Yahshua And Paul
Very nice and insightful article. Hard to get through all the bizarre angry posts, but you stood to your conviction, like a true christian. People like you help me keep my faith.
Here is the truth. Accept it, or reject it. God is the author of all things...including inspiration...good or evil. If you had a flock of sheep, and several wandered off. You bring them back, and they wander off again, taking a few more sheep. Bringing them back, they insist on wandering. Would it not be best to style them to wander where you would they go? The Light proceeds before you, the darkness from behind, until all of the sheep are now in the corral. That's a Good Shepherd. That is Alpha and Omega. Baaa!
Where is the option to laugh hysterically?
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago
0"Where possible, he (Paul) avoids quoting the teaching of Jesus, in fact even mentioning it. If we had to rely on Paul, we should not know that Jesus taught in parables, had delivered the sermon on the mount, and had taught His disciples the 'Our Father.' Even where they are specially relevant, Paul passes over the words of the Lord."
Albert Schweitzer"Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow...thy rod and thy staff," Egyptian iconography...I think a lotta people got sneaked up on!
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Someone in this thread said Paul didn't really teach to forsake the law.
On the following day Paul went in with us to James and all the elders were present. ...and they said to him, (Paul) "You see brother how many myriads of Jews there are who have believed, and they are all zealous for the Law; but they have been informed about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to circumcise their children nor to walk according to the customs. What then is to be done? The assembly must certainly meet, for they will hear that you have come. Therefore do what we tell you: We have four men who have taken a vow. Take them and be purified with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads, and that all may know that those things of which they were informed concerning you are nothing, but that you yourself also walk orderly and keep the Law. Acts 21:18,20-24. The Apostles THOUGHT it was just a rumor.
Paul
Romans 3:21
But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Romans 3:28
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Romans 4:14
For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:
Romans 4:15
Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
Romans 5:13
(For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.
Romans 7:2
For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband.
Romans 7
7. What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
8. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.
9. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died
15. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16. If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17. Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not.
19. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do.
20. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
21. I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me.
22. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man:
23. But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members.
24. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?
25. I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.Jesus wished them to wander far, far, off the true path. Paul also taught that to be tempted was the same as committing the sin. Jesus was tempted. Direct opposition of statements. Paul was a usurper, but I fear we are preaching (teaching) to each other! Have a nice day DS!
Jesus also said that he that look upon a woman to lust after her has already committed adultery in his heart.
James said:
James 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
James 1:15 Then when lust hath conceived, it brings forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, brings forth death.
do you have a scripture where Paul says to be tempted is the same as committing sin? because in christendom we do not have a belief like that at all.
We as humans are always going to be tempted but what do we do with that temptation is what matters. If we dismiss it quickly we sin not, if we play with the temptation, we sin. On the road of sanctification we will get wrong thoughts as Paul said:
2 Corinthians 10:5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;
no conflict.
It seems you just purport what you think you know to be true as truth without actually finding out if what you think you know to be true is actually true or even correct.
Have a nice day
The problem:
Acts 21:20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:
This is in James church.
Acts 21:23 Do therefore this that we say to thee: We have four men which have a vow on them;
So Paul did as James requested.
Did it work?
No
Acts 21:28 Crying out, Men of Israel, help: This is the man, that teaches all men every where against the people, and the law, and this place: and further brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.
Acts 21:29 (For they had seen before with him in the city Trophimus an Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into the temple.)
We also notice the prior to this subject. Paul has decided to go to Jerusalem, BUT:
Acts 21:4 And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days: who said to Paul through the Spirit, that he should not go up to Jerusalem.
Acts 21:9 And the same man had four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy. ( i am assuming they said Paul should not go either)
Judaea a certain prophet, named Agabus.
Acts 21:11 And when he was come unto us, he took Paul's girdle, and bound his own hands and feet, and said, Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owns this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.
Paul's response after these witnesses (listed above) against his going:
Acts 21:13 Then Paul answered, What mean ye to weep and to break mine heart? for I am ready not to be bound only, but also to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus. (notice Paul's devotion)
the conclusion:
Acts 21:14 And when he (Paul) would not be persuaded, we ceased, saying, The will of the Lord be done.
The ramifications:
Acts 21:31 And as they went about to kill him, tidings came unto the chief captain of the band, that all Jerusalem was in an uproar.
This is a rather embarrassing account which i reckon, if it were not true would best by all reasonable deduction, be left out, BUT the bible doesn't leave stuff out and Luke is very thorough. Was Paul wrong to compromise?
Yes. He ignored what Jesus said about his (Paul's) mission to the Gentiles and we see him going back to Jerusalem - but they will not hear him for they are zealous of the Law in James' compromised church. So breaking that first ordinance of his Gentile mission, Paul was not going be successful in the latter. He simply should not have gone. Oh well, Lesson learned lol.
What was Paul teaching here?
Paul was purifying 7 days. So no teaching. When the 7 days were almost up, Luke does not say that Paul was teaching but just that the men saw Paul in the temple and they were Jews from Asia Now the Jews from Asia follow Paul around and derided all that Paul said. This time they accuse him of bringing a Greek into the temple. Here is where the law plays with peoples heads. "oh i saw Paul talking to a greek in the temple". A rule is broken .. look out! There is no grace here, its off to court! Now, we do not know what part of the temple.. the court of the gentiles, possibly, as I cannot imagine it to be the holy of holies, naturally. But because they saw Paul talking with a (converted) Greek, (a christian), they were ready to kill. Paul has not even taught anything yet.
Acts 21:19 And when he had saluted them, he declared particularly what things God had wrought among the Gentiles by his ministry.
Acts 21:20 And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord,
You conveniently left out that the Jerusalem members glorified the Lord for what had been wrong among the Gentiles by Paul's ministry.
So they did not think it a rumor they were more curious as to how this all went down.
In the next chapter Paul gives an elaborate sermon about his conversion with emphasis on his mission to the gentiles.To: Larry Page and Sergey Brin
Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG)
From: GOD
googols@live.com
TO: GOOG
GOD TOOK THE "O" FROM YOU SO O' GOG
YOU KNOW MY NAME IS GOOD
1 "Thus says the Lord God: Behold, I am against you, O Gog aka Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) , chief prince (ruler) of Rosh, of Meshech, and of Tubal.
2 And I will turn you about and will lead you on, and will cause you to come up from the uttermost parts of the north and will lead you against the mountains of Israel;
3 And I will smite your bow from your left hand and will cause your arrows to fall out of your right hand.
4 You shall fall [dead] upon the mountains of Israel, you and all your hosts and the peoples who are with you. I will give you to the ravenous birds of every sort and to the beasts of the field to be devoured.
5 You shall fall in the open field, for I have spoken [it], says the Lord God.
6 I will send fire on Magog and upon those who dwell securely in the coastlands, and they shall know, understand, and realize that I am the Lord [the Sovereign Ruler, Who calls forth loyalty and obedient service].
7 And I will make My holy name known in the midst of My people Israel, and I will not let them profane My holy name any more; and the nations shall know, understand, and realize that I am the Lord, the Holy One of Israel.
8 Behold, it is coming and it will be done, says the Lord God; that is the day of which I have spoken.
9 And [when you, Gog aka Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) , are no longer] they who dwell in the cities of Israel shall go forth and shall set on fire and burn the battle gear, the shields and the bucklers, the bows and the arrows, the handspikes or riding whips and the spears; and they shall burn them as fuel for seven years,
10 So that My people shall take no firewood out of the field or cut down any out of the forests, for they shall make their fires of the weapons. And they shall despoil those who despoiled them and plunder those who plundered them, says the Lord God.
11 And in that day, I will give to Google Inc. ( NASDAQ: GOOG ) a place for burial there in Israel, the valley of those who pass through on the east side in front of the [Dead] Sea [the highway between Syria, Petra, and Egypt], and it will delay and stop those who pass through. And there shall they [a]bury Google Inc. ( NASDAQ: GOOG ) and all his multitude, and they shall call it the Valley of Hamon-Google Inc. ( NASDAQ: GOOG ) [multitude of Gog aka Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) ].
12 For seven months the house of Israel will be burying them, that they may cleanse the land.
13 Yes, all the people of the land will bury them, and it shall bring them renown in the day that I shall be glorified, says the Lord God.
14 And they shall set apart men to work continually who shall pass through the land, men commissioned to bury, with the help of those who are passing by, those bodies that lie unburied on the face of the ground, in order to cleanse the land. After the end of seven months they shall make their search.
15 And when these pass through the land and anyone sees a human bone, he shall set up a marker by it as a sign to the buriers, until they have buried it in the Valley of Hamon-Google Inc. ( NASDAQ: GOOG ) or of Gog aka Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) 's multitude.
16 And Hamonah [multitude] shall also be the name of the city [of the dead]. Thus shall they cleanse the land.
17 And you, son of man, thus says the Lord God: Say to the birds of prey of every sort and to every beast of the field, Assemble yourselves and come, gather from every side to the sacrificial feast that I am preparing for you, even a great sacrificial feast on the mountains of Israel at which you may eat flesh and drink blood.
18 You shall eat the flesh of the mighty and drink the blood of the princes of the earth, of rams, of lambs, of goats, and of bullocks, all of them fatlings of Bashan [east of the Jordan].
19 And you shall eat fat till you are filled and drink blood till you are drunk at the sacrificial feast which I am preparing for you.
20 And you shall be filled at My table with horses and riders, with mighty men, and with soldiers of every kind, says the Lord God.
21 And I will manifest My honor and glory among the nations, and all the nations shall see My judgment and justice [in the punishment] which I have executed and My hand which I have laid on them.
22 So the house of Israel shall know, understand, and realize beyond all question that I am the Lord their God from that day forward.
23 And the nations shall know, understand, and realize positively that the house of Israel went into captivity for their iniquity, because they trespassed against Me; and I hid My face from them. So I gave them into the hand of their enemies and they all fell [into captivity or were slain] by the power of the sword.
24 According to their uncleanness and according to their transgressions I dealt with them and hid My face from them.
25 Therefore thus says the Lord God: Now will I reverse the captivity of Jacob and have mercy upon the whole house of Israel and will be jealous for My holy name.
26 They shall forget their shame and self-reproach and all their treachery and unfaithfulness in which they have transgressed against Me, when they dwell securely in their land and there is none who makes them afraid.
27 When I have brought them again from the peoples and gathered them out of their enemies' lands, and My justice and holiness are set apart and vindicated through them in the sight of many nations,
28 Then shall they know, understand, and realize positively that I am the Lord their God, because I sent them into captivity and exile among the nations and then gathered them to their own land. I will leave none of them remaining among the nations any more [in the latter days].
29 Neither will I hide My face any more then from them, when I have poured out My Spirit upon the house of Israel, says the Lord God.
Footnotes:
Ezekiel 39:11 The number of dead bodies left after the great catastrophe which God will send upon Google Inc. ( NASDAQ: GOOG ) and his hosts would necessarily amount to several millions. Their graves would naturally interfere with traffic on the interstate highway. The dead will not be slain in battle. God will slay them by a great "cosmic catastrophe" (Ezek. 38:18-23). And not just some, but "all" of Gog aka Google, Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG) 's multitude will die then (Ezek. 39:4, 11); before they have had a chance to use their weapons, God will strike them from their hands (Ezek. 39:3). That one-sixth of the horde from the north will be left alive, as the King James Version says (Ezek. 39:2), is without noted exception conceded to be a mistaken translation by all authorities of modern times.
"I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."
FOLLOW ME LIVE FOREVER.
I am the light of the world: he that followeth me, walketh not in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
Lightning on the cloud is in an instant Revelation of Jesus Christ His Word Truth the Double-edged sword proof coming out of his mouth. "His Word that works to save and to destroy" in all His glory for all the world to see. 'I am the light of the world; he who is following me shall not walk in the darkness, but he shall have the light of the life.'
The two edges cut through time and such a sword is the "lightning" that striking is emblem unmasked insight.
The Revelation of Christ does in an instant enlight masses where for centuries Franklin told them go fly a kite.
So in Isaiah 49:2, it is said of the same personage, "And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword." So in Hebrews 4:12, "The Word of God is quick and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword," etc. So lightning stepped Leader is Jacob's Ladder I left you (Hebrew: Sulam Yaakov סולם יעקב) This the ladder to heaven a river through time, flowing both ways means I just called Einstein, told Him I go faster than any limit sign in fact my call just made him an Alien, and even this "first" contact with extra terrestrial is mine. Just showing the ability to make this call is the raising of all dead. Causation the relationship between an event of (Lightning Strike) and another event (Forerunner / Leader), the latter the leader and winner pigeon feeder the consequence beats its cause by a nose. "I am the Light of the world," He said; "the man who follows me shall certainly not walk in the dark, but shall have the light of Life."
In common usage Causality is the relationship between a set of factors in this case a (Lightning Strike) and a (Forerunner Leader). The strike which effects the Leader is a direct factor that affects an Lightning Leader directly, that is, without any intervening factors. (Intervening factors are sometimes called "intermediate factors.") The connection between a Lightning Strike(s) and Lightning Leader in this way referred to as a causal nexus but Jesus Christ needs no Delorean to show time travel to Marty Mcfly, just look at any Ben Bolt by itself and in an instant slavery could die. Do you fathom causality is the relationship between factors of (Lightning Strikes) and (Lightning Leader). Anything that affects this Lightning Leader is a factor of that Lightning Leader. A direct factor is a factor that affects the Lightning Leader directly, that is, without any intervening factors. (Intervening factors are sometimes called "intermediate factors." and many were used to hide) The connection between a Lightning Strike(s) and Lightning Leader in this way can also be referred to as a causal nexus.
Though the Lightning Strikes and Lightning Leaders are typically related to changes or events, candidates include objects, processes, properties, variables, facts, and states of affairs; characterizing the causal relationship can be the subject of much debate.
The philosophical treatment of causality extends over millennia. In the Western philosophical tradition, discussion stretches back at least to Aristotle, and the topic remained a staple in contemporary philosophy before it stole the entire show united science and religion both...
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Paul was anti-Law
Now we need to look at some more of Paul's errors in doctrine... especially those that suggest that one is not expected to live by God's Law. We have seen that Paul's doctrine concerning the sovereignty of God and predestination is wrong, and his use of Scripture to prove his doctrine is lackluster at best... if not outright abusive. Paul has told lies, and he is without a doubt the very false apostle that Yahshua commended the Ephesians for rejecting.
Still, Paul did make some pro-Law statements along with his anti-Law statements. He never did reconcile the contradiction, indeed he couldn't! Either God expects us to live by His Law or He doesn't. There is no in-between. But to be fair, I must make mention of the fact of his pro-Law statements, because among the growing sects of Messianic believers, there is a small number who call themselves "observant" Messianics. They continue to believe, as Yahshua taught, that the Law stands today. But in their endeavor to try and maintain some semblance of credibility with other Messianics, who themselves are really nothing more than Christians with a Jewish twist and an umbilical cord to main stream Christianity, these observant Messianics will engage in bend-over-backwards apologetics for Paul and do everything they can to argue he was pro-Law. Apparently they continue to feel the need to embrace the picture of an infallible New Testament. But we shouldn't at all be surprised about the fact that Paul made both pro, and anti-Law statements because of some other telling-statements he made.
"...to the Jew I became as a Jew, that I might win Jews; to those who are under the Law, as under the Law, that I might win those who are under the Law; to those who are without Law, as without Law (not being without law toward God, but under law toward Christ), that I might win those who are without Law; to the weak I became as weak, that I might win the weak, I have become all things to all men, that I might by all means save some." 1Corinthians 9:20-22
At the very least, it is apparent that Paul was a chameleon who blended with his surroundings whatever they were at the time! Paul clearly taught contradictory messages for the purpose of making everybody happy... something you would never find Yahshua doing. As long as there are numerous, clearly anti-Law statements made by Paul, Christians and non-observant Messianics alike will always point to them and rest their case against the poor "legalistic" observant Messianics. There is no simple misunderstanding about it. Even Paul's contemporaries accused him of encouraging others not to practice the Law of Moses. This is nothing new. It is a significant issue in much of the book of Acts. They even had him there in the flesh to explain himself and straighten out the misunderstanding if indeed it was so simple. But the obvious seems to go unnoticed... the issue is never settled in the book of Acts. James, the leader of "myriads" of Messianic Jews, never does come to Paul's rescue when everyone would naturally think he certainly would have if it all were just a simple misunderstanding of Paul's teaching.
You will see shortly as more of Paul's anti-Law doctrines are exposed, the observant Messianic's endeavors might be better termed appaulling apaulogetics! These would be better off facing the fact that Paul was a false apostle, call him on the fact, and suffer the ostracism of Christianity. They aren't having any real success convincing Christians that Paul was pro-Law anyway.Where did jesus commend the Ephesians for rejecting?
Either God expects us to live by His Law or He doesn't.
Now which law are we talking about? the commandments or the 613 laws of the pharisees?
Paul clearly taught contradictory messages for the purpose of making everybody happy
not in the situation of titus and timothy. And certainly not in rebuking the churches for their wrongdoings. And certainly not in the gospel he preached. And he certainly did not make the jews happy in jerusalem any time he went to preach there. He certainly did not please the jews from asia before the jerusalem council event.
So one has to wonder when did Paul pull this chameleon maneuver? When he allowed James to sway him by his purification in the temple? yes.
something you would never find Yahshua doing
[i] Yashua did not mention many things, he did not proclaim to be king when talking to roman kings. He even said: John 16:12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. He did not change medicine or science or change their false doctrines as God did in the OT. He left their secular society unchanged. He could have wowed them with information about how the earth revolved around the sun but he left that to Galileo. And lets not forget about those parables. I am not saying Jesus was dishonest, he was wise and i will say that Paul was wise also - look at pauls motivations.... so this can be saved and that be saved and those saved.. all for the message. "that I might by all means save some." if i go into preach to the homeless i do not wear my best suit, i become like them to win them. Reasonable tactic.
This whole long speech is just your opinion. You don't know what James was doing or why. Luke says the gates were shut, probably with James on the inside. We need evidence no opinion deborah.
Teach on. I will put to you this idea. The whole truth will be revealed at the advent and acceptance of the Third Temple. The third exists now. Teaching will continue, you are a messenger. I feel honored to write in the same venue as you. Peace.
********
Ahh, thank you. I am blushing
God's peace to you too.The third temple built by mans hand on earth will not have the shekinah glory, only new jerusalem will have Gods approval.
If you think God wants sacrifice again, think again.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
John 5:43
I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.
How TrueJohn 5:18 Therefore the Jews sought the more to kill him
It is always the jews meaning the law abiders.
Why did Jesus ride in on the donkey?
Because of the jewish nations rejection of him as Messiah.
He took the servants role not the kingship role because of their rejection of him. He could not be their king.
Matthew 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that kills the prophets, and stone them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Matthew 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.
Matthew 23:39 For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that comes in the name of the Lord.
What confuses me is that Jesus himself said that there will be many False prophets. ... And, in the book of Revelations (written in 96 AD) John sees a vision of a False religion which I assume rises up out of these false teachings of those false prophets; which Jesus warned about.
It is also written, in Revelation, that a great majority of righteous men will be fooled by the false doctrines of a false religion which will rise up out of the earth; If possible, even the very elect.
If a doctrine is 95% correct; it falls into the category of FALSE.
It is “kinda” like rice pudding. If 99.9% (in weight) of the ingredients are correct; but when we substitute a table spoon of salt instead of sugar; I'm going to spit it out. I did that once; and my two dogs wouldn't eat it either.
I believe Jesus spoke truthfully and clearly always! ... Even when he said; This generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled, but nobody knows what day it shall be.
Just think about it for a minute, "What If" Jesus was telling the truth when he said that?
“IF” Jesus appeared today and taught us the same way he did back then, how many of us would interpret his message in such a way as to change his message entirely? As we have done with his previous message?
What "IF" Jesus said exactly what he intended to say?
IF we can change his words to mean something entirely different, as long as it sounds "kinda" the same, We should always be able to do that and remain within The realm of Truth" ????
I don't think so!
Paul might have really experienced the Lord on the road to Damascus.
Paul might have believed with his whole heart, everything that he taught was in accordance with the teachings of Christ.
He may have also unwittingly, been paving the way for that which was prophesied to come. A tiny crack in the windshield which over time, spreads from east to west.
Religion has always been a good/bad thing. Cause it is a major part of Gods plan
Whatever Gods plan was/is (?); This was/is all a part of it.**********************************
I would say he did it on purpose and even planned it
Acts 26:9
I verily thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.You may very well be right concerning his intentions.
I don't think that it matters much what his intentions were; concerning the results were the same. A crack in the glass which grows in every direction more with each passing day.
We have been learning "Interpretations" of poor translations for centuries.
Now, when someone reads scripture making every attempt to read exactly what it actually says; we are told that this is JUST "our" interpretation.
Don't get me wrong, I am agreeing with everything that I have (ever) read of yours.
I've been attempting to describe the same thing ... but looking through a different gate.
I think ??Acts 26:9 I verily thought with myself, that I ought to do many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth.
and this is what he did contrary to the name of Jesus
Acts 26:10 Which thing I also did in Jerusalem: and many of the saints did I shut up in prison, having received authority from the chief priests; and when they were put to death, I gave my voice against them.
Acts 26:11 And I punished them oft in every synagogue[/u[, and [u]compelled them to blaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them even unto strange cities.
Are not all these things contrary to the message of Jesus? Did not jesus preach peace and love?
again context.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
On Divorce (Posted just to show the different teachings of Paul and Yahshua, not to condemn, It is between God and each individual)
Yahshua is very clear on this:
Matthew 5:32....
But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.
But Paul Says"
In 1 Corinthians 7:12-16 the apostle Paul instructs believers that if they have a non-Christian husband or wife, they must stay with that husband or wife if they wish to stay. However, if that non-Christian husband or wife wants to leave, the Christian spouse is supposed to allow the non-Christian spouse to leave....
If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. (Paul is the only one who taught this)
But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?
Paul is the only one who teaches this.He also cleansed what Jesus had previously cleansed. He calls defiled that which has been called clean. This is a sin against the Holy Spirit. All of christianity has it's root in Pauline thought.
The non christian wanted nothing to do with Christianity. So what is the christian to do, force abidement? On so many levels it makes sense to be peacemakers, like Paul says.
In Gentile Land, People marry whom they want to marry, then they come to Christ later on in life, sometimes the spouse is okay with that, sometimes not.
Once again it is different with gentiles. Jews marry Jews and both have God from the beginning, but Gentiles do not wait to become christian before they marry in Gentile Land.
Christians married to non-Christians, of course, should try to keep the marriage going, which Paul says, but if it has too much contention, and one is fed up, let that person leave. Now this could mean a time of separation which may or may not lead to divorce or straight into divorce. But to end war in marriage and to show love, keeping the peace is paramount.
If gentiles were christian from birth and all had God as jews are jewish from birth and all have God, then there would be no mixed marriages, but once a born again christian accepts Jesus they are involved in a mixed marriage. And God said never to be married to another race in the OT, for obvious reasons.
christian and non-christian are different races - so to speak.
So if the law of Moses is applied, the law of Moses is broken either way. It is an unequal yoke. Two different lifestyles. Believer with non-believer or Jew and gentile. God's people and a pagan.
The other way the law of moses is broken is by tyranny. If one oppresses the other and forces their ways or makes them stay against their will. We see this is not the happy union that the God of the OT purposed for his people.
If gentile people marry being christian then the law of Moses can be applied and they should remain together for all time, because then they are considered both as Jews or Gods people and can pull the cart together. It is as Paul said.
Paul's instruction, once again, is sound.
As I said a couple of posts back; I agree with Debra's point of view.
I came to the same conclusion about half way through my investigation concerning Daniels vision (Daniel 9:26)
This doesn't seem as it is on the same subject matter as the OP while in fact it is.
In 538 BC Gabriel told Daniel that it shall be 62 weeks and then the Messiah will be killed.
568 years later Jesus was killed on the cross.
I believe this to be saying that 62 weeks in prophesy is the same as 568 years in our timeline.
Therefore One week in prophesy would be just over 9 of our years.
The 69 weeks unto the Messiah would end in 96 AD
The 70 weeks that Hebrew Nation was given to repent and anoint the Most high would have been accomplished around 104 AD ... and 30 years later the Last Jewish revolt broke out. Just a couple years later when that revolt was put down, Total and complete evacuation of all Hebrews from their Holy land had begun.
The end of days for that Hebrew Nation had come as Jesus had predicted.
If 62 weeks in prophesy is 568 years, how long would 42 months of the Beast be(180 weeks)? A. 16 & 1/2 centuries.
I studied this concept of a week in prophesy being equal to 9.16 of our years, applying this every time a specific period of time is given in prophesy.
After a decade had passed , I came to the same conclusions which Debra is now proving using a different method.
I've read many people expressing this same conclusion using as many different reasons for coming to that same conclusion.
I am pleased to see others reading what the scriptures actually say.************************
Yes, Daniel's vision and prophecy was about Paul.
Numbers has a prophecy about him becoming a stumbling block*************
That's what's wrong. You depend on others to point you to things instead of studying.
Look up Daniels visions and prophecies and the ones in Numbers
You do the work.
I posted nothing out of context. What I posted is what it meant in the whole chapter..and the Bible all interlocks.
Notice that Jesus showed up before the temple destruction
coincidence
of course not
did you account for leap years?
did you use lunar years or solar years?62brotheryochanan wrote
Notice that Jesus showed up before the temple destruction
coincidence
of course not
=========
ME ..
And what does that have to do with anything I have said. Of course he showed up before they killed him.
62 weeks were finished in 30 AD.
All that we can do is to ASSUME what is meant when it is written that it shall be 69 weeks unto Messiah the Prince!
But 70 weeks that the children of Daniels people were given to quit sinning, make restitution, AND Anoint the Most Holy; leaves little space for assumption.
If 62 weeks are equal to 568 of our years and this was fulfilled in 30 AD, It stands to reason that the 69 weeks would have been finished around 96ish.AD
It also stands to reason that this 70 weeks (approx 104 AD ) would have been accomplished "BEFORE" that Nation of Israel came to the end of their days in 138 AD,
The 70 weeks were finished and they didn't repent, make restitution OR anoint the Most Holy; SOoooo they were punished, ALL the people were scattered through out the rest of the Roman Empire, ... carried away into the wilderness So-to-speak. Where they were feed for the next 1650 years before they started migrating back to their promised land. Another 40 years pass till the caliphate signs a declaration allowing Hebrews entry into any of the cities in what used to be known as Israel.
==============================================
================
brotheryochanan asks
did you account for leap years?
did you use lunar years or solar years?
- - -
me
No I did NOT, because using the old Hebrew Calendar ... Every Month had 30 days. Period! They didn't know about leap years and such.
For instance, 42 months was 1260 days or 180 weeks.
180 weeks X 9.16 = 1648 years ... don't need to consider leap years, full moons, or anything of the kind.
1648 years after Hadrian scattered the power of the Holy people corresponds with the Mass migrations of Hebrews back to the promised land at the turn of the 19th century.
I've applied this equation to EVERY prophesy that a timeframe was given ...
And all of the details all come together quite nicely.
Thanks for asking.
I have addressed three of the differences. It is not a discussion because you refuse to answer the arguments that refute yours. I have listed arguments that show the teachings are the same. You say they are not. End of discussion
- Virgil Newsomeposted 13 years ago0
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/92581?p … ost1981203
Why have the naysayers avoided answering the post linked above?
I also want to know why the one who opened this thread stole content from another site and didn't cite a source.
http://www.wordwiz72.com/paul.html***************
It is from by Davis D. Danizier's book "Betrayal of Jesus"
I did not steal it. I got permission. Want the email?
I've known this stuff for a long time.
Hope you can buy the book. It's only $12.95
I have about 5 hubs on Paul..written 2 years ago. My husband has several articles on the internet about 5 years ago.
If I post anything from my hub I will be banned. They considering it as spam.
Here's one hub
http://deborah-sexton.hubpages.com/hub/ … s-Teaching
About the scripture you posted. What better way to make people think you are God. Teach a little of the truth.
But he taught different things to different churches.
He didn't know a New Testament Bible would be printed with his letters.david D
http://kingwoodunderground.com/topic.js … d=11095207
read the comments on the bottom
I like this one.
Jesus was preaching exclusively to fellow Jews who believed in God. He was preaching under the law of the Old Covenant, all the while showing them that they could not keep the law and therefore, never achieve salvation. Jesus was doing this to show them that He was indeed the Son of God. It would be very hard for Jesus to preach a message of salvation through belief that He was the perfect and complete sacrifice for their sin if He had not yet bore their sin upon Himself and died in their place on the cross.
Red this Bible Commentary that explains what he said and wqhy he said it.
http://www.easyenglish.info/bible-comme … ss-lbw.htmAre you with any other Commentaries that would explain the verses?
*******
I read the commentary anyway..but I disagree.
Paul said he tricked people, lied and robbed the church.
So this devalues anything else he said.2 Corinthians 11:8 I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service.
2 Corinthians 11:9 And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man: for that which was lacking to me the brethren which came from Macedonia supplied: and in all things I have kept myself from being burdensome unto you, and so will I keep myself.What does this show?
-Other people kept Paul enabled to do his service.
-Paul did not demand or beg to be supported, Paul just went and did and left -God in charge of meeting his needs.
-The people of macedonia supported Paul.
-Paul kept himself from being a burden to them.
-Paul felt bad not being able to pay back what was given that he said he robbed them.
and this beautiful passage:
2 Corinthians 11:2 For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ.
What a rotten person lol
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Concerning The Dead
Yahshua Said:
Luke.20
[38] Now he is not God of the dead, but of the living;
But Paul taught differently
Rom.14
[9] For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. - Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Our Enemies
Yahshua
Yahshua Taught to do good to our enemies so we can be the children of our Heavenly Father.
Matthew 5:44,45 48
44. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you. 45. That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven..........48. Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.
Paul
Paul said to give food and drink to our enemies, not to become children of our heavenly Father, nor to to help our enemies, but to heap coals of fire on their heads
Romans 12:20
Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
Romans 12:19 Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance is mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Romans 12:20 Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
The two underlined wordings are 2 parts.
Part one vengence is mine says the lord
Part two.. heap coals of fire <-- God will take care of the situation IF..
Romans 12:21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.
does that sound opposite to you?*****************************
It might be true that God does this for his children. However to teach to give food and drink to your enemy so coals of fire would be heaped on them is a sick teaching, selfish and evil, and not what Yahshua taught.
Yahshua taught love and he said to do it so you would be children of God
Matthew 5
41. And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.
42. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.
43. Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.
44. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45. That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.
Paul teaches hate not love.
Romans 12:20
Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
I can tell that you follow Paul
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Paul said he had another doctrine. Absolutely nothing to do except believe. Paul is the only one that taught we are saved without works
2 Timothy 2
8. Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel: (Paul)
Romans 3:28
Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the lawWhen the deeds of the law cannot be done. When the OT way is over and a new way comes into effect.
What is left
What is left when there are no deeds or works that reconcile you to God?
When the priest can no longer sacrifice an animal what has he left to rely on?
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!FAITH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If i put a quarter in a machine i am supposed to get something but what if i don't have a quarter - i get nothing.
With God we don't need a quarter, we do what He says and let faith carry us confidently into His arms.
There is only faith when there are no deeds to do
faith and belief are interchangeable
I believe God exists
and i have faith that God exists
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Greatest Commandment-Yahshua said
Matthew 22:
36. Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37.Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38. This is the first and great commandment.
But when Paul spoke of the commandments, he left the greatest one out.
He indicated the important one was to love your neighbor
Roman 13:8
Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
Romans 13:9
For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. you should not read the bible out of context, otherwise you end up getting confused like you are already. yes paul said the person who hangs from a tree is cursed.., jesus become cursed for us by being crucified so he could free man from sin... no contradiction there...he had to become a curse to free man .
you should not read the bible out of context, otherwise you end up getting confused like you are already. yes paul said the person who hangs from a tree is cursed.., jesus become cursed for us by being crucified so he could free man from sin... no contradiction there...he had to become a curse to free man .
- Emile Rposted 13 years ago0
Just a thought here. You guys do realize you are debating ancient text? The point of which probably wasn't to debate what you think vs. what someone else thinks in a sometimes seemingly heated exchange; as if you could possibly determine what an unseen god wanted either of you to believe. Your religions are grand to you, obviously, but I'm wondering what purpose they serve you. Other than to preen publicly with your assumed knowledge.
Man made guys. That's all it is. It might help to put it into perspective.perspective.
read the evidence
read the scripture used
you can clearly see what is going on
and be thankful you don't have to only rely on your own opinions
nothing that accepting God as living entity with passions won't cure
Yah wanna know what the grand purpose God serves to me is. He gives me a greater purpose than I have ever known before. He gives me things to do each day that are always geared towards other people. He teaches me about myself and changes me. I am not the same person i was when i started this almost three years ago. I have patience, love, kindness on a level with all people. Most people genuinely respect my christian stance because they see me cheery and unmovable everyday. 13 people have to come to know christ through my witness, that i know of, and they are happier than ever and addiction free. As a single child I have brothers and sisters by the score, honest fellowship and appreciation for people in every situation that is genuine. and more.
And with all that i come in here and listen to people dis and smear, ridicule and lower the integrity of the wonder and glory that is God. Sorry if i get a little passionate.
hope that helps your perspectiveThat is all well and good BO, yet I can't help but wonder if you haven't missed a valuable point. You guys work yourselves up into a frenzy, thinking that you are defending God's views. You aren't. You are defending your own.
This is, of course, well within your rights. It just seems so sad. I don't see how this could be the way anything might have been intended. It negates the value of the concept of God to others who watch the egos ride herd over the debate. At least it does for me.I guess I am doing this too.
It just seems to me that everyone is scratching at the surface in these debates.Oh no jerami. I wasn't commenting so much on discussion as much as I was lamenting the presumed need for debate. You seem to always simply voice an opinion without responding as if the opinion of others is of no value.
I guess that is my point. It's all opinion and all interesting. Until people start throwing around comments about 'you don't know God' or 'I get my info from God' or 'I'm trying to teach you'. That is presumptuous and negates any value in the words that preceded or followed the statements; for me.
If there was any way to be 100% sure, one way or the other, there would be no room for debate. Since there is no way, there is no use in debate.I wasn't upset or offended by your comment, CAUSE I agree, AND sometimes feel guilty of that which you speak.
Cause "of course" I feel that I am right or I wouldn't be expressing my opinion.
"IF" a person is going to believe anything that is written in their bible; I think that they should understand first those things which are written suposidly quotes from God, then the Messanger anels AND those things written in red letters.
When we understand these things FIRST we would then come to a different conclusion than that which we hold onto so dearly.
Unfortunately we have inherited over 1600 years of interpretation of scripture before we even learn to read.
When we have preconcieved ideas of that which we are about to start reading ... we miss the message as it was intended.
At least, that is my opinion!I would agree. Not that I think any are intended to attempt to make sense of things that are obvious madness within the text. It appears that attempting to do that has driven some people mad.
It's all just words. Processed differently by each individual. It has to jive with reality. I get the distinct impression you have tried to do that. You have interesting thoughts on the subject.
And as upsetting as the OP's words appear to be for some, it appears she is attempting to do that also. But, even then, it is all simply opinion. I wonder why anyone feels it is important enough for the opinions of others to get under their skin?been doing house work ... I post then gotta get up and do something.
Now I'm back for a little bit.
You are right; I have been "trying" to make sense out of it all.
It does all make sinse to me, but then everyone thinks they do.
As a whole, I don't think that we are suposed to figure it all out.
Gives us something to do other that procreation. HA.
GrandPa always said that when I get confused about something, I needed to start my thought processs all over. And keep it as simple as possible, forget all about excuses and alabies, the when and why fores.
Too many details are kinda like too many leaves on a tree; can't see what the structure of the tree looks like.
Besides that, when we make the story too long, with too many details, the people hearing the story gets bored and start daydreaming; not hearing anything we are saying.
You keep telling yourself that there is no correct interpretation and that everybody has their own and guess what, that makes room for your interpretation to, doesn't it.
Well you are not in context with the bible.
There are scriptures and context and proper application and understanding and when none of these are present in an summation, correction needs to be applied.
Why?
Because it is clear as the nose on a face. Paul was not in contradiction when timothy got circumcised and not titus. The general idea is that both should have been circumcised when the circumcision is not even necessary. Flaw one. A christian greek and a half greek, half jew involved in two completely different issues are supposed to have the same conclusion. Flaw 2. Thinking that the gentile dispensation is going to be identical to the jewish dispensation is flaw number 3.
You just want to see love? Oh that's okay, God is a universalist, so don't bother being holy or abstaining from anything because it will all work out. Oh Paul is a satan, but its okay. Have a nice day.
This is not the work of a christian who cares about those things that be Gods and about the people trapped in their wrong beliefs.
Instruction is good and glad is the heart that receives it.
This is what Christianity is all about, caring enough to bother trying to help people understand, but on a public forum, the door is open to everyone and this is much different to speaking one to one in private.
Some things that are said are deep some are light, some things need prior understanding to grasp. Some things are over the head of some people and not others. So what is said to one person doesn't ring true with another. I like nicodemus. He heard things that he didn't understand but he stored them in his heart, and pondered them. He did not diss them because his understanding lacked. He was open to what was correct, being humble, even in his great learning to still want to be on the right track. Years later he helped to bury Jesus body. He could have said oh jesus that is just your view. Jesus would have said that it was the fathers view. I read a book about installing a shower then i told another person how to install a shower, they said it was just my point of view until they went to install a shower. It may have been my point of view but it was correct. Now christians on here all have their points of view and what is important is what they agree on. Jesus is everything: that's the bottom line. Salvation is necessary and relationship is paramount. Now lets see what views aside from that new converts come up with. It doesn't matter that everyone have everything exactly the same pertaining to genesis 3:16 but it does matter that everyone have everything the same concerning john 3:16. One may think the cannon occurred in 325ad another in 425ad but that is irrelevant to a christian walk. This is not like science, based on formula, formula died with the law on the cross. Everybody learns at their own pace and kudos to that. Jesus said just love one another, and we do just that. Obviously some troubled people have not this love but the Christians care about all non believers and it shows by the different hats. I think of all the posters the Christian show more love than those in the top 10 posters and those who want to sue people and those who just push their false doctrines and one liners onto people without actually debating anything. There is christian love in here, in this place and format and God bless them all.
Oh your bible is no good. its all lies.
Your fallacious fantasy is psychotic. We are so far from reality we are gonna need a hubble telescope to see those christians. Its all just your opinion.
What is the christian to say?
That other one should say nothing and just listen, spend some time on the post and read it a few times and be open.Actually BO, when I keep telling myself that there is no correct interpretation and that everybody has their own I am desperately attempting to find room for yours. You could not be correct. These hoops you jump through in order to set yourself on a pedestal are, in my opinion, foolish and about as far from spirituality as I am from the South Pole.........but, I still think you have a right to your opinion and I am willing to leave room for the possibility that you too, however improbable it might seem, could be right.
I'd be open to debate any topic you care to, open a thread send me an email or lets hijack this little area. Lets start off small i don't want to have to take you through the whole there is no satan on this thread, i might by email though :0)
A debate? To what end? We are nothing alike BO. You are a person of the book. You believe God communicates with you through one medium. Lifeless words in an ancient book. I cannot debate delusion. I will not be dragged into a pointless discussion on whether or not words which fly in the face of reality are to be given credence.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. You missed the point. By ignoring the second of the commandments you stand in defiance of the first.
You said it yourself in another thread. The words of Paul, in your mind, take precedent over the words in the gospels. We all see what we want. I will not allow myself to become saddened by what you see, by entering into a protracted exchange.If you were me, Emile, I would have said precisely the same.
May I ad emphatic here, just because...
What comes to mind, I believe we can agree Emile -as we often do:
Sheep know the voice.
Goats eat anything you put in front of them -especially paper.
James.
***************
Thanks for telling Hubpages you intend to hijack this thread
To think Paul was against Jesus, How foolish and ignorant can a person be? it is true, as the Bible says, Ever learning but never coming to the Truth, it is a bottomless pit of intellectual reasoning.
What I mentioned in the post before this, shows me that religion has not been paying any attention to these facts, They have been mis-interpreted away.
swept under the rug.
Makes me wonder ?? What else is under that rug?
Nothing that Paul or anyone else says is going to make me think that Gabriel lied about these things. That 62 weeks took 568 years for completion and yet the next 8 weeks haven't happened yet some 1900 years later.
62 weeks = 568 years
8 weeks = 1900 years and still counting. I don't think so!- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
For those who knew about Paul, learned about Paul, and at least listened about Paul, I appreciate you and your ability to search and study.
For those who argue for Paul even against Yahshua..well that is your business.
Since none of these wish to learn, this is my last post on this thread.
Mark 6:11
And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
I've showed scripture side by side and you still can't see.
Obviously you are not suppose to.
I have planted the seed, that's all I can do.
Do any of you know what "out of context means"?
AND Love is not always kind, or friendly or kissy
One thing is for sure..If Yahshua comes back and walks the earth, you'll reject him because he won't teach what Paul did.It isn't that they will not learn, to think that everything they know may be based on a lie is unthinkeable and they are not able to see what is obvious to you and to others. This is why the argument against the idea is full of witch references, vague references to what seem unrelated verses, and frankly pathetic lines of defence.
I am not a christian, I am not even sure that the events depicted in the bible have any basis in real events BUT, I can read the story, and the original contains all the attraction that comes with being on the side of right, and the social values hold good from the personal to the whole of society. paul turns the whole thing into a cynical political means of control, and delivers the justification of bigotry and intolerance into the 'published' version. That bigoted and intolerant people follow the words of paul rather than their own christ is hardly any surprise.
Well done Deborah for the work on this and you have clearly shown that those who find this issue so hard to digest are driven by ego and self promotion, just like their false disciple.Since you have read all the posts and have come to your conclusion. you must have noticed how the one verse used to denounce is placed into fuller context to announce, what is right.
You speak of us christians not wanting to believe that what we believe is based on lies, but clearly the persuasive evidence is against that what we believe is a lie. I tell you quite honestly sir, that if any good evidence was imparted to cause me to change my belief about Paul - I would. I do not fear the truth of the bible. But there was no persuasive evidence against Paul but much for Paul.
Many evidences she did not discuss nor answer. In fact to the points of context that were given she just cut and pasted her accusation and went to another thread, circumventing the post that destroyed her accusation.
Weak and sickly people who do not know the bible may subscribe to jargon like this false doctrine and you certainly seem to be on board but you also claim to not be a christian and i see that you do not know the bible. Does your country even allow you to have one? So your support is like as jesus said
The blind lead the blind
Deleted
This 'people' judges you to be blowing hot air and nasty jibes in place of cogent argument.
You have shown yourself unable to counter what Deborah has put up - instead plying this thread with ill-thought out and irrelevant material - you are just sounding your own horn, or should I say empty drum.
As an impartial observer, as I don't believe this is about salvation, I am not a believer in any sense or denomination, the facts are clear - the writings you are all debating, or just decrying in some cases, clearly support Deborah's argument.Deborah has explained to you and others many times that she wrote the hubs, and writing the hubs doesn't mean she has practiced any of them. You have called her a diviner, a witch and a sorceress, This is LIBEL
Now this is the last time I'll say stop.
They have new laws about posting slander/libel online so millions can see.
You are guilty of Libel. I'll seek an attorney and stop you. I promise.
libel
Law a published false statement that is damaging to a person's reputation; a written defamation. Compare with slander .
the action or crime of publishing such a statement : a councilor who sued two national newspapers for libel | [as adj. ] a libel action.
a false and malicious statement about a person.
a thing or circumstance that brings undeserved discredit on a person by misrepresentation.
You might want to read a few Libel cases
http://spiritualabuse.org/experiences/l … garty.html
- JoelMcLendonposted 13 years ago0
Deborah, There are so many people here on the forums who think they are spiritual. I've watched them constantly attack you. Yet, I doubt they hold as much power in their whole life as you do in your little finger. I know what you have and I wonder how you can continue offering them anything.
I don't care that they reject the things you offer them, I do care when they treat you so badly. When they can't fight the truth you show them, they attack you and justify themselves completely, blaming you for their reactions. I am very sorry Deborah.Good you read it. That's all i wanted, its not worth the ban.
My posts speak for themselves. Proper context and biblical truth.I can agree with this 100%.
I do think you are over-reacting with the mention of libel etc., you are giving the hollow words more attention than they deserve.There is nothing spiritual about the arguments Deborah presents. She refuses to accept the work of scholars who have studied Hebrew and Greek. What sources has she cited? simply the Bible and her own opinion.
Spiritual is what Paul did. Hey, he was beaten, shipwrecked, and continued to preach the Gospel. Has Deborah suffered any of that? Then how can you say she i8s spiritual and Paul isn't? She is being a pseudo intellectual when she takes certain verses and ignores others. then she claims hew authority is based on spiritual truth that she knows and no one else has such truth. the term is gnostic.When you say she refuses to accept the work of 'scholars' and then demand her sources - did you forget to cite your sources for your sweeping and erroneous statement ?
To cite various parts of the compilation of texts that the catholic church stitched together and called the bible - correctly, and to show the discrepancies between the claims of the various writers, is not gnostic - it is analysis.
To attack her by claiming she is a pseudo-intellectual is simple bigotry and blind defence of your position with no evidence or reasoning offered.
It is not necessary to be beaten, shipwrecked or to preach to analyse blatantly conflicting texts, and it is not necessary to self-promote oneself, write ones own fabricated story, make wild claims etc., as paul clearly does. You may not like the fact that the guy you have been blindly following all your life is a liar and preaches against the words of jesus - but attacking Deborah for showing you how to see that fact is shooting the messenger.I gave her a link to a Bible Commentary. there are many Commentaries that give the circumstances surrounding the the writingsof Paul. She denounced the Commentary as being a Pauline document. She gave absolutely no documentation for her assertion. She expects people to believe her when she accuses Paul of being a liar, thief and many other things. Where is her proof? She says, read it for yourself[-as though she is the only one who has read the text and her interpretation is the only interpretation.
What would you call someone who refuses to accept the work of schollars without documentation. You are telling me that the Catholics stitched togethera Bible. How do you know it is not valid? King James translated the Scriptures from Greek and Hebrew? Were they wrong? Are you saying that people cannot translate things properly and then tell me that Deborah is right? Well? Sou7nds like you are taking her work=d over other scholars? Are you? What does that make you?
I did not attack Deborah. I attacked her scholarship. And I am attacking yours. What are your sources--Greek or Hebrew?
One who has that special truth is a Gnostic. Right? sounds as thought Debiorah has made that claim.One might be interested in reading this sites version of the History of the English Bible.
http://www.greatsite.com/timeline-engli … e-history/I would say that she simply put up the various conflicting texts and pointed out the inconsistencies. No degree needed, not even one of those laughable divinities Phd's
The words speak for themselves, maybe you should just go back and read them.You can prove anything by taking verses out of context without looking at the rest of the Bible. that is exactly what Deborah has done. For exampole, Judas hanged himself. Go ye and do likewise. I rep[eat. Deborah's scholarship is suspect.
We agree on the out of context
anybody else care to comment on that?***********************
Your Christianity and Humanity is suspect to me.
Every time I see your picture, I can feel a kind of hate emitting from you.
I've never said that to anyone on the forums beforeIt must be spiritual rather than intellectual. You did not reason, you felt. I thought you claimed to know the truth. Right?
********************************
It's called discernment. I discerned and I Still Feel ItYes, I am familiar with discernment. Have you discerned the spirits of the scriptures you used? No, you have not, If you had, you would not have reached the conclusions you have reached.
****************************************
This thread as stated in my first post is for those who want to know what the differences are between Paul and Yahshua's teachings. It is not about how you feel about me. I couldn't care less about your judgments.
If you would rather follow Paul instead of Yahshua, that's your business.
of course i care about what people think of me that is just the love of God.
But as it happens that is not enough to deter me from proper contexting verses out of context. I guess at the very least i can be nice in the face of smears, libel charges and hatred and ill feelings.Like the smears, hatred and ill feelings you offered Earnest?
its a sad situation that what was said was accurate. I spoke what i knew to be true, and that embraced what happened in here. I suppose he could have loved, but i don't know that. I would have to assume that and that's a really big leap of faith assessing what went on in here.
Do you recall the time i said to him, "If you ever convert to christianity I would probably be your best brother." No you probably don't. Friendship with that kind of attitude was never an option, it was to evil.
Sorry you are having trouble with it, man, but look to the bigger picture. You seem to have inherited his shoes.
Again i am trying not to be critical but truth is truth.
Wishing you well
Nice?
You better read back over some things you've said
And what I said in that paragraph is truth. A discernment.
Better than being happy someone died and posting it
No one smeared you, we simply told the truth.
Anything we do is soon discovered.
I waited over one and a half years to expose you.
You think it's Okay to say those things to a woman?
And remember, you brought it up again.lol
Deborah. It wasn't a plural situation. You bring that out of context as well? One dubious thing and two affirmative things. 1-2. I can appreciate that you want to turn the screws on me, because to discredit me would help you justify your out of context posts, i assume, in some weird way, but keep it honest alright.
And still you say i was happy about that earnest thing, how do you back that up?
EXPOSE ME that's another lol. Again you take one sentence and blow it out of proportion. The only way an exposure could occur is if this behavior was continuous, which you do not know, but have slammed the gavel down anyway, and then to call it truth? it's far from truth, but enjoy whatever enjoyment you can get out of it, law abiders are very stoic.
You're are really rude, Typical behavior
Why should Deborah accept a doctrine she came out of years ago.
Your English New Testament says you can't put new wine in old bottlesIf you think I am using the New English Bible, you are completely wrong. An d being rude works in both directions. I am attempting to have an intellectual discussion. But you refuse to look at any evidence except your own myopic truth.
Can you have an intellectual conversation about the bible? I thought rationality and common sense were discouraged by the church. Christians tend to say it isn't debatable. So how then can anything said be original to the one speaking?
In Zen, it is said to avoid useless or redundant language. Was not the same not said in the new testament? Wasn't the bible meant simply to be reference to prayer, not a book to live by? Did Jesus not say to make it new?The Bible is a Book of Life. It is not a Book of Prayer. Jesus said, "My words are spirit and they are life."
********************
THE WORDS I speak are spirit and they are life.
He didn't say My words..the words, there is a big difference..and from your own mouth you judge yourself, which is not entirely your fault, as you were taught to repeat the words, as if they were life. And I quote:
'The(se) words are spirit and they are Life.'
'And life is the light in man'
'The worlds are framed and sustained by the words of Creator' {translating: the universe is the breath of Creator}
The bible is not spirit, it is a book.
It is not the Book of Life. Because according to the text, the real Book of Life is written by the Epistles of Life, Living Stones, Trees of Life where the words are etched/written in them for all eternity {meaning humans who 'get it' and are transformed back into the original being they were designed to be.}
Trees more beautiful than those of Eden itself.
Else, everyone who memorized the book would essentially be living eternity here and now...
Why do [you] worship a book when even that book states, "The word is in you to both hear and do it. If the word is in you, you don't need any books to 'get a word' from.
James.And you bought it, coming from the mouth of a mortal?
**********
You are probably using the King James version. I use all three. KJV, Greek and Hebrew.
Thanks
new wine in old bottles
I'd love to hear how you interpret this?
So there are no messengers ever that should be shot
Even in the bible a number of messengers have been shot
This is about as sensible as your other assumptions
*************************
For one thing, Deborah speaks, reads, and writes both Hebrew and Greek.
She studied the scriptures for one year under the Hebrew priests.
She had to prove she had the understanding of the scriptures before she got her certificate of semichah. She is an ordained minister in America, I know what she has been through and the life she lives. She is a scholar. Her book will be out soon so you might want to read it.
The only thing you have against her is that she does not agree with you.
The scriptures show the truth, after all, Paul is the one who said he robbed and lied.
Why don't you read all of her posts in this thread.
I can see your mind, by the angry look on your face.No you can't. Obviously this is one scholar who likes to take a single verse and use it to promote some single verse fallacy.
There are rules to interpreting scripture and one of those really important rules is that no single verse can be used by itself.
Another rule is that everything must fit into its context.
Ignoring these basic rules leads a person into darkness and nothing will bring them out - except maybe a candle apparently
Job 11
1Then answered Zophar the Naamathite, and said,
2Should not the multitude of words be answered? and should a man full of talk be justified?
3Should thy lies make men hold their peace? and when thou mockest, shall no man make thee ashamed?
4For thou hast said, My doctrine is pure, and I am clean in thine eyes.
5But oh that God would speak, and open his lips against thee;
6And that he would shew thee the secrets of wisdom, that they are double to that which is! Know therefore that God exacteth of thee less than thine iniquity deserveth.
7Canst thou by searching find out God? canst thou find out the Almighty unto perfection?
8It is as high as heaven; what canst thou do? deeper than hell; what canst thou know?
9The measure thereof is longer than the earth, and broader than the sea.
The search for truth will end when it is found.
The fact that we are still searching should be telling us something! ??
We haven't found it yet!
But we all want to think that we are on the right path.
However; when we reject pieces of truth because it doesn't fit in with what we have already figured out; this too is telling us something that we do not want to know.
The don't want to know part, is why no one that is still searching hasn't found it.Yes, it should, but believers are ignoring or denying it.
Not JUST believers !! EVERYBODYs ah DOIN IT.
Each and EVERYBODY.Sorry Jerami, your assessment of others who actually understand much of the world around them does not equate to your irrational beliefs.
Your un-reason does not sit upon the same shelf as their reason.When you read my coments ... you tend to have tunnel vision.
I oftem make comments which I believe to be applicable NO Matter what the subject matter might be. And I can count on you and your tunnel vision to ZzzzoooooM right in on thatwhich makes the best arguement in your own mind.
MISSING the point in question "TOTALLY"Yes, I know you believe that, just like you believe so many other irrational things.
Well, Mr. Master of what is and what AINT ...
I wish that you could share some of your wisdom with us ignorant folks; instead of JUST expressing to us how ignorant you think that we are.
Come on with it ... shine some wisdom upon us.
This is an invitation for you to now say something inteligant.
Say something smart; that will convince me how wrong that I am.I don't need to express what is exhibited so clearly and unfettered from reality.
Sorry for the delay I just painted a wall and am looking for the answer to my question concerning your wisdom!
Troubled Man said ...."I don't need to express what is exhibited so clearly and unfettered from reality".
(ME) If this is the answer to my request ? I agree with you completely;
your wisdom is expressed and exibited so clearly unfettered from reality ? !!
You seem to have done a complete turnaround. I'll be anxiously waiting for more of what is to come.
He and the others ignore anything which is inconvenient. It's a form of revisionism.
It's a big universe...can anyone be sure we haven't missed something? Scientists tell us that half the universe is missing! (Dark Matter) They can't find it, but they are sure it's there. Sounds like a christian describing God.
Doesn't this dark matter make up more than HALF ?
But I agree how strang it it that a majority of what is; isn't ???
What ? That makes sence when Ya think about it. No it don't ;;; Yes it does; kinda, not at all.
I agree ! No I don't?
I think there is more to this than meets the eye,
edit gotta go to H Depot back shortly
Maybe by then T.M. may have shined some light into my darkness.
Really, troubled? Is dark matter a religious concept? Am I inventing it? You, my friend are the irrational one here. You have said nothing at all which disputes what I say. What? You out of ammo already?
You tell me. My understanding is that it's an attempted explanation for the effects of gravity.
See? You don't know, so you pretend to know. Dark Matter is a attempted explanation for the effects of gravity. Actually, gravitational field effects say that there is something there, but it is undetectable beyond those effects. This is also how we determine the presence of planets around distant stars. All very mysterious. The fact remains is that Dark Matter constitutes most of reality, in short, we don't have a clue what reality is made of. To pretend that everything is known is as irrational as the most irrational religionist. Sorry, but I call it like I see it. You get to wear the pointy hat today, though!!!
Then, obviously, it is detectable.
No, you call it as you believe it.Detectable yes, definable, no. Actually, I know more about the nature of energy. And, so do you...or are you telling us what you DON'T believe? You say you know. If you know it, then you obviously believe it. O.K.?
Yes, I "understand" believers confuse the concepts of belief with understanding simply because they have no understanding of the concept of understanding, they simply believe based on their indoctrination to believe rather than understand.
So we are agreed. Your beliefs are based on faith, too. If E=MC2 is the ball of wax, consciousness is included in it, because consciousness does exist. Does it not? If it exists, then what is it's mass? It does exist, but to say that it is simply a concept, well, that is like saying awareness is only a concept. Consciousness exists, therefore it is included in the equation. Consider: First law of motion: A body at rest, tends to stay at rest, and a body in motion tends to stay in motion. What we are told by the current state of scientific endeavor is this. There was nothing, then everything. For just a moment, don't even consider gravity...just for a moment. How does this differ from the Bible version? Nothing...then everything. Gravity is the primal form of energy. Energy isn't created, energy isn't destroyed. Isn't born, and can't die. The total of all energy in this time/space never changes. If energy is removed from the equation, everything disappears. Gone. Experiments being conducted on earth at this moment in super-colliders around the world seek to duplicate what occurred at the inception of this time space. What if: That's how we got here? BANG!!! My friend, we are little more than monkeys wearing clothes. Thats a fact. I also believe that when the truth finally is known...and there is only one truth....everybody is going to be surprised how wrong all of us have been. You may consider yourself superior to me or others, but you aren't. If you cannot perform the math to proof for your own self all of the scientific theories you believe in, then you are accepting it on faith and faith alone.
Most teachers become teachers after studying other teachers.
"IF" they answer the questions as these other teachers want them to answer them; THEN and ONLY then can they become accredited to become teachers.
And if they can expand upon the original concept, they are then called scholars
What if the first teacher was misguided on just a few smaller issues? And that concept is expanded upon again and again, and again, and again through the ages?
After enough time, After we have studied these so called scholars long enough, we can read the original message and no longer see it's original concept, though we read the original words, our mind hears what those scholars say that we are supposed to see. Like a mystical FOG.
I think that Debra is headed out of this man made fog concerning Gods word, and is attempting to tell others that the fog does exist.
Until we admit to ourselves that it does exist .... Well, you should be able to figure out the rest.What kind of scholarship did Abraham, or Jesus have?
Didn't Jesus disagree with the scholars of his time?Anyone can get a degree or scholarship these days. There is off campus, over the internet courses. Pay the fee and attend classes. For 25$ the church of spirtuality will send ya a pastors certificate. We have radical right wing and left wing scholars. We have idiots with papers. My experience tells me that when a person leans on their credentials and start mentioning them as an ensign we should listen, there is something terribly wrong. A proper theologian should surprise you.. oh man i've been listening to you for years and i never knew. That's a person who relies on their knowledge, not their ability to spout a bunch of letters.
What a person says is really what counts. I have read outrageous things from people who have letters after their names. There are a couple of people with letters after their names. Letters puff people up, they get big headed.. you should listen to me i have studied this for years. Whats the old saying? It's not seminary it's a cemetery.
Jesus never said, we need huge amounts of learning and letters to know wassup. That we should all be theologians. There are theologians I wouldn't read past their first paragraph.
The only credentials christians need are located in Micah 6:8
Micah 6:8 He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.and what if a person gets a degree and then comes up with theories that do not support the theologies of the institute that degree was obtained in?
Then that person is evolving, growing outward. Religions have tendancy to trap a person, seeking an inward path. To grow outward, one must accept the world as it is, not as they have been told to do so. When the mind is trapped, the body will stagnate. A rolling stone gathers no moss, as a moving river never stagnates. To lock the mind to an idea, is to bring personal growth to a standstill.
What you may call evolving wouldn't work in any other scenario. People go to learn and learn they do. Then they are supposed to come out and eschew everything they learned because growing is evolving which = a good thing?
I am afraid that every law court in the world would advise people not to think outside the box of their laws.
My question is that if these ideas are eschewed, is the degree still legit? Or has the person forfeited the agreement - so to speak.
If i get a math degree and then i eschew all prime numbers am i still a mathematician. Why then if i eschew my teaching in a doctorate area am i still considered a doctor.One focusses on the issues of his/her own mind, to move where one will is the nature of the beast. To go beyond what we are taught, is the mother of innovation.
Refer to Einstein and Jesus, himself. Although it doesn't appear Jesus had any formal education. Outside of the box worked out well for them.
Jesus wasn't really outside the box. He was back to the original purpose, which is really, inside the box. The Pharisees were more out of the box than Jesus was.
Einstein wasn't really out of the box either, he abode by the demands of mathematics. He may have used some imagination to conceive the idea but still he applied mathematics to substantiate his theories.
Well, Paul and the other apostles where men. And men are fallible. God/Jesus is infallible. So there is your answer. Man is not perfect and has his biases and likes and dislikes. Jesus brought everyone to the table as you say, the good and the sinners. So, do we follow Jesus example and teachings or the apostles, who were fallible men?
fallilble
lets examine that shall we
yes men are fallible but we can safely say less fallible with God in their lives, so can we say, with God greatly in their lives - less fallible than less fallible.
Since God said to jeremiah
Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.
and so jeremiah did his job well.
Proverbs 1:23 Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.
Joel 2:28 And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions:
Joel 2:29 And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.
Sounds like fallible people have some help
If people live breath and follow the Way of God how fallible should they be? There will always be a margin for error or to make a wrong decision but when it comes to those things that be of God and this is the area we are talking about, the fallible ratio to infallible should drop toward zero with experience, time and dedication.
John 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceeds from the Father, he shall testify of me:
John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
So how fallible will people be with Gods help over time equaling experience and knowledge?
Theoretically we should grow in the knowledge and understanding of God and be attuned to what He has to say. So again the compass points to infallibility over fallibility.
Some people are completely fallible and they choose to be that way for whatever reason, but this kind of fallibility is obvious to anyone leaning toward the infallible side of the scale, and some people want the bible to reveal what God wants and they are okay with being taught and that learning.
What I understood is really a thousand dollar worth. You have the good points sighting these view.
There are lots and lots of ways to praise God even when you walk, talk, eat, sleep, all are worships.
Now I believe that the teaching on the Mount of Olives.
"The Sermon on the Mount (anglicized from the Matthean Vulgate Latin section title: Sermo in monte) is a collection of sayings and teachings of Jesus, which emphasizes his moral teaching found in the Gospel of Matthew (chapters 5, 6 and 7).[1] It is the first of the Five Discourses of Matthew and takes place relatively early in the Ministry of Jesus after he has been baptized by John the Baptist and preached in Galilee.
The Sermon is the longest piece of teaching from Jesus in the New Testament, and has been one of the most widely quoted elements of the Canonical Gospels.[2] It includes some of the best known teachings of Jesus such as the Beatitudes, and the widely recited Lord's Prayer. To most believers in Jesus, the Sermon on the Mount contains the central tenets of Christian discipleship.[2]"
This sights the true nature of Jesus. We must have fellowship with other Christians while hearing the words of God. - That is the Church where Paul made."I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life." -jc
FOLLOW ME LIVE FOREVER. -jc
I am the light of the world: he that followeth me, walketh not in darkness, but shall have the light of life. -jc
Lightning on the cloud is in an instant Revelation of Jesus Christ.
His Word in Truth the Double-edged sword proof coming out of his mouth. "His Word that works to save and to destroy" in all His glory for all the world to see. 'I am the light of the world; he who is following me shall not walk in the darkness, but he shall have the light of the life.'
The two edges cut through time and such a sword is the "lightning" that striking is emblem unmasked insight.
The Revelation of Christ does in an instant enlight masses where for centuries Franklin told beggars in rain go fly a kite.
So in Isaiah 49:2, it is said of the same personage, "And he hath made my mouth like a sharp sword." So in Hebrews 4:12, "The Word of God is quick and powerful, sharper than any two-edged sword," etc. So lightning stepped Leader is Jacob's Ladder I left you (Hebrew: Sulam Yaakov סולם יעקב) This the ladder to heaven a river through time, flowing both ways means I just called Einstein, told Him I go faster than any limit sign in fact my call just made him an Alien, and even this "first" contact with extra terrestrial is mine. Just showing the ability to make this call is the raising of all dead. Causation the relationship between an event of (Lightning Strike) and another event (Forerunner / Leader), the latter the leader and winner pigeon feeder the consequence beats its cause by a nose. "I am the Light of the world," He said; "the man who follows me shall certainly not walk in the dark, but shall have the light of Life."
In common usage Causality is the relationship between a set of factors in this case a (Lightning Strike) and a (Forerunner Leader). The strike which effects the Leader is a direct factor that affects an Lightning Leader directly, that is, without any intervening factors. (Intervening factors are sometimes called "intermediate factors.") The connection between a Lightning Strike(s) and Lightning Leader in this way referred to as a causal nexus but Jesus Christ needs no Delorean to show time travel to Marty Mcfly, just look at any Ben Bolt by itself and in an instant slavery could die. Do you fathom causality is the relationship between factors of (Lightning Strikes) and (Lightning Leader). Anything that affects this Lightning Leader is a factor of that Lightning Leader. A direct factor is a factor that affects the Lightning Leader directly, that is, without any intervening factors. (Intervening factors are sometimes called "intermediate factors." and many were used to hide) The connection between a Lightning Strike(s) and Lightning Leader in this way can also be referred to as a causal nexus.
Though the Lightning Strikes and Lightning Leaders are typically related to changes or events, candidates include objects, processes, properties, variables, facts, and states of affairs; characterizing the causal relationship can be the subject of much debate.
The philosophical treatment of causality extends over millennia. In the Western philosophical tradition, discussion stretches back at least to Aristotle, and the topic remained a staple in contemporary philosophy before it stole the entire show united science and religion both
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Deborah (Last name removed for privacy)
Curriculum Vitae
Since 2008 Doctoral Fellow in Topoi
1990-1994 Certificate of Semichah Tel Aviv University
1993-1994 MSt in Jewish Studies at the University of Haifa
2003-2007 Study of Theology and Jewish Studies at the Baylor Center For Jewish Studies
19__ born in America********************************
You're speaking of Judaism but you must be thinking about Christianity.
The Jewish teachers don't diss anyone.
They don't speak of Paul or the New Testament at all
I'm the only one I know that does this. I do it to share knowledge and help othersDeborah...Some will never accept certain things. And it doesn't matter what "proof" or "evidence" is presented...
So far from what I have seen...Good read...Keep it up.. you might reach one or two..
brotheryochanan wrote:
You keep telling yourself that there is no correct interpretation and that everybody has their own and guess what, that makes room for your interpretation to, doesn't it- - = = =
There is No correct interpretation ? Verrrrry true!
How can anyone profess that the bible is the inspired word of God and is true .... And then
..... And then
..... And then interpret it to say something other than what is written.It is baffling, really, how division is always the intercessor/interpreter of the naturalized human. There is no division between the spiritual and the intellect, else the human mind would understand no thing and certainly nothing. To say otherwise is defiance of the image humans are made in and the likeness of that image.
And, although Deborah and I have had several disagreements, I tend to agree that this Pauline fixation is the cause of much trouble, for many of the believing (and non). But from guilt, and with power, comes establishments of many things -doctrines especially. Paul's guilt of murdering thousands, sitting in judgment with his fellow lawmakers, spoon fed Rome and all its riches (comforts, conformity) coupled with international connections, certainly influenced his 'enlightenment'. Was it the event of Stephen that finally shook him to the core? Driven like a madman on death row, using every tool at his disposal, to cleanse himself from that guilt? I have no doubt.
Some writings of his later life, lead me to think he was becoming forgetful, given to flights of fantasy from absorbing ideologies around him. Traveling to the edges of East Asia (some even think present day Russia) and all over North Africa, southern Europa -and not collecting certain elements of their belief systems- is very difficult to swallow. In fact many elements of Judaism absorbed cultural beliefs into their legal and social system from the time it came into being. A system Paul knew better than the back of his hand. Stories of angelic battles, demons, the destruction of the world, the grandiose return of the promised King of Is Ra El.
Paul caused a wondrous man and wondrous events to become an unreachable god -likened to Artemus and others- appealing to the weak and used to justify the cause of establishing the 2nd greatest theological order in human history. Even so far as to blend the Sanhedrin with the Senate of Rome itself. Evidence of this appears later when Constantine had his 'enlightenment' and called on many of Paul's words & works to make Christianity the official 'religion' of the world. Then later during the Crusades and again in our own time with the "pushing of prophecy".
Did he ever escape the guilt? Seems not, because he continuously appealed both to Rome and the believing for mercy and forgiveness for his juvenile actions -even 50 years after those events transpired. Did he expound on the same message and result as Y`shua, certainly not -else everyone would be daily transforming into the being Paul himself spoke of, regarding Y`shua, with no practical application of his own.
Y`shua message was very simple and clear:
Everything done wrong from the beginning has been undone (repaired). Walk with the Father even as Adam walked and enjoy the fruit of living forever in human form (heaven-earth). Because that was and still is the true message. That is true unity, oneness, godliness and love.
Paul did not teach this. He taught religion by application of 'law' -part old part new. This same law that makes up modern Christianity and nearly all democratic systems. (Although Democritus would not be happy with the result of his ideas and copyright infringement of his surname).
James.Jerami,
Does these verses below sound clear and to the point for you?
Romans 9
New King James Version (NKJV)
Israel’s Rejection and God’s Purpose
6 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel,
7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, “In Isaac your seed shall be called.”
8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.
9 For this is the word of promise: “At this time I will come and Sarah shall have a son.”
10 And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac
11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls),
12 it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.”
13 As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.”
Jerami,
Does your God hates people even before they have been born?
And your works doesn't matter?"Was it the event of Stephen that finally shook him to the core? Driven like a madman on death row, using every tool at his disposal, to cleanse himself from that guilt? I have no doubt. "
It was not guilt at all. Paul said:
Acts 23:1 And Paul, earnestly beholding the council, said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.
How could Paul say that? He killed christians, but he killed christians while being a pharisee and a keeper of the law. Paul thought he was doing God a favor eliminating that sect that sought to turn people from the law. He was guilt free before his conversion.
What 'made Paul mad' was Stephens unshakable faith.
Acts 7:55-59
Acts 7:60 And he knelt down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge. And when he had said this, he fell asleep.
"is very difficult to swallow. In fact many elements of Judaism absorbed cultural beliefs into their legal and social system from the time it came into being."
Yes that is somewhat true. Lets not forget that these blendings occurred over periods of 400yrs. 400yrs they were slaves to Egypt. 400yrs they were in exile in Babylon and Persia then the Romans. So culturally after this long a period of time one can expect certain adaptations. It's kinda like, if i lived in England would i one day celebrate Guy Fawkes Day. But I do not think we can say this is entirely the case with Paul, one reason is his steadfast determination to doctrine. His disciplinary lifestyle as a pharisee. His devotion to his job. His revelation of Jesus Christ. Paul shows all the signs of a man who, when convinced of correctness, commits. A very zealous man who goes to lengths to accomplish a goal and secondly, Paul was not traveling for 400 yrs. and thirdly, it is very difficult to sway someone from their beliefs once they have strong convictions about their beliefs.
An interesting read James. Whilst I don't agree with Deborah on her ultimate conclusions on Paul, I am happy to challenge the Christian notion that Paul was infallible. Based on his statement to Timothy that all scripture is God breathed, etc, etc, the Church has concluded that Paul's writings are God- breathed scripture because they are contained within the NT. The idea that one can question Paul's teaching is somehow an anathema to the Church. It is really rather liberating to disagree with Paul where our conscience cannot align its reason with his teaching.
Indeed-y.
Tthe compilers of the text made Paul the leading authority.
We already know many other letters were written by all the main characters.
Why were they excluded from the compilation.
My second question is why was Lucius given a book all to himself, being Paul's personal assistant, some claim, if not Paul himself. And given credit for writing the entire summary of Acts. If memory serves, Paul wasn't even around during that time. If he was, he would have been no more than eight or ten, still living in Tarsus.Not all apostles were given charge to write into the NT. Matthew agrees and supplements mark and luke agrees and also john. You can't have 4 witnesses who are the same. And luke being a gentile convert is amazing testimony as one who is converted himself, plus he was skilled as a writer and did excellent research, i suppose being the wealthier of the others.
The book of acts covers a 30-35 year period of time in which case paul would have been way more than 8 or 10.Chanan, I meant Paul would have been 8 or 10 when the Work was happening, before Acts kicks in. and again, yes, many years are encompassed in Acts -which apart from very little, is all Paul.
What happened to the original events of the 11 -after the Spirit came(?)
So, to me, the text is not supreme authority, nor 'anointed'. It is a rough compilation at best. A summation of keynote points to give a person some idea of what happened and why. Not a 'Holy' book to be learned, quoted -and in many cases misquoted- to use for or against another.
Read the thread. You are the one who left the reasoning process and went to feelings. And it appears that i was right. You admit that it is for those who want to know the differences; thewrefore, it is not open for discussion. You should have started a hub.
James
and from your own mouth you judge yourself, which is not entirely your fault, as you were taught to repeat the words, as if they were life. And I quote:
'The(se) words are spirit and they are Life.'
'And life is the light in man'
'The worlds are framed and sustained by the words of Creator' {translating: the universe is the breath of Creator}
Don
And the words of the Creator are in the Bible. But the Spirit is in man. If the Wpirit is not in man, he is dead.
James
The bible is not spirit, it is a book.
It is not the Book of Life. Because according to the text, the real Book of Life is written by the Epistles of Life, Living Stones, Trees of Life where the words are etched/written in them for all eternity {meaning humans who 'get it' and are transformed back into the original being they were designed to be.}
Trees more beautiful than those of Eden itself.
Don
So have I denied the "Tree of Life"? No, the Bible confirms it. And God says He will writ His words in the heart of man. So if the God's words are written in the heart of man, he is walking in the light. How? He has God's Spirit.
James
Else, everyone who memorized the book would essentially be living eternity here and now...
Why do [you] worship a book when even that book states, "The word is in you to both hear and do it. If the word is in you, you don't need any books to 'get a word' from.
Don
Not everyone who reads the book understands the book. that why the book is not worshipped. It is the author of the Book who is worshipped. You must worship in spirit and in truth. The Bible is the Book of Life to them that Find it.Yes, you have denied the Tree of Life.
why? Because you prefer -by the doctrines teaching/method- to worship the words in the book. The words of Creator are not in the book alone -in fact, less than one billion trillionth of a percent, of Creators words, are in the bible.
How much time does the average believer spend reading the bible or listening to preaching versus walking with the Spirit and heeding the small, still Voice' in them, which is the true word, that leads into all truth. A spirit, that is as His Spirit, even the breath of Himself, to bring forth [manifest] the proof of Eternal Life in each one? The true Witness who creates a Testimony [Epistle] in each one -that same Spirit who brought forth and testified of the First Born among many.
So again, yes, Don, I boldly say you -and many others- are in denial. Denying the Spirit -which is the word of truth. And you are correct again, unless the spirit is in man, he is dead. How many men have died since Adam lost his unity/glory (aka became strictly a natural man).
Again, you go back to the book for reference and to defend what you worship instead of worshiping {walking with} the Father in spirit. Instead you prefer to walk with the bible.
And that cop out of 'the book is secretive to those who are in darkness' is bogus. Because, even the text states: to those led by/walking with/in spirit: all things are revealed, nothing is hidden or any mystery -meaning all things are known to them -as Adam knew before his inception. This would include everything about Creator, our planet, even worlds afar off.
Now watch closely: to everyone else -everyone- all things come in parables.
So, tell me then, where are parables written:
In the heart of man or in the bible (Torah, Law + Letters)?
So then, who are constantly reading the parables to understand, yet never understanding. Seeing, yet blind. Hearing words, but still deaf. Certainly not the unbelieving, what do they care of such things.
The word is in you -and the word is you. If you can understand that, then close the book. Experience the Life.
James.**************
You are totally incorrect about the hidden things
Matthew 13:35
That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables; I will utter things which have been kept secret from the foundation of the world.
And you just said Yahshua is Bogus.(since he taught he spoke in parables so that not all would understand)Twice you misquote -which is typical bible-washing.
Y`shua said the Spirit would bring everything he (Y`shua) said to their remembrance -including the commands. The funny thing about it, most children by age ten know the 10 commands front to back. The Spirit writes the law on the heart, not the person -else it is works. So typically, you are cramming chapter-verse, like any other, trying to understand it for yourself -else aim superior against those who do not (just like Paul did). Are you disappointed that Paul reminds you much of yourself(?)
If everyone is supposed to be studying scripture to understand the things of Creator, why didn't Y`shua command everyone to do so, when he healed or spoke on the mountain and rose up from the grave? Because words on paper or stone cannot explain nor reveal Eternal Life. Didn't 3000 years of Hebrew history make that obvious? The Temple, the Tabernacle, the Ark, the Tablets and the 613 rules from ten, the flood, Babel, etc.?
As for Parables, they are seeds for the human mind to seek out the truth in spirit. Many would call them Haiku, poetry to capture ones attention so that they would site down and think about it. Much like Songs of Solomon, Lamentations, the Parable of the Sower.
The Spirit teaches expressly and without reserve -and certainly doesn't need a Strong's Hebrew-to-English Concordance to explain anything. Y`shua used parables at the time, because it was a way to relate to their thinking until he completed the work.
Y`shua never "taught" Torah. And if he did teach it, show me where he did. Certainly, he quoted Torah to the Torah-lovers; fish to the fishermen; dinari to the wealthy & tax collectors, etc etc etc. You cannot convince us in 3 short years, doing all the work he was -in every place- he had the time to teach the full measure of Torah to the 12 and the multitude. If that were the case, he never would have manifest. Moses had the written word covered 1,000 years earlier and the Hebrew Scribes, Law Makers & Priests after him.
Again, what the prophets spoke or said; what Y`shua said would be brought to remembrance. The only reason this stuff was written down was for historical purposes. 90% of the compilation cannot be applied to daily living. The entire compilation of Torah, Poems, Songs, Chronicles, Prophets, the Letters and 'Gospels' is simply a basic historical reference. It has no power nor authority. The Spirit does. And the Spirit IS truth. So, do not misunderstand. The Spirit is not a truth it IS Truth itself.
You, like Paul, command the people to study the scripture, to show themselves approved. Not the Father & certainly not Y`shua. The Father & Y`shua both confirmed the simple truth: "Walk with Me". I will be your Abba (once again) and show you all the mysteries/hidden things/forgotten/forsaken things of Life. Going to the ends of the universe to show you that salvation, in all its fullness - no reservations, no limitations, no quid pro quo, no ticket necessary, nothing secret/special you have to do (that no one else knows..shhh its a secret).
Just Walk with [practical] Faith in spirit -which I am going to send to you anyway, empowering you with that same Spirit that lifted up the Son of Man. Nothing can harm you, slow you down or get in the way. You do not need shiny, leather bound bibles or carefully rolled parchment of Torah in a little wooden box above your eyes to understand the One who is All Things. No need to strain your eyes at artifacts or yellow highlighted pages. Just 'hang out' with Me (the Father) like it was supposed to be fro the beginning and let ME show YOU exactly how I did it and how I made it and why I made you. We have forever! Are you ready and willing? If so, let's go! ...and the joy comes !!!
Ironically, the very person you are judging is the one who told you to do exactly what you are doing. Does that make you more of a liar than him(?). Maybe. Does it make you bogus(?) Maybe.
...
James.*******************************
God does not like it when you offend one of his little ones...Remember that.
You have the spirit alright, but it is not the Holy Spirit.
If you have God's power where are your miracles and healings and other signs?
You have a war personality. You want so badly for others to look up to you. They sense your hate and can't bring themselves to associate with you.
But that isn't my fault Twenty-OneI haven't been following this thread so I missed this comment. Luckily someone responded this morning so I had the opportunity to read it.
It's eloquent and insightful. I think it shows you have a deep understanding of the true message and sacrifice. I'm impressed and in awe. The comment about people hating you for your understanding probably only applies to those jealously hoping to convince people that they've found some secret message. Your explanation is the only way the story makes sense.
You are jumping to the conclusion that those who believe the Bible cannot see God in the mountains, trees, fields, oceans. You are totally wrong. God is everywhere and He is seen by those who believe. You have a bias against the Bible. But you should recall what Jesus told the Pharisees. "The Word testifys of Me." We worship the author. Not the Bible.
I am not biased toward the book. In fact, I have a degree of completion for learning the book and was hugely active in traditional ministry.
But, now you are blending things together.
My statement states: parables come from the books, the prophets, the scribes and are for those who are blind. Just like the Pharisees were blinded by their text, if you recall correctly. "You study deeply the law and scripts because through it you think you have solved the mystery of salvation." is what he referenced. The word that testified of Y`shua was not Y`shua himself, else he is a false witness. The Spirit testified on his behalf. And what was that testimony? That Eternal Life has come to everyone who accepts it and walks with the spirit, regardless of belief systems, doctrines, knowledge, wealth, impoverishment and more. To those who accept it, they become one with the Father, as he is one with the Father and the Spirit in the midst of them (uniting them). Meaning, again, you are the word manifest. You become heaven-earth.
And just as they worshiped Moses or Elijah -even Abraham, Torah & Traditions- believers worship the man Y`shua and worship the bible. Sorry to contradict, but because of the aforementioned, you cannot say you worship the Author of all Life, that is Creator.
I do not exclude myself from this, so do not mistake what I am saying. I am just a guilty as you. I studied it for years, taught it, preached it, even threw the book -literally- at someone to make them believe. That was the result of the Pauline fixation.
Now, on a lighter note, tell me what of Creator do you actually 'see' in mountains, oceans, fields and trees apart from the aesthetically pleasing? To see means you understand how that tree was made, why it is beautiful and such. Else, it is just another parable.
James.Do you noit see the Creator in the creations. "If ye have see me, you have seen the Father. How do you stand in awe of the creation without seeing the Creator?
I asked you to tell me what YOU see, not to return a rhetorical question.
but that is classic biblical conditioning and ever so slightly condescending.
I know what I see and am merely curious as to what you see...
My thinking says edification is good...
James
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Paul was always supposed to be quoting from scripture. Have you ever looked up the things he said the Bible said?
Well, Paul took verses from different places and made it say what he wanted it to.
In Romans 3 Paul says:
First lets look at why he is suppose to be quoting the Bible.
Paul says his lie abounded to the glory of God. In other words lying is OKay if it is for the glory of God.
He goes on to tell the church people everyone is unrighteous (That's because he knows he is.)
7. For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner?
10. As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one: (from Psalm 14:1-3 and Psalm 53:1-3)
11. There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12. They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
13. Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips: (from Psalm 5:9 and Psalm 140:3)
14. Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: (from Psalm 10:7)
15. Their feet are swift to shed blood: (from Isaiah 59:7-8 and see Isaiah 48:22)
16. Destruction and misery are in their ways:
17. And the way of peace have they not known:
18. There is no fear of God before their eyes. (from Psalm 36:1)
In Verse 10, this was taken from Isaiah 53:6.
The others from, etc.
Psalm 5, 10, 36, 53, 10 and Isaiah 59:7
Psalms 53 says “the fool has said in his heart there is no God.”
It is not saying there is none righteous, it is saying the fool said it in his heart. But Paul makes it sound like God said it instead of the fool.
Psalm 53
1. The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good.
The fool says in his heart all the things in Verses 1-3
And it is the workers of iniquity who do not seek God
4.”Have the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread: they have not called upon God”
Verse 6 shows that Israel has salvation and when the others return to God, Israel will be happy.
In Psalms 5 David is speaking of the fool and the workers of iniquity
Psalms 5 Says their throat is an open grave; they flatter with their tongue.
But Paul makes it sound as though the scriptures say this about everyone
Psalms 5:5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.
When David says their throat is an open sepulchre he is speaking of his enemies not everyone
Psalms 5:8-9
8. Lead me, O LORD, in thy righteousness because of mine enemies; make thy way straight before my face.
9. For there is no faithfulness in their mouth; their inward part is very wickedness; their throat is an open sepulchre; they flatter with their tongue. See Romans 3:13
In Psalms 10 David is speaking of the wicked not everyone.
4. The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts.
7. His mouth is full of cursing and deceit and fraud: under his tongue is mischief and vanity. See Romans 3:14
In Isaiah 59 it is speaking of those who have turned back from God to Idols-Not everyone.
Isaiah 59:
heir feet run to evil, and they make haste to shed innocent blood: their thoughts are thoughts of iniquity; wasting and destruction are in their paths.Romans 3 (NIV - UK)
5 But if our unrighteousness brings out God's righteousness more clearly, what shall we say? That God is unjust in bringing his wrath on us? (I am using a human argument.) 6 Certainly not! If that were so, how could God judge the world? 7 Someone might argue, If my falsehood enhances God's truthfulness and so increases his glory, why am I still condemned as a sinner? 8 Why not say— as we are being slanderously reported as saying and as some claim that we say— Let us do evil that good may result? Their condemnation is deserved.
Looking at v5 & v6, Paul is clearly saying that nobody can use the argument that God is unjust in bringing his wrath even though our unrighteousness shows his righteousness more clearly. In v7 and v8 he says "someone might argue" and this person might say .... Paul is stressing that he himself would not say such a thing. In fact he suggests their "condemnation is deserved."
10 As it is written: There is no-one righteous, not even one; 11 there is no-one who understands, no-one who seeks God. 12 All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no-one who does good, not even one.
Although both Psalm 14:1-3, Psalm 53:1-3 state that it is of the group of people declared to be fools that do not do good, that is are not righteous, both these passages explicitly state that God looks down on the sons of men (that is every human being) and declares of them ALL "Everyone has turned away, they have together become corrupt; there is no-one who does good, not even one."
13 Their throats are open graves; their tongues practice deceit. The poison of vipers is on their lips.
Continuing the theme of 'everyone' in the verses above, we might be led to believe that everyone is being described here in v13. According to Psalm 5:8-9 and Psalm 140:3, David is explicitly talking about his enemies. Therefore in this instance, Paul is not correct.
14 Their mouths are full of cursing and bitterness.
As above, Paul implies this is everyone, but Psalm 10, David is explicitly talking about the wicked, and clearly not everyone in the world is actually wicked, whether they are Hebrew, pagan, Christian, or atheist. Paul again is not correct.
15 Their feet are swift to shed blood; 16. Destruction and misery are in their ways: 17. And the way of peace have they not known:
Isaiah 58 and 59, are talking explicitly about the "House of Jacob"; clearly this does not talk about the 1st century general population. Paul again is not correct.
18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.
Psalm 36 is explicitly talking about the wicked. Paul again is not correct.
To be fair to Paul, he makes it abundantly clear that he does not hold the view that lying is OK for the Church if this highlights God's righteousness. In Psalms 14 and 53, God does indeed declare that everyone has "turned away, .. become corrupt.... etc".
If we were to read the remaining verses of Romans 3 in isolation, Paul is not correct in his statements. however, what he is giving us is his interpretation. He has concluded that because "God said" that all have become corrupt, then those other Hebrew scriptures that refer to the wicked or David's enemies, by extension are applied to all.
In Psalms 14 and 53 Does God actually mean everyone; did God actually say this? In both Psalms, it is stated that they were written by David, that is, he is the author. Was David exaggerating when he claimed "God said" or "All"? Was David employing a poetic device here when bemoaning the state of Israel; a stereotype to emphasise a point? Perhaps, if someone pointed out "What about Fred over there", David might have said "OK there's always an exception.". It depends on whether you believe God gave David the Psalm line by line, word for word, or whether David like song writers today simply wrote a song from his heart, to get his view across, coloured by his perspective?
I think that David like Paul are not infallible (David shagged Bathsheba and murdered her husband remember), and what they gave us was their opinion, their interpretation, based on the belief that what they were writing was the same thing God was thinking.
You stand in awe of what has been created. You know that the creation has to have a Creator and He is surroundng you with His love. The little insignificant you has become a child of the King. A child of an awsome God. A part of the eternal universe.
Why does there have to be only one child of God? If it was all created by God, all would be the child...
All have the possibility of becoming children of God by faith throuygh faith. There is only one begotten child of God. But every believer is a child opf God.
I have my personal God of which I am a part, I do not need fath for that, only an idea of what it means. In my eyes, all is one.
When Christianity was still very young, the catholic church put restrictions on who could be the child of God and they used the nicene council to do so. This was the creed.
1) None could come to father accept by him.
2) they formed the holy trinity.
3) They restricted and banned the worship of any other deity.
Do some research, you'll see that Christianity is an attempt to put a monopoly on religious belief. It lasted until the middle of the last century, now people practice what they want unhindered by all accept radical religious groups.research is fine, but you have to remember the source. Yes catholicism did what it did. But that hardly means that those who separated from it are doing this for control reasons. Did luther place his thesis on the vatican door for control reasons? NO. He did it for truth reasons. Orthodoxy split for truth reasons also.
Say what you will but the persuasive evidence is against control not for it at least from the non catholic sector.
Its all faith because works are finished and when there are no more ceremonies and festive days and sacrifices, what does a person have left?
Faith
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
When a person experiences something great in their lives you don’t have to remind them what happened because they don’t ever forget.
At least most people don’t forget these experiences because they relive them over and over.
But when we lie about something, we tend to forget little details, and sometimes we forget what came first.
About Paul’s lying.
In Roman’s Paul is responding because he was accused of lying.
What did Paul lie about?
To start, he lied about his conversion. I’m saying he lied about how it happened.
Paul, at the time being called Saul says he was on the road to Damascus, when he had a vision. Luke writes it first in Acts. Paul'contadict the first account of what happened on the road to Damascus. Here is the story he told Luke:
First account of Paul’s conversion.
Acts 9:1-8
1. And Saul, yet breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest,
2. And desired of him letters to Damascus to the synagogues, that if he found any of this way, whether they were men or women, he might bring them bound unto Jerusalem.
3. And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:
4. And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?
5. And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
6. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.
7. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
8. And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.
I am going to point out that Paul said the men with him (what men, I don’t know) heard the voice speak to Paul, but they didn’t see anything.
Anywhere in scripture, a major event took place there was always witnesses.
Second account of Paul’s conversion
Now in Acts 22: 9-13
Paul tells about his conversion again, but this time he states that the men with him saw the light but didn’t hear anything.
In accounts 1 & 2 Paul says he was blinded and went to Damascus to meet with Ananias and to receive further instruction as to what his mission was.
Third account of Paul’s conversion
In Acts 26: 13-14 Paul tells King Agrippa there was a light that shone around him, and the men with him and that they all fell to the ground.
Acts 26:13-14- At midday, O King, I saw on the way a light from heaven, brighter than the sun, shining round me and those who journeyed with me. And when we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew language .
He didn’t tell the King he had been blinded, he says he actually saw Yahshua and that he was actually instructed to what his mission was.
Acts 26:16-18 But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee, To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.Gee do all the accounts have to be identical to be believed? Are not the gospels different? Do we eschew them for their lack of identicality?
What Paul leaves out talking to agrippa is just fine. We cannot hang a man for not reciting the same story exactly.
Each rendition of Pauls conversion are supplemental not contradictory. In order for a contradictory statement to be, it would need to be worded like this:
Paul said I fell down
Paul said I did not fall down
But Paul did not say that, he said he fell down and then WHEN THE OTHERS HAD FALLEN ALSO, he heard a voice. This is not a contradiction its an supplementation.
The men heard a voice but saw not a man
the men saw a bright light
this is not a contradiction either, the contradiction would be:
the men did not see a light
the men saw a light.
the men saw a bright light but Paul saw jesus is perfectly in line with jesus coming to the jews and not the gentiles, roman soldiers and yet Jesus gave witness of his appearance by the bright light but showed not himself.
when it comes to what the men hear that is a translation problem solved by anyone who understands proper greek, genitive case and accusative case.
the proper translation should read.
7. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a sound but seeing no man.
Acts 22:9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.
And they that were with me saw indeed the light and were afraid but they understood not the sound of him that spake to me.
Why? because jesus spoke in hebrew to Paul and the roman guards did not know hebrew. its a translation problem.***********************
Blah, Blah, Blah, Blah
You don't even understand what I meant. so don't answer and look silly.
Isn't that funny. I understand Greek and Paul still lied.
You like Paul..he allows you to sin
I don't know what Bible you use, but it does not say what you say it saidIts a common misconception people have about the translated words, in this scenario. Many have sought to claim discrepancy but it's just not the case. Anybody can and many have, made this error if they adhere to the infallibility of the translation.
Strongs G191 confirms the use of understand as a viable definition for hear.king james bible
as usual it doesn't matter what you meant, the truth is dictated by the scriptures themselves. These are not even my ideas but scripture defined not even really interpreted. It just takes reading the verses before and after and in this case, comparing verses to see what the differences are. I don't make the scriptures say what i want, i let them tell me what they are saying.
Hmm,
Tough to swallow the 'caught in the lie' thing.
Reasoning:
a. We do not know whom this Lucius person credited for writing both an epistle on the Y`shua events, as well as the largest portion of "new testimony" text -being the Book(s) of Acts.
b. It is also noted, by many scholars, to be a compilation of many contributors who either traveled with Paul, heard the stories in the synagogues, churches, etc. about him and the other 11.
The largest issue regarding the idioms of 'the Vision' is: translation.
You already know how most have tried to translate Aramaic, Hebrew and Greek words, numbers into English, seamlessly, only to find massive contrasts in those translations. contrasts that have caused many believing and non much trouble.
My own studies lead me to think Saul never had such a vision. A vision he had, but not of Y`shua telling him to establish Christianity.
His plan was to go to Damascus, Syria and other locations anyway --to gain support for the cause against the way. He still did that, accept oddly in reverse of the original plan. Or was it? Saul was quite learned, wealthy, politically connected, publicly liked --and the right hand of the Sanhedrin president, his own life-coach & mentor.
Who is to say, he realized just how valuable forming an alliance with the new and motivated sect; How much influence could be achieved to use against Israels enemies at the time and if needs be against Rome itself. Holding the believing accountable to the law, satisfied the Jewish leaders and tradition. Adding the salvation message -reinforced the unity and communal approach. Plus, it helped wash off the guilt for his peers murdering their Savior and he murdering thousands of them. It also positioned them all over the regions -from Asia to North Africa, across nearly half of Romes holdings- like sleeper cells waiting for the moment to rise up against those who took their city/states and temples from them.
Remember 99% of the people Saul preached to were synagogue-doing-Torah-thumping Jews -like himself. If you can't market your own kind, who can you market?
The evidence of the establishment goes without saying as he was quite successful the world over. So successful, Rome -the greatest of empires- did get scared & so did Jerusalem and its leaders. Was Paul 'too good' at politics? Yes. Was he deliberately lying? Well, that's politics (science + religion, with sh!te eating grin, a dagger in your back --and a tax deductible campaign contribution cup)
James.
EDIT:
Also note -one of my many points against doctrine and its teaching, is this:
Y`shua did not quote Torah to the people. He spoke to them from the heart. He did quote Torah to the Priests, Lawmakers which makes sense. He spoke to the fishermen about nets and seas which makes sense. To most he spoke about seeds/food -as most were farmers and cattle ranchers, not city scholars, which makes sense.
Today's ministry teaching and pushing scripture, to the common people, is ridiculous. It is like me going to the billiard hall and dropping David Hume on everyone rather than the Parable of the Chipped Cue.
How many people 2000 years ago has a pocket version of Torah in their possession, or houses? None. Torah was like the Declaration of Independence to the Hebrew people -it was the foundation of their entire way of living: socially, economically, spiritually, family, health and more. In fact most never even saw the Priests/Law Makers, who were usually arguing the text in their little hives somewhere, until election time or they wanted to reinforce their position and rile up the crowd. Nor did they hear any scripture -even in the temple.
Paul, like many others even in his time and countless ones today, knew this and overtook the common people with their 'intellect' and influence, instead of showing them by example of living, what the Life was all about. I am not saying a little teaching isn't necessary -some is. But Christianity -as well as most theology (scientific or sensational) -is nothing more than a burden on people. People need answers and to see the 'original' message, in action, from all sides. That's all the proof they'll need of who's right, wrong, real or fake.
This thread mirrors the rest. Does anyone really really care that Paul lied? No. does anyone really say anything about Peter lying three times? No. Does anyone know Isaiah 46.7 by heart? No. But they do know not one of the elite preachers/priests/priestesses will get off their 'untouchable' high horses to get down n dirty in the mud pits, with the ones who keep them on those pedestals.
Did Paul lie, did Petra lie, did David or Solomon lie? Has Deepak Chopra, Tony Robbins, William Clinton, Einstein, the Pope, mother Theresa --or any of us-- lied, on multiple occasions, to achieve our results? So then, as the saying goes: He without any sin, be the first to cast the stone against him (Paul). Me, I could care less about what he did. He didn't die for me; He didn't make me and he doesn't give me truth -nor do his writings-- deemed 'sacred' by most believing.- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
This is absolutely amazing..People will find a way to blame everyone else, anyone else but Paul.
I've heard people blame some harsh stuff on God..but we better not blame Paul
PAUL lied for Paul
Paul was writing letters to different groups, he did not know they
would end up as part of scripture.
He told different groups different things, that's why you see him saying don't sin to some, and sin is a natural thing to others, etc.
He taught them according to what they already knew.
His true followers were Gentiles. The Jews mostly ended up leaving him.
Bible thumpers? Knowing the word is what kept them from being deceived.
No Paul never had a vision.Actually just the opposite. lol.
"You study [search every line daily] the scriptures [bible torah] for in them you think you'll find [comprehend] the mystery of [eternal] life."
PAUL, the one who are ripping on, is precisely the one who 'pushed' folk to study the scriptures/law and pull it apart line by line. Only fitting his own request comes back to haunt him.
None of the 11 even suggested it -- not even Y`shua himself requested or suggested any of us do so. This was what Paul knew better than himself -the law and he could use it to control them people. And it worked for nearly 1,000 years.
I'm done. It was fun, as always.
James.**********************
LOL, I'm afraid God did. He spoke of his word constantly in the Torah. The New Covenant was also based on his commandments being written on the heart.
I am sure that some of the New Testament has been left out as was the Old Testament.
The Gospels are based on a Hebrew writing called the Gospel of the Hebrews.
One of the things the Holy Spirit does is to illuminate Holy Scripture, to bring them to memory. But before that can be done you have to read the word.
John 14:26
But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
Yahshua said in John 14:15 "If ye love me, keep my commandments" How do you do that unless you know what they are?
Yahshua read the scriptures himself and we are to follow his example.
Oh, you must be twenty-one.
I don't care to talk to the person who thinks he knows more about Hebrew than the Hebrews. Things were peacefulI'm with you on this one Deborah. As far as I can tell the Torah was read to the people regularly at the Jewish festivals around the temple, and subsequently in the synagogues after the return from exile. When Peter stood up in Acts 15 he confirmed this. However, I don't expect that the layman was ever party to the great theological debates that the ruling classes engaged in concerning the finer points of the law.
With regards to Paul, I am more inclined to think that he believed he had license to interpret and reinterpret scripture and the law on people's behalf. He links disconnected scripture together to weave up an argument. In this manner he was no different from Church leaders for the last 2000 years. What we get is their spin,their opinion, etc. Thus we are under no compulsion to view Paul as infallible, or his teachings to be "The Word of God". We do not belong to his Church, and we are free to disagree with him in good conscience.DH,
I agree @times the believing used references from Torah to speak.
Did not deny it, won't deny it.
But, again, who were they speaking this script to?
The common people or to the leaders of the Sanhedrin/The Temple Elders.
Of the 88 times Y`shua spoke from Torah it was nearly 95% to the Leaders -who were the only ones using scripture against him. The other 5% were partial references to reaffirm who he was and the Work, nothing more or less. He never taught from Torah -be it beside the Sea or on the Mount. Like people today, hearinG Torah @ Sabbath sermons or Sunday church, for 20 minutes, was the extent of their 'biblical' education.
It was Paul who issued the order that everyone study Torah, because it was what he knew best and also knew the Gentiles had no clue of what the Law/Torah entailed. If fact, 99% never heard a single line of Torah in their entire lives.
What good would hammering the Law into them do? None, unless there was an ulterior motive.
Even when Philip was on the road w/ the man from Ethiopia, who was a proselyte, reading the text of a prophet. He only replied with the revealing of Y`shua not a 30 day tent revival bible thumping session and a gift certificate to heaven. The text even states the Ethiopian 'got the message' during that carriage ride, was baptized and immediately Philip was gone. From that moment on it was the Spirit in the man who caused him to rejoice and started guiding him. No further biblical mind-melding training necessary.
Finally, and most importantly, all of Torah, Psalms, Songs of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, Prophets, etc was written for one singular purpose: to forgo the manifestation of the Second Adam. And, from everything I have read, studied or been taught confirms ALL of the was summed up when he manifested and fulfilled the requirements under Law and fulfilled the Prophets voice. Yes, right up to John the Baptizer -who is the last prophet. So, between the prophet and the Spirit came the Intercessor. After the Intercessor came the full measure of the Spirit.
No Torah left to teach about.
No Temple left to pray in.
No Sacrifice left to kill.
No Testimony needing a witness.
- The covenants fulfilled. Unity restored.
Paul, Deborah and many more since (myself included at one time), have reverted back to the Law & Prophets, as if beginning anew, in the hope of a Second Coming of the Second Adam. Which is ridiculous and unnecessary. Again, the irony of her 'argument/self-conflict' regarding Paul & using 'scripture' is hysterical, because Paul, himself, is the one who imposed this requirement on the people, not Y`shua. Her argument is: Paul was a liar and wrongly taught because of how he was teaching scripture. That he didn't teach what Y`shua taught. In the same breath claims Y`shua taught scripture -just like Paul (and she are -as well as million other ministers). That makes the whole lot of them a farce. This is supposedly the man who became the foundation of the entire Christian organization. A man she says lied -repeated. That being the case, and a lying tongue something the Lord abhors above all things, everyone -including her has been mistaught, misinterpreted and falsely applied as 'gospel truth'. What does that say about perhaps his best~brightest tri-lingual pupil, who is using that same 'scripture' to defeat her mentor(?)
Any who, just my rambling...
James.**************************
The layman were suppose to read the word even if they didn't debate.
Every time I post scripture to weave aa story to be understood, people yell "out of context" but it's ok for Paul.
Paul did not use the scripture the way it was suppose to be used and changed the whole meaning. The problem is people take Paul's writings and relate it to their salvation
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
This threa is about Paul and Yahshua and their differences
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
You guys keep talking about the New Testament..which did not exist at the time. The true scriptures are from Genesis to Malachi. And Revelations comes from Hebrew writings in Jewish Mysticism.
The Gospels are poor copies of the "Gospel of the Hebrews" aka "Acts of the Hebrews"
Nothing else to many is scripture.
Of course I follow the Law and it is not hard.
The Law was NEVER done away with.
The people who believe this do so, as Paul because they cannot stop sinning.
Which shows they are not of God.
John 14:15
If ye love me, keep my commandments.
If you want to enter into life (eternal) you have to keep God's commandments.
Matthew 19:17
And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
If you want to break the Law, that's your choice. I don't want to. Thanks
This thread is about Paul and Yahshua.
Start your own thread if you have another topic.Another "this is the true way" argument, hear it from all angles and none can change the views of another.
****************
I am not trying to change the minds of any.
This thread is for those who asked me to post the differences in Paul and Yahshua's teachings.
SO I DID.
thanksWhen you said true over imagined, you invited the criticism. I'm not trying to insult you, only point out the commonality of the above statement.
***********************
The scriptures weren't imagined so why would I say that?
They are real documents. The ones that it is stated Yahshua read from.
The New Testament are letters sent to a few churches.Their real documents based on nothing real.
*************
See, you're the one stating something as true that you have no proof of.
Now go argue with someone else and stop trying to hijack this thread by going off topicI have dreams and aspire to things, they are only realistic to me. My father was the kind of person that said "you can't, you won't, you'll never but I do. I made my life, not God. I can choose to be led or I can lead, I want neither but only to live my life. I cannot live my life, if I live the life others want for me...
*************************
I live my own life and choose God.
We were made that way, with free will.
I don't know anyone who follows God because they feel they have to (although I am sure these people exist)
You state you live your life, which is probably true, but it seems to me you don't want anyone else to live their life the way they want toThat's exactly the point... You are living the life as taught by others, not as you would do by walking in your own skin. I refuse to be part of a crowd and definitely refuse to be told I have to. I'm not telling you how to live your life, I'm trying to get people to see the validity of others. You say your's is the only way, yet so do they. Why can only the few see the problem? Why can only the few be open minded? I do not hate your God, I have distate for the people around it. They force feed it to every soul they encounter and justify with regurgitation. Be original in speech, for God will always be renewed. Trap God to a book and there is nothing new to say.
**************************************
I do not live my life as other’s have told me. I do abide by the 10 commandments because they are the best for me. I don’t want to kill or steal. But it is the way I live my life through free will.
I am not part of a crowd and no one has told me I have to be. That is stereo typing.
See the validity of others.? I do accept and support others, but that doesn’t mean I have to believe and do things as they do. That’s a contradiction don’t you think? Unless validity is not the word you wanted to use.
Never once have I said mine is the only way. Don’t put words into my mouth.
I am not a Christian and I am original in speech. I believe so different from others, that most on people this forum show dislike for me (which is ok)
I’m the one trying to get Christians to look at the bible with open eyes, remember?
As far as me force feeding what I think, remember you have to click on the title of the thread and read before you know what it says.
So blame yourself for the force feed.
The God I believe in is not trapped in a book. He is everywhereWell at least we've established a stance... I don't believe you will find any truth in the bible, the ten commandments should already be apparent and practiced. If one needs the bible to be a decent person, then there is a problem. If it is bad to hit the sibling, then it is bad to hit anyone else. If it is wrong to steal from family, then it is wrong to steal period. I would not wish for the wife of another, for it's not my wife and it causes problems. I would not worship idols, I would not kill. Those are things people shouldn't be doing anyway, why does it need to be in writing?
My point is this; None can bring you to God but you, but the God you know is the God of men. My God started out that way, but no longer lives on paper. I don't need to quote words that are not mine and I don't need to argue for it's existence. The point plain and simple, is that it should already be apparent that it's no God but your own. None can instill it and none can make it real, it's only real by you, scripture and regurgitation is no substitue for the truth of it. The truth will always be subjective and rarely agreed upon, unless you're talking to other regurgitators. Speak your own mind or you will never escape the argument.
- Deborah Sextonposted 13 years ago0
Mr. yochanan
You're wasting your time posting remarks to my hubs, I am never going to approve them, even if they are positive onesDoubt you'll ever get a positive one, seriously, i doubt it, matter of fact you could bet money on it and win. But just so you know. Context is everything.
I did kinda shut down your divorce and remarriage thread. It's context.**************
I don't care about your negative posts, I just delete them.
How did you shut down my thread?***********
As much as you would like them to be, none of your answers are correct.
You don't know much about the scriptures at all.That's a wonderful assessment but wrong, as the people who read the posts, i post will know, and that is the only important assessment. I also expect the christian community - not the unsaved community - to act as correctives if they discover i am in error.
may I?
but as scripture proves, if you believed any of it, you don't know much about the bible. You need to understand proper context and apparently proper Greek and Hebrew too. I find you lacking in these three areas = assessment.
But i don't want to war, that will just cause a war so lets stop the petty bickering and try to keep an open mind when you see lots of scripture typed before you and proper context given.*****************
If you are referring to me..I am not unsaved.
God saved from the beginning. Need scripture?
People prayed, asked forgiveness and God saved them
I know that is your interpretation of scripture, but by the way you interpret it shows you don't understand it.
Of course the Christians will agree with you because that is what they've learned too.i wasn't referring to you as unsaved, i wasn't referring to you as christian either.
I'm not interested in applying the OT ways into this new covenant. Neither am i interested in consulting any candles or buying some magic charm.
I am interested in biblical clarity*******************
That's your choice, I don't care.
1 Chronicles 16:35
And say ye, Save us, O God of our salvation, and gather us together, and deliver us from the heathen, that we may give thanks to thy holy name, and glory in thy praise.
Yahshua showed us how to love and sacrifice ourselves willingly.It may be a stretch but I think we can compare first covenant and second covenant
"IF" we are going to call it that ... to
Lets call it the first morgage on your home and a second morgage on your home.
The second does not nullify the first. But is mearly an extension because we couldn't satisfy the first agreement.
This isn't a good analogy but Kinda sorta ?Can't says I agree.
Both Covenants are complete different.
"New & better covenant I make with you".
Better than the first and different in nearly every aspect, save the prime directive: love the Father and each other.
One of the primary arguments about the New Coven is abandoning the written Law/text. It is believed without the Law/text, man cannot love the Father nor his fellow man, correctly -without being reminded of it or studying the text rigorously. Under the Old Coven it was mandatory that people follow the law to the very last letter (yod). And even doing so did not produce the fruit of Life, it prolonged death, to a point, and added kudos to the ego, as being righteous because one kept the commands.
Y`shua even told this when the man who said he had kept the Law from his youth. Because of keeping the Law to the letter, he prospered under Old covenant Rules. Same rules believers are trying to apply with the prosperity movement.
Old Coven was 99% earthly, 1% spirit.
New Coven is 99% spirit, 1% earthly.
This one thing towards Paul I appreciate. He makes this very clear as Y`shua did.
"for by the law is the knowledge of sin"exactly
and by christ is the power to overcome sin.How about taking stock? I don't need christ to see my faults, only the ability to criticize my life choices. There is no outside mechanism or avatar, that can honestly make me behave myself. There in kind, is no devil responsible for my misdeeds, it's all me. I can choose to follow the path of christ or, I can lose myself to the doctrine of a church. The church which leaves little room for the true acceptance of life and reality. I can choose to hide my nature behind God or I can choose to look at myself, leaving all suppositions in their place.
Actually, that mentality is pure post-indoctrination.
You say you do not need the anointing/christ to see your faults, yet the anointing does NOT point out faults nor critique choices. You do. The doctrines do. The post-indoctrinated do. Notice the resemblance...
"Following a path" is no different than following a law or any other human concocted diversion/deluge. Church, as you remarked, is the precise reason you are expressing contempt for the anointing. Most church folk, textual thumper`s (pre, present or post) provide the same argument...
A person cannot hide their nature when they have anointing/christ, but can hide the anointing behind nature. That hiding is a remnant of doctrine and what presses most to argue against or for the doctrine.
Choice the the mother of all doctrines. free yourself from choice and you'll certainly discover a new perspective.
Jamestaking stock is fine but we are talking about what God wants and we cannot judge that people are all fine and dandy and able to overcome everything without God. Some people have serious battles, serious personal flaws - don't forget that God invites all people to come as they are, and many of these are/were flawed.
Anyway it is all done by the power of God - believe it or not
***********************************
This thread has taken on a Mob Mentality.
A verse out of context? Was I suppose to write the whole bible in this forum? I gave verses thinking you could read the rest. Did you?
I also weaved many of Paul's statements to show he was anti-chirst, a liar, a thief, a fornicator and, a false prophet who transformed HIMSELF into an angel of light.
I also gave references and compared Yahshua's, God's, and The Apostle's, teachings, with Paul's..the teachings were in conflict.
If you can't see it, it's God's will.
Isaiah 48:6
Thou hast heard, see all this; and will not ye declare it? I have shewed thee new things from this time, even hidden things, and thou didst not know them.
Psalm 119:115
Depart from me, ye evildoers: for I will keep the commandments of my God.
Proverbs 3:7
Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil.
I am not judging Paul, but God's word says if we know someone is a false prophet we must warn the others, or their blood will be on our hands.
So you think God is wrong to tell us this?
My intention was love and for it I got hate.
2 Chronicles 16:9
For the eyes of the LORD run to and fro throughout the whole earth, to shew himself strong in the behalf of them whose heart is perfect toward him. Herein thou hast done foolishly: therefore from henceforth thou shalt have wars.
Related Discussions
- 118
Apostle Paul got it all wrong.
by Julie Grimes 8 years ago
I think that the Christian religion would have been entirely different, if Apostle Paul hadn't screwed things up. It is my firm belief that if Christians really want to be Christ-like, they need to have a dual faith based, religious, belief system. As it is, how can any of us Christians...
- 57
Which came first, Christians or the Bible?
by Captain Redbeard 9 years ago
I just read a post from someone stating that Christianity is based on the Bible which stands to reason, "If Christianity is based off the bible then that means it would have never come to furition since the book would never have been written because no Christian would have existed before...
- 58
Can someone explain to me if most Christians follow Leviticus.
by Peeples 9 years ago
Can someone explain to me if most Christians follow Leviticus.It is my minimally informed belief that most Christians do not follow Leviticus because it was either A) part of the old testament or B) Was not written for Gentiles. I know that the majority of the laws in it are not followed by...
- 17
Why has the study of Christianity become so Old Testament-based in recent years?
by Billie Kelpin 9 years ago
Why has the study of Christianity become so Old Testament-based in recent years?Growing up Catholic, I always felt the emphasis was on the philosophy and spirit of Christ. Old Testament study and emphasis by modern day Christians often seems to me , despite the obvious historical connection, the...
- 85
Basic Beliefs of Evangelical Christians
by JimLow 12 years ago
This list of beliefs I wrote about 5 years ago, came from an approximate 20-year study of the Statements of Beliefs by many different Christian denominations. These were the beliefs I found that were of most common agreement between them. That doesn't mean they represent ALL denominations but...
- 54
If Jesus never wrote anything why is the New Testament the basis of Christianity
by Chaplain Bernell Wesley 12 years ago
If Jesus never wrote anything why is the New Testament the basis of Christianity?If Paul wrote 2/3 of the New Testament is Christianity not a Pauline invention since Jesus wrote none of it?