of that.

 

[Doug Brents]

Trying to understand you here again.

You were addressing this:

***"Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you."​

​

You said 'he is differentiating between things he is saying that Jesus did not say on His life versus things He did say.'

Sorry, I've read this five times and still don't get what you are saying. I think the 'on his life' is what's throwing me. Did you mean during his life on earth? If that's it is still doesn't make sense. What part of *** did Jesus say during his life on earth?

Forgive me for poorly wording my statement.
Jesus said many things during His life, that the readers of Paul’s letters would have remembered. But there are things that He did not say, but only later had His Apostles teach through direct inspiration at the moment. This is one of those cases. Jesus never said that if you trust in circumcision that He would be of no value to people, but after His death He inspired Paul to say that. So Paul is making the distinction between things Christ said during His life, and new instruction given by Paul that Jesus did not personally say.

All I see is Paul expressing his belief that circumcision has something to do with salvation, which it does not. It is about a covenant. I don't see where this makes sense. If it is true then millions of Jewish males have no hope for a Messiah then do they?

It amazes me how little you understand of what Scripture is saying in some places. Paul is not saying that circumcision has anything to do with salvation. What he is saying is that keeping the Old Covenant as a means to salvation will prevent you from receiving the benefit of Jesus as your savior.
Many in this time believed (and some still do today) that the only way to salvation is to become a Jew and keep the Old Covenant Law while acknowledging Jesus as the promised Messiah. Paul’s statement from the Holy Spirit says that if you allow yourself to be circumcised in order to keep the old Law, then Jesus is worthless to you because you are then forced to keep the WHOLE Law in order to be saved.

You also believe that his testimony in Acts is God speaking for him? And HE caused him to lie?

Not sure what you mean. But God cannot lie or cause others to lie.

Yes they would speak things that were about the kingdom, not about themselves. They would not have spoken about Paul the way he is speaking about them.

Again, you miss the point. THEY didn’t say anything. The Holy Spirit spoke through them, just as the Holy Spirit was speaking through Paul when he spoke in the quote below.

Whatever anyone else dares to boast about—I am speaking as a fool—I also dare to boast about
22 Are they Hebrews? So am I.
Are they Israelites? So am I.
Are they Abraham’s descendants? So am I.
23 Are they servants of Christ? (I am out of my mind to talk like this.) I am more.
I have worked much harder, been in prison more frequently, been flogged more severely, and been exposed to death again and again.


I repeat: Let no one take me for a fool. But if you do, then tolerate me just as you would a fool, so that I may do a little boasting. 17 In this self-confident boasting I am not talking as the Lord would, but as a fool.
4 “I worked hard and killed men and women who believed as I believe today. I put them in chains and sent them to prison.



I doubt very much the LORD would say any of that.

Why would He not? If He is seeking for His instrument to be accepted by His audience, then He might (as He did in this instance) have His instrument brag about his accomplishments and traits that would bring the audience to listen to the speaker.

 

[BobRyan]

No, I don't that is not saying that don't believe it should be in the bible canon. However when you contrast it to the other writers of the Bible it is clear that Paul puts a lot of himself in his letters.

For example, here he is explicit that it is him saying this, not God, not Messiah, his opinion.

Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.​

That is in Gal 5.

Context is important.
1. Paul is an example of a circumcised Christian
2. Acts 16:1-3 Paul has Timothy circumcised
3. Acts 21 - Paul goes out of his way to prove he is not telling Jews not to circumcise their children once they become Christians

1 Cor 7 has a more complete version of his teaching on that point
18 Was any man called when he was already circumcised? He is not to become uncircumcised. Has anyone been called in uncircumcision? He is not to be circumcised. 19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God. 20 Each person is to remain in that state in which he was called.


He is speaking specifically to the problem that came up in Acts 15:1-2
Some men came down from Judea and began teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 And after Paul and Barnabas had a heated argument and debate with them, the brothers determined that Paul and Barnabas and some others of them should go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and elders concerning this issue.

They were inventing new teaching out of pure man-made-ideas. No Bible text OT or NT made such a claim regarding gentile saints.