Replacing the 12th Apostle

[yedida]

The twelve were sent only to Israel before his ressurrection. As another poster stated you had to follow him from the "beginning" in order to be called his apostle. This is why an apostle was chosen that was already following him.


Why was Peter accepted and Paul rejected by the jews? Was it not because Paul was a Pharisee? The apostles did not fully accept Paul even after his conversion; Yeshua tells the apostles to beware of the pharisees.....

Peter even warns that Pharisee Paul's words are difficult to understand.



Of course, but he was rejected by the jews, so he had to seek another audience. If Pharisee Paul would have been accepted by the jews, he may have never been sent to the gentiles to establish a church.




I think he may have been a well known Pharisee; but an apostle is questionable. Since he writes in his letter (to the gentiles) calling himself an apostle; but Pharisee Paul also claimed to be crucified with Christ. In fact, no apostles were crucified with Christ; only the worst sinners.



I was only responding to a poster comment that the Torah came from YHWH, not the angel.



Gen 22:11-12

11 But the angel of Adonai called to him out of heaven: “Avraham? Avraham!” He answered, “Here I am.” 12 He said, “Don’t lay your hand on the boy! Don’t do anything to him! For now I know that you are a man who fears God, because you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me.”


Abraham was a gentile before he was circumcised, therefore Abraham received the law. It was possible for a gentile to receive the law in the old testament. Israel's grandfather was a gentile; her ancestors were idolaters.



The angel from heaven commanding Abraham to not harm the boy; did spare Isaac's life, then afterward Jacob was born from Isaac. The law says "YOU shall not murder". Abraham was not allowed to murder his only son with his own hands; so the jews conspired to have the romans to crucify Yeshua. This was not the proper protocol for human sacrifice, human offerings were supposed to be burned alive. This is why Pharisee Paul writes:

Romans 12:1
I exhort you, therefore, brothers, in view of God’s mercies, to offer yourselves as a sacrifice, living and set apart for God. This will please him; it is the logical “Temple worship” for you.

The three hebrew boys thrown into the fiery furnace.



I have never heard of that story. Only those "born from above" can be "born again" (John 3:7). Yeshua was the "firstborn from the dead" (Col 1:18).



Yeshua himself says that he is the first and the last.

Rev 22
12 “Pay attention!” [says Yeshua,] “I am coming soon, and my rewards are with me to give to each person according to what he has done. 13 I am the ‘A’ and the ‘Z,’ the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End.”

I will leave the bulk of this to Lulav (she does a much better job than I could do) but I did want to mention a mistake in your wording right off the bat: Yeshua did NOT warn against the Pharisees, he warned against the leaven of the Pharisees (there's a very big difference between the two). In fact, he stated that they sat in the seat of Moses and for the people to do what they said. He simply told the people not to DO as the Pharisees did - they were hypocritical in what they said and did.

In fact, it is very likely that Yeshua was a Pharisee himself.

 

[mercy1061]

That may be, but He was not of a man and a woman so his offspring would be different by virtue of His difference - His birth did not follow that law (by God's decree) but does that release Him to break that law?

Adam was the first and the last; then Adam fell into a deep sleep. A "bone" was taken from his side....

What about "asexual" reproduction?

 

[mercy1061]

I will leave the bulk of this to Lulav (she does a much better job than I could do) but I did want to mention a mistake in your wording right off the bat: Yeshua did NOT warn against the Pharisees, he warned against the leaven of the Pharisees (there's a very big difference between the two). In fact, he stated that they sat in the seat of Moses and for the people to do what they said. He simply told the people not to DO as the Pharisees did - they were hypocritical in what they said and did.

In fact, it is very likely that Yeshua was a Pharisee himself.

I do not see a difference between the pharisees and their doctrine; at the time Yeshua told the jews to obey everything they tell them. Just like I do not see a difference between Yeshua and his words. If you accept the pharisees you also accept their words; if you accept Yeshua you also accept his words. The pharisees taught the people of Israel very well; but they just did not lift a finger to help anyone. If you lift a finger, it may mean "wait a minute", dont be hasty in your decisions.

I think Pharisee Paul understood their words and their motives; this is why he said that their words would not profit the gentiles if they obeyed them. The pharisees taught the gentiles "circumcision in order to be saved"; Pharisee Paul taught "circumcision on the 8th day"; Pharisee Paul also circumcised Timothy keeping with the ancient custom.

I do not think Yeshua was a pharisee; he may have been a Rabbi....

 

[ananda]

You have made some excellent points. In fact Pharisee Paul only claimed to be an "apostle" to the gentiles, the original 12 were apostles to the jews. Therefore Paul is a Pharisee, not an official apostle of the original 12.

As Lulav stated, the 12 were apostles to both Jews and Gentiles.

I would have to slightly disagree with you with regards to Stephen; I agree that Stephen was not an "original" apostle but the law was delivered to Abraham through a voice from an angel in heaven (Gen 22:11-12). The law says "thou shall not murder"!

Stephen claimed that Torah as a whole was διαταγὰς/appointed/ordained by angels in Acts 7:53. For the record, it appears that Paul and the author of Hebrews also taught this idea (Gal 3:19, Heb 2:2).

In Torah itself, we read how YHWH said He Himself gave Torah directly (Ex 20:22). Gen 22:11-12 was a special, isolated case involving an intermediary messenger.

 

[mercy1061]

As Lulav stated, the 12 were apostles to both Jews and Gentiles.

Matt 10:5
5 These twelve Yeshua sent out with the following instructions: “Don’t go into the territory of the Goyim, and don’t enter any town in Shomron,

The twelve were sent out to the gentiles after his ressurrection. According to your own arguement, this would disqualify Pharisee Paul from being an apostle. Pharisee Paul did not follow him from the beginning or "genesis" as you previously so eloquently stated.

Stephen claimed that Torah as a whole was διαταγὰς/appointed/ordained by angels in Acts 7:53. For the record, it appears that Paul and the author of Hebrews also taught this idea (Gal 3:19, Heb 2:2).

Amen. Shall we agree with Pharisee Paul, writer of Hebrews, and Stephen?

In Torah itself, we read how YHWH said He Himself gave Torah directly (Ex 20:22). Gen 22:11-12 was a special, isolated case involving an intermediary messenger.

Genesis is before Exodus....

Genesis is the beginning.....

(Ex 20:22) speaks about the altar that Abraham built before Moses was born. We can not call Gen 22 an isolated incident when it is repeated in Exodus 3:


2 The angel of Adonai appeared to him in a fire blazing from the middle of a bush. He looked and saw that although the bush was flaming with fire, yet the bush was not being burned up.
6 I am the God of your father,” he continued, “the God of Avraham, the God of Yitz’chak and the God of Ya‘akov.” Moshe covered his face, because he was afraid to look at God.

I think Abraham and Isaac were involved in the incident that occured in Gen 22. We know Isaac is the father of Jacob. Are you hearing the voice from the "angel of Adonai" from the beginning? The "angel of Adonai" appears to Moses in Exodus.

 

[mercy1061]

As Lulav stated, the 12 were apostles to both Jews and Gentiles.

Stephen claimed that Torah as a whole was διαταγὰς/appointed/ordained by angels in Acts 7:53. For the record, it appears that Paul and the author of Hebrews also taught this idea (Gal 3:19, Heb 2:2).

In Torah itself, we read how YHWH said He Himself gave Torah directly (Ex 20:22). Gen 22:11-12 was a special, isolated case involving an intermediary messenger.

I think lifting a finger would be much better that lifting a thumb.

Lifting a finger could also mean to look upward.

 

[yedida]

I do not see a difference between the pharisees and their doctrine; at the time Yeshua told the jews to obey everything they tell them. Just like I do not see a difference between Yeshua and his words. If you accept the pharisees you also accept their words; if you accept Yeshua you also accept his words. The pharisees taught the people of Israel very well; but they just did not lift a finger to help anyone. If you lift a finger, it may mean "wait a minute", dont be hasty in your decisions.

I think Pharisee Paul understood their words and their motives; this is why he said that their words would not profit the gentiles if they obeyed them. The pharisees taught the gentiles "circumcision in order to be saved"; Pharisee Paul taught "circumcsion on the 8th day"; Pharisee Paul also circumcised Timothy keeping with the ancient custom.

I do not think Yeshua was a pharisee; he may have been a Rabbi....

Why do you emphasize Pharisee when speaking about Paul? What are you wanting to point out?
I didn't say that there was a difference between a Pharisee and his doctrine at all. I said that there is a difference between warning a person to stay away from a group of people and to stay away from their doctrines.
You seem to be very confused in your writings. You contradict yourself.
And what does being a Pharisee or not being a Pharisee have to do with being a rabbi?

 

[ananda]

Matt 10:5
5 These twelve Yeshua sent out with the following instructions: “Don’t go into the territory of the Goyim, and don’t enter any town in Shomron, ... The twelve were sent out to the gentiles after his ressurrection. According to your own arguement, this would disqualify Pharisee Paul from being an apostle. Pharisee Paul did not follow him from the beginning or "genesis" as you previously so eloquently stated.

Correct. I do not believe that Paul is an apostle.

Amen. Shall we agree with Pharisee Paul, writer of Hebrews, and Stephen?

I prefer to side with what Torah itself says

Genesis is before Exodus.... Genesis is the beginning..... (Ex 20:22) speaks about the altar that Abraham built before Moses was born. We can not call Gen 22 an isolated incident when it is repeated in Exodus 3:

I believe that Torah was given as a whole to Moses on the mountain in Ex 20. Unless I'm missing something, the incidents described in Ex 20:22, Gen 22, Ex 3 did not speak about Torah being given as a whole.

 

[mercy1061]

Why do you emphasize Pharisee when speaking about Paul? What are you wanting to point out?
I didn't say that there was a difference between a Pharisee and his doctrine at all. I said that there is a difference between warning a person to stay away from a group of people and to stay away from their doctrines.

I never said that Yeshua said stay away from the pharisees. I said they never lifted a finger to help anyone. Lifting a finger could also mean warning. Now "pointing" a finger; not "lifting a finger" could mean placing blame. I suggest we should all lift a finger to help someone, by pointing upward.

You seem to be very confused in your writings. You contradict yourself.
And what does being a Pharisee or not being a Pharisee have to do with being a rabbi?

You have not explained how I have contradicted myself. Yeshua often referred to the pharisees as hypocrites; and that the jews righteousness must exceed that of the pharisees (Matt 5:20).

For I tell you that unless your righteousness is far greater than that of the Torah-teachers and P’rushim, you will certainly not enter the Kingdom of Heaven!

 

[mercy1061]

Correct. I do not believe that Paul is an apostle.

We agree.

I prefer to side with what Torah itself says

I do not divorce or seperate the Torah from the heart of it's writer. I do not exclude the incidents involving the angel of Adonai in my observations.

I believe that Torah was given as a whole to Moses on the mountain in Ex 20. Unless I'm missing something, the incidents described in Ex 20:22, Gen 22, Ex 3 did not speak about Torah being given as a whole.

If the Torah includes "Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy"; we must conclude the Torah in it's entirety could not have been given as a whole to Moses or completed on the mountain in Ex 20.

 

[ananda]

We agree.

I do not divorce or seperate the Torah from the heart of it's writer. I do not exclude the incidents involving the angel of Adonai in my observations.

You're pointing out that parts of Torah was given through messengers (from YHWH) - I do not dispute that.

Stephen, Paul, and Hebrews, however, claim that Torah originated at the hands of angels (cf Gal 3:19 & Gal 4:8). That is what I am disputing.

If the Torah includes "Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy"; we must conclude the Torah in it's entirety could not have been given as a whole to Moses or completed on the mountain in Ex 20.

That's my faith

 

[mercy1061]

You're pointing out that parts of Torah was given through messengers (from YHWH) - I do not dispute that.

Stephen, Paul, and Hebrews, however, claim that Torah originated at the hands of angels (cf Gal 3:19 & Gal 4:8). That is what I am disputing.

That's my faith

The Torah and I explicitly state the "angel of Adonai"; but I do understand that times recorded in the Torah Abraham did meet more than one messenger; he did meet three messengers. Although these messenger(s) were "born from above"......

The "angel of Adonai" did preach to Abraham "Thou shall not murder"; when a human sacrifce by altar of fire was required. Normally when a message is given it is delivered by messenger(s) because of Adam's sin in the garden (Gen 3:24).


So he drove the man out, and he placed at the east of the garden of ‘Eden the k’ruvim and a flaming sword which turned in every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.

The messengers do guard the way to the tree of life. You can not eat from the tree of life unless you can get past the security guard. In the hands of the angel(s) is a "flaming" sword.

Moses and all the people heard the law at Mt Sinai; they were all on the same level (Exodus 20). A testimony must be established by at least two witnesses; the people complained that they no longer wanted to hear the voice of Adonai alone; but they asked Moses to become a second witness and speak with them. Adonai came down on the mountian alone; then Moses spoke to the people after they heard his voice, later Moses received two stone tablets "up" on the mountain written on them the law by the "finger" of G-D. The pharisees refused to lift a finger to help the people; so I would have to continually assert that Yeshua was not a pharisee. The pharisees taught "circumcision in order to be saved"; Pharisee Paul circumcised Timothy; the apostles circumcised no one.

 

[Lulav]

Here's an off-the-wall thought: Yeshua couldn't procreate because of the law of "after its own kind." (Here we have breaking the lesser for the greater, at least in this instance, it looks like it would be in this order.) If we believe the virgin birth, then he's not exactly like the rest of human-kind and his offspring (at least the first to second or thrid generations) would be of a different kind of human.....don't you think?

My biology lessons taught me that you need and X and a Y chromosome to produce a male child. The X comes from the mother and the Y from the Father, (two X's produce a female).

If you don't have the meeting of these, you do not get a child. Joseph was from the house of David, as he had to travel to Bethlehem for the census, but Miriam, we're told was related to Elizabeth who was of the line of not only Levi, but of Aaron, the High Priest line. . Ever wonder why Miriam had to travel with Joseph when she was so far along in her pregnancy?
She had to travel with him because she was carrying a child of the line of Judah, through her husband Joseph.

So, in answer to your question, I don't see how he could be like the rest of us if this didn't happen, in the 'normal' way. Otherwise he could not have been a male.

 

[yedida]

My biology lessons taught me that you need and X and a Y chromosome to produce a male child. The X comes from the mother and the Y from the Father, (two X's produce a female).

If you don't have the meeting of these, you do not get a child. Joseph was from the house of David, as he had to travel to Bethlehem for the census, but Miriam, we're told was related to Elizabeth who was of the line of not only Levi, but of Aaron, the High Priest line. . Ever wonder why Miriam had to travel with Joseph when she was so far along in her pregnancy?
She had to travel with him because she was carrying a child of the line of Judah, through her husband Joseph.

So, in answer to your question, I don't see how he could be like the rest of us if this didn't happen, in the 'normal' way. Otherwise he could not have been a male.

I think I agree with you. It's still up in the air.....

 

[visionary]

You're pointing out that parts of Torah was given through messengers (from YHWH) - I do not dispute that.

Stephen, Paul, and Hebrews, however, claim that Torah originated at the hands of angels (cf Gal 3:19 & Gal 4:8). That is what I am disputing.

That's my faith

There is one more spot that I can think of that talks of the hand off from angels.

Acts 7:38
This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

 

[Lulav]

I think that perhaps a reading of the LXX might shed some light onto this. It seems that the Hellenized Jews were more familiar with this text than the Masoretic. Paul, Stephen and whomever wrote Hebrews, were all defiantly Hellenized Jews and the Septuagint would be their version of the Torah.

Yet, Paul does speak against a doctrine of angels, but what does that mean?

 

[mercy1061]

I think that perhaps a reading of the LXX might shed some light onto this. It seems that the Hellenized Jews were more familiar with this text than the Masoretic. Paul, Stephen and whomever wrote Hebrews, were all defiantly Hellenized Jews and the Septuagint would be their version of the Torah.

Yet, Paul does speak against a doctrine of angels, but what does that mean?

Are you speaking about the angel in Gal 1:6-9?

Pharisee Paul speaks about an angel that appears alone, but Pharisee Paul says if "we" preach another gospel let "him" be under a curse. Why didn't Pharisee Paul say let "them" be under a curse? Could Pharisee Paul be talking about the angel of Adonai?

1 Cor 13
I am on my way to visit you for the third time. And as the Scriptures say, “Any charges must be proved true by at least two or three witnesses.” 2 During my second visit I warned you that I would punish you and anyone else who doesn’t stop sinning. I am far away from you now, but I give you the same warning.

 

[mercy1061]

There is one more spot that I can think of that talks of the hand off from angels.

Acts 7:38
This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

I think there is only one angel of Adonai in Acts 7:38?

 

[Lulav]

Are you speaking about the angel in Gal 1:6-9?

Pharisee Paul speaks about an angel that appears alone, but Pharisee Paul says if "we" preach another gospel let "him" be under a curse. Why didn't Pharisee Paul say let "them" be under a curse? Could Pharisee Paul be talking about the angel of Adonai?

If he was speaking of the Angel of the L-rd, then he was cursing him. He was also putting himself above any messengers from G-d as well.

1 Cor 13
I am on my way to visit you for the third time. And as the Scriptures say, “Any charges must be proved true by at least two or three witnesses.” 2 During my second visit I warned you that I would punish you and anyone else who doesn’t stop sinning. I am far away from you now, but I give you the same warning.

I think you meant 2 Corinthians 13

I'm also concerned about him thinking he had the authority to 'punish' anyone who sinned. Sounds like he was a one man Sanhedrin.

 

[mercy1061]

If he was speaking of the Angel of the L-rd, then he was cursing him. He was also putting himself above any messengers from G-d as well.

Pharisee Paul is not preaching another gospel; therefore Pharisee Paul at this time is not cursing the angel of Adonai. The angels do guard the way to the tree of life with a flaming sword. There are "angels" but only one sword turned in every direction.

I think you meant 2 Corinthians 13

Thank you for the correction. I will be careful to denote this in my future observations concerning Pharisee Paul not being an apostle (delegated to replace one of the twelve).

I'm also concerned about him thinking he had the authority to 'punish' anyone who sinned. Sounds like he was a one man Sanhedrin.

Pharisee Paul would be "crowned" among the phillipians (Phil 4:1); therefore a king has the power or authority to punish his subjects; as a father has the right to punish his children.

So, my brothers, whom I love and long for, my joy and my crown, my dear friends, keep standing firm in union with the Lord.

I think one man can punish any one man as the rules of checkers prescribe.....

Pharisee Paul circumcised Timothy alone......