Did Paul keep the Law...?

[Klee shay]

Misunderstanding forgiven. :D I will try to watch my wording in future so as to avoid confusion.

May I ask what specifically you're trying to get at about Paul though? Am I correct in saying you believe he taught one thing about the grace given to us through Jesus Christ, but did another as far as the Jewish traditions were concerned?

Are you questioning the truth in Paul's teaching about the grace given to us through Jesus Christ? Or are you questioning his obedience to Torah Law?

 

[Georges]

Misunderstanding forgiven. :D I will try to watch my wording in future so as to avoid confusion.

May I ask what specifically you're trying to get at about Paul though? Am I correct in saying you believe he taught one thing about the grace given to us through Jesus Christ, but did another as far as the Jewish traditions were concerned?

Sort of....IMO, Paul was as he claimed, "All things to all men". I think he taught Torah obedience when among Jewish Christians (especially while in Israel), and Torah abstinence when away from the scrutiny of the Nazarene elders....in any event, Torah obedience proclaims God's grace...because no one can keep the Law totally, yet, God provides "in the Torah" a means to make things right with him. The Paul of Acts was Torah observent as he claims....the Paul of the Letters appears to preach Torah abstenence.

Are you questioning the truth in Paul's teaching about the grace given to us through Jesus Christ?

No....it's a matter of Torah observence.....(which does show the grace of God). I'm questioning the Paul of the Letters who "apparently" teaches Torah abstinence, when the Elders in Jerusalem (James et al) are Torah observant....Torah observence is Faith and Works.....in recognition of God's grace.

Or are you questioning his obedience to Torah Law?

I'm pretty well convinced that the Paul of Acts when around Jewish Christians acted in a Lawful manner....or so he claims in Acts 28. There are many instances in Acts that Paul was subject to and still observed Jewish Law...(i.e. Feast Day observence, Nazarite Vow etc), but the Paul of the Letters...(if Paul did write all of the Letters) is suspect.

 

[Klee shay]

You've obviously given this topic a lot of thought. You've got me thinking about a few things which I haven't really thought about before.

1. Did Paul ever teach without the context of Jesus Christ? Whether he taught Torah observance or abstinance; did he ever leave Jesus out of the picture?

2. More importantly, did he teach about Torah observance FIRST, and then led into Torah abstinance later? If he did then this would indicate growth in the Holy Spirit. A spiritual walk is where you learn and grow and perhaps Paul's walk was always mean to led into Torah abstinance?

If the Torah was perfect as it was then there was no need for a Jesus to come and enlighten us according to the true word of God. Jesus is the perfect example of observing Torah while also changing the nature of its interpretation according to mankind's understanding. Then he was sacrificed so a Holy Spirit would come to englighten further truth according to the word of God.

If Jesus transformed the understanding of Torah observance, then it is to be expected that another would come to build upon what Jesus laid the foundations for.

Interesting discussion by the way.

 

[Georges]

You've obviously given this topic a lot of thought. You've got me thinking about a few things which I haven't really thought about before.

A lot of thought....10 years ago, I would have defended Paul to the death...once I started questioning...as you are....things didn't add up for me....they do now....and I found that it is ok....I going to err on the side Jesus and the Apostles did...I will consider the Torah as God's word and try to abide by the rules the best I can.......

1. Did Paul ever teach without the context of Jesus Christ? Whether he taught Torah observance or abstinance; did he ever leave Jesus out of the picture?

Always....Paul made up his own doctrine.....How many times does he say..."remember what Jesus said", or "as Jesus said", or something to that effect. Paul doesn't mention anything personally about Jesus, and I find that odd. Sure he mentions Jesus' name...but how many times in comparison to his own name? Paul mentions himself a lot more than he does Jesus.

2. More importantly, did he teach about Torah observance FIRST, and then led into Torah abstinance later?

Very quite possible....however, he never admited to making that change....something like "I was mistakened when I still followed the Torah" would have indicated a change...Instead at the end of his life (Acts 28), he admitted following Torah.

If he did then this would indicate growth in the Holy Spirit. A spiritual walk is where you learn and grow and perhaps Paul's walk was always mean to led into Torah abstinance?

Well the more important Apostles...including James the brother of Jesus didn't get that message....Did Jesus forget to tell his own brother (who was the dominate figure during that time period)?

Also, you are hinting at what my friend Thessalonian suggests as Progressive Revelation...if that is the case we are all greater than Paul because after 2000 years the HS should have made us 2000 years more spiritual than Paul....

Keep in mind the very important concept that Jesus laid out....Not one jot or tittle would pass from the Torah until the end of Time....when I woke up this morning the Sun was still shining...so the Torah must still be in effect....




If the Torah was perfect as it was then there was no need for a Jesus to come and enlighten us according to the true word of God.

We needed Jesus to show us the example of how to keep Torah...

Jesus is the perfect example of observing Torah while also changing the nature of its interpretation according to mankind's understanding.

Not so Klee, Jesus didn't change any of the precepts of the Torah...what he wanted changed were the Man Made traditional Laws that surrounded Torah Law....

Here is an example....

1. Torah law states...."Thou shalt not lay your hand on the stove burner, or else though shall smart greatly....".
2. At some point in the future a group of Rabbis come in and make a law..."you shall not go into the kitchen". This law protects the Torah law. If you don't go into the kitchen, you can't put your hand on the stove....
3. At some futher point...another group comes in and makes a law...."you shall not go into the hallway that leads to the kitchen".....That law protects the law that protects the Torah law....
4. By the time you get to Jesus, the law tradition gets to the point of "you shall not go into the house".....

So what you have is God's law (step 1) and Man's law (Steps 2-4). By Jesus' time, the buden was the man made law...one of them was eating with Gentiles....or even entering the house of a Gentile. That is what Jesus is preaching about, and to a certain extent, so is Paul.

Recap.....Jesus doesn't change the Torah concepts...he preaches against the man made concepts...


Then he was sacrificed so a Holy Spirit would come to englighten further truth according to the word of God.

Klee, God doesn't need a human blood sacrifice for anything...that's a Pauline Gnostic/Mystery Religion myth. God gave his HS out abundently to those he wished to.....without sacrifice.

If Jesus transformed the understanding of Torah observance, then it is to be expected that another would come to build upon what Jesus laid the foundations for.

Progressive Revelation.....that is how many explain how only Paul was able to explain Jesus to the masses. What if Paul was wrong, and the 12 were right? Again, personally, I choose to err on the side of Jesus and the Apostles....I vote Torah observence

Interesting discussion by the way.

I think so....you are doing a great job at making good points...I hope I have replied with good points as well.

 

[Klee shay]

Always....Paul made up his own doctrine.....How many times does he say..."remember what Jesus said", or "as Jesus said", or something to that effect. Paul doesn't mention anything personally about Jesus, and I find that odd. Sure he mentions Jesus' name...but how many times in comparison to his own name? Paul mentions himself a lot more than he does Jesus.

Yeah, I'd agree with this. But remember Paul was different to all the other Apostles, including Jesus himself, for he wasn't a true Jew. For this reason I believe it is why Paul was chosen to speak on behalf of Jesus - to gain the more. The Gentiles were accepted into the fold but who would preach to them without coming across as another Jewish Traditionalist, whereby repeating history again.

While the Apostles were able to get the Gentile to know the truth and whereby accept the Holy Spirit...who else but another form of Gentile (a Jew and Roman hybrid) could help the Gentile to nurture the spirit by which they were accepted. They were not the chosen children of God. By birthright they were Gentile...and yet there had to be a way to allow the Gentile to grow in the spirit without being ensared in the Jewish Traditionalist trap again?

I'm not saying this is why it happened. I'm just thinking out loud really. I've never given this much thought before. Maybe there is a another place of understanding between Paul fed people misguided truths and Paul fed people the absolute Gospel?

I believe he was a spirit led fallen man and his works help us to understand we need the Saviour more.

Also, you are hinting at what my friend Thessalonian suggests as Progressive Revelation...if that is the case we are all greater than Paul because after 2000 years the HS should have made us 2000 years more spiritual than Paul....

I've never heard it called Progressive Revalation but now I have I will know what it means in future. I think what Paul tried to teach us through his fallen nature however, is that we are nothing without Christ. In that realisation however we must also practice it. I cannot judge Paul to know if he was unrighteous; like I cannot judge you to know if your words are unrighteous. We can only teach what we understand and pray that it works for the good of those who believe.

It think if Progressive Revalation is the labelling of fallen men, I think you'd be right. Everyone who built upon the foundation was fallen. It is through the grace of God that any good comes of it at all.

Keep in mind the very important concept that Jesus laid out....Not one jot or tittle would pass from the Torah until the end of Time....when I woke up this morning the Sun was still shining...so the Torah must still be in effect....

I think this is the danger we all fall into. The OSAS camp believe the Gospel of Paul which weighs heavily on the grace of God to do the right thing where man cannot. The Catholic camp believe the Gospel of the Popes/Saints which weighs heavily on the grace of God to do the right thing where man falls short.

We all believe something in the bible that's meant to be the absolute truth we follow. And yet all scripture seems to be written around one character - Jesus. He gets second billing (under God) both in the beginning of the bible (through the word of God), the middle (through the word of God) and the end (through the word of God).

When we look at the people who were inspired from the spirit and look for their truth, we will only find folly. If we look to the people who were inspired from the spirit and look for the Lord's truth however, we will find growth.

We needed Jesus to show us the example of how to keep Torah...

Don't we need Jesus as our example to have a relationship with God more though? I know this sounds like the same thing but it differs in application. Not everyone will know or even require Torah. Not the prisoner waiting on death row who decides to give his life to Christ. They need to trust the example that Christ's works were enough for our salvation and that God is capable of taking mercy on our souls if we truly repent of our sins.

If we seek to do Torah rather than seek to do God's will; which will change in application according to whom the work is meant to gain; then don't we also miss the message Jesus tried to teach the Jews.

The will of God is the will of God no matter who has come before to lay the appropriate foundation. God will not deviate from what is laid on the foundation but as God, doesn't he also earn the right to add to it beyond our immediate comprehension?

Recap.....Jesus doesn't change the Torah concepts...he preaches against the man made concepts...

I did appreciate the example you took the time to write up. It did make it easier to understand what you were specifically addressing.

One question I have though, if Jesus only changed the Torah according to the man made concepts of it - would there actually be any Torah left? Genuine question there, I'm not being sarcastic. I don't know much about the the Torah so it isn't easy to draw my own conclusions.

Can you tell me what of the Torah we are meant to follow?

Klee, God doesn't need a human blood sacrifice for anything...that's a Pauline Gnostic/Mystery Religion myth. God gave his HS out abundently to those he wished to.....without sacrifice.

Then why didn't God take the cup from Jesus when he prayed, "not by my will but thy will be done"? Did Jesus need to die if God could dispense the Spirit so easily? Was taking his son's life unnecessary for this cause?

I personally believe God can do anything of his own will, except take away man's freedom to choose. I know others of a different understanding of 'free will' would disagree with me there, but that's another subject entirely, LOL.

Progressive Revelation.....that is how many explain how only Paul was able to explain Jesus to the masses. What if Paul was wrong, and the 12 were right? Again, personally, I choose to err on the side of Jesus and the Apostles....I vote Torah observence

And honestly I don't believe you're wrong. But then I wouldn't think someone who voted for Paul and Jesus is necessarily wrong either. So long as Jesus is in there, He will find a way to bring us to His truth. Preferrably Jesus would preceed any concept of obedience though; otherwise we enter into the trap of man-made traditions and beliefs again.

I think our natures have an uncanny knack for falling into that one time and time again. :wink:

 

[wavy]

Yeah, I'd agree with this. But remember Paul was different to all the other Apostles, including Jesus himself, for he wasn't a true Jew. For this reason I believe it is why Paul was chosen to speak on behalf of Jesus - to gain the more. The Gentiles were accepted into the fold but who would preach to them without coming across as another Jewish Traditionalist, whereby repeating history again.

Two questions:

(1) Who wasn't a true Jew? Both of them were true Jews.

(2) To what repetition of history are you referring to? I didn't understand what you meant when you said that.

If we seek to do Torah rather than seek to do God's will; which will change in application according to whom the work is meant to gain; then don't we also miss the message Jesus tried to teach the Jews.

You can't walk in the torah and be contrary to Yahweh's will. The scripture says that Yahweh made known his ways to Moses (Psalm 103:7).

One question I have though, if Jesus only changed the Torah according to the man made concepts of it - would there actually be any Torah left?

Of course.

Can you tell me what of the Torah we are meant to follow?

I believe it is for our instruction (which is what "torah" means). A guide to follow in ways of conduct. Everything in it can be applied (though everything in it can't be observed for obvious reasons).

Then why didn't God take the cup from Jesus when he prayed, "not by my will but thy will be done"? Did Jesus need to die if God could dispense the Spirit so easily? Was taking his son's life unnecessary for this cause?

I disagree with Georges on this one. The Masoretes subtracted from a key passage of the bible that is found in both the LXX and the DSS (though I'm not 100% sure on the DSS).

Here is how Psalm 40:6 reads in the LXX:

Psalms 40:6
Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not; but a body hast thou prepared me: whole-burnt-offering and sacrifice for sin thou didst not require

The 10th chapter of Hebrews accurately quotes this verse.

 

[Rick W]

Was Jesus observant of the law when he said "Rise, take up thy bed, and walk."? John 5:8

Yes or no?

 

[mutzrein]

Was Jesus observant of the law when he said "Rise, take up thy bed, and walk."? John 5:8

Yes or no?

Not according to the Pharisees.

 

[Rick W]

Was Jesus observant of the law when he said "Rise, take up thy bed, and walk."? John 5:8

Yes or no?

Not according to the Pharisees.

Exactly.
But that's not one of the options presented. ;)

 

[wavy]

Yes.

 

[Georges]

Was Jesus observant of the law when he said "Rise, take up thy bed, and walk."? John 5:8

Yes or no?

Not according to the Pharisees.

Exactly.
But that's not one of the options presented. ;)

Potluck...please read this in it's entirety....I've already explained what you think you've won a coup on....I will quote from my previous post.....

Not so Klee, Jesus didn't change any of the precepts of the Torah...what he wanted changed were the Man Made traditional Laws that surrounded Torah Law....

Here is an example....

1. Torah law states...."Thou shalt not lay your hand on the stove burner, or else though shall smart greatly....".
2. At some point in the future a group of Rabbis come in and make a law..."you shall not go into the kitchen". This law protects the Torah law. If you don't go into the kitchen, you can't put your hand on the stove....
3. At some futher point...another group comes in and makes a law...."you shall not go into the hallway that leads to the kitchen".....That law protects the law that protects the Torah law....
4. By the time you get to Jesus, the law tradition gets to the point of "you shall not go into the house".....

So what you have is God's law (step 1) and Man's law (Steps 2-4). By Jesus' time, the buden was the man made law...one of them was eating with Gentiles....or even entering the house of a Gentile. That is what Jesus is preaching about, and to a certain extent, so is Paul.

Recap.....Jesus doesn't change the Torah concepts...he preaches against the man made concepts...

Mr. Moderator.....What you quote about Jesus commanding the man about taking up his bed as being against the "Law" is a the exact thing I had posted about....that is a "man made law" and not a Torah Law....a man made law to keep man from working on the Sabbath....Jesus was teaching a much more important concept of the Sabbath...and that was, he is Lord of the Sabbath..and he will rule and heal during the Millennial Sabbath.

 

[Georges]

Always....Paul made up his own doctrine.....How many times does he say..."remember what Jesus said", or "as Jesus said", or something to that effect. Paul doesn't mention anything personally about Jesus, and I find that odd. Sure he mentions Jesus' name...but how many times in comparison to his own name? Paul mentions himself a lot more than he does Jesus.

Yeah, I'd agree with this. But remember Paul was different to all the other Apostles, including Jesus himself, for he wasn't a true Jew.

Paul claims to be a true Jew though...

For this reason I believe it is why Paul was chosen to speak on behalf of Jesus - to gain the more. The Gentiles were accepted into the fold but who would preach to them without coming across as another Jewish Traditionalist, whereby repeating history again.


The men Paul preached to throughout Asia Minor were Godfearers who were already interested in Judaism....As Godfearers, they would have already been accepted into the fold (albeit, there was a station they would assume if they didn't fully proselyted). The Jews at that time had a very aggresive Proselyte program...All throughout Acts...Paul goes to the Synagogues to preach....both Jews and Godfearers attended these Synagogues.

While the Apostles were able to get the Gentile to know the truth and whereby accept the Holy Spirit...who else but another form of Gentile (a Jew and Roman hybrid) could help the Gentile to nurture the spirit by which they were accepted.

Klee, I can't find anywhere in the Gospels or the Letters where Paul uses his Roman citizenship (by claim) to futhur his gospel...In fact, there is good evidence that he bought his Roman citizenship....in an effort to meet with Ceasar.

They were not the chosen children of God. By birthright they were Gentile...and yet there had to be a way to allow the Gentile to grow in the spirit without being ensared in the Jewish Traditionalist trap again?

They had the chance to become "sons by adoption"...as I had mentioned, the Jews had a very aggressive Proselyted program throughout their synagogal area.

As far as the traditionalist trap....Torah Law is good, Man-made Law not so good...however, keep in mind the man made law was made with good intention.....it just got too carried away...too many man made laws spoil the original Torah Law.

Jesus as James, Peter, and the others taught Torah observence, Man made Law surrounding the Torah....not to be observed (on the level of Torah law)...

Paul seemed to be Torah observent in Acts, but in the Letter's he appears to be Torah Abstenent. But, in Galations, it appears when he speaks against the law, it may be construd that he is talking about the man-made law (the middle wall of partition).


I'm not saying this is why it happened. I'm just thinking out loud really. I've never given this much thought before. Maybe there is a another place of understanding between Paul fed people misguided truths and Paul fed people the absolute Gospel?

I believe he was a spirit led fallen man and his works help us to understand we need the Saviour more.

[quote:e8449]Also, you are hinting at what my friend Thessalonian suggests as Progressive Revelation...if that is the case we are all greater than Paul because after 2000 years the HS should have made us 2000 years more spiritual than Paul....

I've never heard it called Progressive Revalation but now I have I will know what it means in future. I think what Paul tried to teach us through his fallen nature however, is that we are nothing without Christ.

That is where Paul goes against Rabbinic's in that I believe in Judaism, they see that man as being born without sin and learns sin. Gnosticism and Neoplatonism teaches that man is evil and born fallen....Paul is a Hellenist Jew who was bought up in Asia Minor...a hotbed of Gnostic and Mystery religion philosophies..

In that realisation however we must also practice it. I cannot judge Paul to know if he was unrighteous; like I cannot judge you to know if your words are unrighteous. We can only teach what we understand and pray that it works for the good of those who believe.

I don't necessarily through the baby out with the bath water concerning Paul....I'm just more guarded when I read him.....Has to do with biblical history, geography, and adgenda edits in the NT.

It think if Progressive Revalation is the labelling of fallen men, I think you'd be right. Everyone who built upon the foundation was fallen. It is through the grace of God that any good comes of it at all.

No....no.....I think that PR is how a trinitarian (for example) would explain the trinity without the concept being taught in the bible...As time progressed in Chruch history, each progressive Chruch father would build upon the others view of the trinity and would add more....The way they explain how it's in it's present state is that the Spirit led these men to add to the diffention as they were led by the spirit...and more will be revealed in the future as the spirit leads someone else...

Keep in mind the very important concept that Jesus laid out....Not one jot or tittle would pass from the Torah until the end of Time....when I woke up this morning the Sun was still shining...so the Torah must still be in effect....

I think this is the danger we all fall into. The OSAS camp believe the Gospel of Paul which weighs heavily on the grace of God to do the right thing where man cannot. The Catholic camp believe the Gospel of the Popes/Saints which weighs heavily on the grace of God to do the right thing where man falls short.

We all believe something in the bible that's meant to be the absolute truth we follow. And yet all scripture seems to be written around one character - Jesus. He gets second billing (under God) both in the beginning of the bible (through the word of God), the middle (through the word of God) and the end (through the word of God).

God should get first billing...Jesus second (the way he would have wanted it).....


When we look at the people who were inspired from the spirit and look for their truth, we will only find folly. If we look to the people who were inspired from the spirit and look for the Lord's truth however, we will find growth.

Agreed...

We needed Jesus to show us the example of how to keep Torah...

Don't we need Jesus as our example to have a relationship with God more though? I know this sounds like the same thing but it differs in application. Not everyone will know or even require Torah. Not the prisoner waiting on death row who decides to give his life to Christ. They need to trust the example that Christ's works were enough for our salvation and that God is capable of taking mercy on our souls if we truly repent of our sins.

True repentence is the key.....with or without Christ....Pesonally, I think every one is born with a knowledge of right and wrong (it may be primative knowledge). Those who have never heard of Christ will answer to God for their lives....God will know if they are repentent....are they (who never heard of Christ) saved because he was crucified, or are they saved because they were sorry for their sins......I think the latter....

If we seek to do Torah rather than seek to do God's will; which will change in application according to whom the work is meant to gain; then don't we also miss the message Jesus tried to teach the Jews.

If we seek to do Torah we will be imitating Christ....what better message?

The will of God is the will of God no matter who has come before to lay the appropriate foundation. God will not deviate from what is laid on the foundation but as God, doesn't he also earn the right to add to it beyond our immediate comprehension?

Yes...but he should be comprehended....so much the better for us if we have the mind of God....or strive to understand it....he gives us the ground work for that understanding in the Torah.

Recap.....Jesus doesn't change the Torah concepts...he preaches against the man made concepts...

I did appreciate the example you took the time to write up. It did make it easier to understand what you were specifically addressing.

One question I have though, if Jesus only changed the Torah according to the man made concepts of it - would there actually be any Torah left?

Maybe I didn't word my example quite right...it was off the top of my head....Jesus didn't change the Torah.....he adhered to it's concepts as taught in Rabbinical schools....He sought to change the man made laws....Those laws he can legally change....Torah, he cannot.

I must restate that last sentence, because according to Rabbinic tradition, Messiah will be the only one who has the authority to change Mosaic Law...evidence of this is scene in the futuristic Ezekiels temple where Messiah will teach Torah...some of the Feast days are changed at that point.

Genuine question there, I'm not being sarcastic. I don't know much about the the Torah so it isn't easy to draw my own conclusions.

Me niether.....I'm still learning.....

Can you tell me what of the Torah we are meant to follow?

You can find the 613 commandments anywhere on line.....scroll through them and see how many apply to you.....I think you will be surprised at how few apply to the average joe.....I think you will be surprised at the amount that you already keep.

Klee, God doesn't need a human blood sacrifice for anything...that's a Pauline Gnostic/Mystery Religion myth. God gave his HS out abundently to those he wished to.....without sacrifice.

Then why didn't God take the cup from Jesus when he prayed, "not by my will but thy will be done"? Did Jesus need to die if God could dispense the Spirit so easily?

No....I think it was all in God's timing to distribute his Spirit.....

Was taking his son's life unnecessary for this cause?

My opinion on that would be the topic of another lengthy thread...

I personally believe God can do anything of his own will, except take away man's freedom to choose. I know others of a different understanding of 'free will' would disagree with me there, but that's another subject entirely, LOL.

Progressive Revelation.....that is how many explain how only Paul was able to explain Jesus to the masses. What if Paul was wrong, and the 12 were right? Again, personally, I choose to err on the side of Jesus and the Apostles....I vote Torah observence

And honestly I don't believe you're wrong. But then I wouldn't think someone who voted for Paul and Jesus is necessarily wrong either. So long as Jesus is in there, He will find a way to bring us to His truth. Preferrably Jesus would preceed any concept of obedience though; otherwise we enter into the trap of man-made traditions and beliefs again.

I think our natures have an uncanny knack for falling into that one time and time again. :wink:[/quote:e8449]

Klee,

You asked a very tough question in the "take this cup" paragraph....I'll need to consider it for a while...

 

[Georges]

Then why didn't God take the cup from Jesus when he prayed, "not by my will but thy will be done"? Did Jesus need to die if God could dispense the Spirit so easily? Was taking his son's life unnecessary for this cause?

I disagree with Georges on this one. The Masoretes subtracted from a key passage of the bible that is found in both the LXX and the DSS (though I'm not 100% sure on the DSS).

Here is how Psalm 40:6 reads in the LXX:

Psalms 40:6
Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not; but a body hast thou prepared me: whole-burnt-offering and sacrifice for sin thou didst not require

The 10th chapter of Hebrews accurately quotes this verse.

Glad to see you weighing in.... Wavy, I'm critiquing a book that a colleague of mine is writing...he devotes a chapter to "Was Jesus an atonement sacrifice"...in it he addresses the very verses you had posted above....and that the Hebrew verse is "not" a word for word quoted of the Psalms verse and it's meaning is changed....That will have to wait until Monday...cause it's at the office....hang on till then....

Geo.

 

[Klee shay]

Hello Wavy, :D

(1) Who wasn't a true Jew? Both of them were true Jews.

(2) To what repetition of history are you referring to? I didn't understand what you meant when you said that.

1. Both were Jew but Paul was not a true Jew. Remember when Jesus said; Render to Caesar the things which are Caesars and to God the things which are Gods'. Whether by birthright or by money, Paul claimed his citizenship to Rome and to Caesar at one point. While he will always belong to God, he claimed his Roman citizenship to escape his Jewish captors...does that sound like a true Jew to you? A true Jew would have had to face his Jewish elders and punishment for breaking the Law, as Jesus did.

The Gentiles were accepted into the fold but who would preach to them without coming across as another Jewish Traditionalist, whereby repeating history again.

2. Jewish Traditionalists is who Jesus came to confront. Not the ordinary God-fearing Jew but those who would use the Torah to mislead people away from the true meaning of God's word. If this could happen to an ordinary God-fearing Jew, what would happen to a Gentile who wanted to come to God? Would they be treated like a second class citizen as other Jews were for a time - thus repeating history? I hope that made more sense this time.

You can't walk in the torah and be contrary to Yahweh's will. The scripture says that Yahweh made known his ways to Moses (Psalm 103:7).

And Jesus lived God's will because Moses rejoiced for His coming and made the path clear. As did John the Baptist and all the prophets. God has made his will known to all man through the life, death and resurrection of His Son - either before his coming or after.

Abraham was also able to follow God's will without the Torah being made known to Moses yet, no?

My point being, while Torah is a good guide to follow as God's will, we need only read the bible to see that God's will went far and beyond what was outlined in the Torah. Would you agree?

 

[Klee shay]

Paul claims to be a true Jew though...

As I have claimed to be a Christian in the past too, but that understanding of what a Christian is, keeps changing the more I understand, LOL. Paul was a true Jew in as much as he tried to be but his understanding of that changed when Jesus touched his life.

If in your own walk with Jesus you have experienced changes, perhaps you can relate to Paul when he called himself a true Jew but also a servant of the Lord.

The men Paul preached to throughout Asia Minor were Godfearers who were already interested in Judaism....As Godfearers, they would have already been accepted into the fold (albeit, there was a station they would assume if they didn't fully proselyted). The Jews at that time had a very aggresive Proselyte program...All throughout Acts...Paul goes to the Synagogues to preach....both Jews and Godfearers attended these Synagogues.

I don't know if all were as you say, but I agree that most he preached to would be as you described.

Beyond his lifetime though? How many souls has Paul gained for the Lord in the "Christian" faith as opposed to the "Jewish" faith? That's not to say he gained perfect souls without need of transformation by their Saviour, but his life's works spoke to generations beyond his lifetime. The entire world wasn't going to be won over by Judaism but it would be won over by the sacrifice of one man - the Son of God.

While Paul wasn't perfect, I think he tried to capture this message in his walk with the Lord to gain the more.

Klee, I can't find anywhere in the Gospels or the Letters where Paul uses his Roman citizenship (by claim) to futhur his gospel...In fact, there is good evidence that he bought his Roman citizenship....in an effort to meet with Ceasar.

I can see where you could have thought this is what I was saying, but I was referring to his ability to relate to a Gentile. He didn't use his Roman citizenship to further his gospel, but by claiming his Roman citizenship to escape his Jewish elders he demonstrated that he was beyond their authority. Not beyond the authority of God mind you but like a Gentile, he was relying on the grace of God to distribute his measure of faith and carry him to where God willed.

Judaism only knew God's will through the Torah but the Gentile would know God's will through the life, death and resurrection of His Son. Would you agree?

As far as the traditionalist trap....Torah Law is good, Man-made Law not so good...however, keep in mind the man made law was made with good intention.....it just got too carried away...too many man made laws spoil the original Torah Law.

Perhaps you can explain something to me because I've always wondered this myself. I think what you describe sounds very logical but I've always had a problem distinguishing Torah Law from Man-made Law; since the covernant was between God and a man to begin with.

Paul seemed to be Torah observent in Acts, but in the Letter's he appears to be Torah Abstenent. But, in Galations, it appears when he speaks against the law, it may be construd that he is talking about the man-made law (the middle wall of partition).

I can see why you say this. I think there is always more to discern with the Holy Spirit as we grow. If we understood it all we'd probably be ready for Heaven, LOL.

No....no.....I think that PR is how a trinitarian (for example) would explain the trinity without the concept being taught in the bible...As time progressed in Chruch history, each progressive Chruch father would build upon the others view of the trinity and would add more....The way they explain how it's in it's present state is that the Spirit led these men to add to the diffention as they were led by the spirit...and more will be revealed in the future as the spirit leads someone else...

Okay, having said that (which I don't necessarily think incorrect to some degree) is it possible that men are led in the Spirit to do such things? For example, is it possible the Spirit led Paul to teach about grace through Jesus Christ which either got misinterpreted in translation into English, or by Paul's own flesh at the time?

If this is so then, given that God knows everything, was its God's will anyway? If he knew Paul was imperfect and would try his best but not get it absolutely spot-on, why allow the Spirit to continue to inspire him?

God should get first billing...Jesus second (the way he would have wanted it).....

Yep, that's how Jesus taught it so that's how we should observe it.

True repentence is the key.....with or without Christ....Pesonally, I think every one is born with a knowledge of right and wrong (it may be primative knowledge). Those who have never heard of Christ will answer to God for their lives....God will know if they are repentent....are they (who never heard of Christ) saved because he was crucified, or are they saved because they were sorry for their sins......I think the latter....

The bible covers a lot of stuff but there is also stuff not covered; like is a dumb man damned because his brain is geared differently and cannot fathom logic? I guess if his brain is wired differently then in a way that makes him incapable of making a choice for his own salvation. This is why every last detail on Earth is left up to the Father to judge, as you say.

If we seek to do Torah we will be imitating Christ....what better message?

I don't necessarily disagree with that statement but it will only reach a limited audience. What of those who rebel against such examples? How many people have changed denominations but still kept Christ as their principle belief? In this way, perhaps different denominations of faith reach different kinds of people...but all the more for Christ to take into the fold and transform according to God's will. :D

Yes...but he should be comprehended....so much the better for us if we have the mind of God....or strive to understand it....he gives us the ground work for that understanding in the Torah.

I agree, He should be comprehended but although we all share the one Spirit of adoption, we all have different ways to transform according to God's will. The groundwork may be in the Torah for some; the groundwork may be in Paul's works for others - so long as we are willing to put God first in whatever we do then eventually we will comprehend him more and more. He meets us no matter what level we start from.

Klee,

You asked a very tough question in the "take this cup" paragraph....I'll need to consider it for a while...

There is plenty to consider in the bible hey. Somehow I don't think my lifetime will be long enough. :wink:

 

[Georges]

Paul claims to be a true Jew though...

As I have claimed to be a Christian in the past too, but that understanding of what a Christian is, keeps changing the more I understand, LOL. Paul was a true Jew in as much as he tried to be but his understanding of that changed when Jesus touched his life.

Could be...but, still for me...Paul doesn't add up. What he preached (if it the Letters are truely his) and what his actions (Acts) seem to show are very inconsistent...

If in your own walk with Jesus you have experienced changes, perhaps you can relate to Paul when he called himself a true Jew but also a servant of the Lord.

I've changed greatly over the years....

The men Paul preached to throughout Asia Minor were Godfearers who were already interested in Judaism....As Godfearers, they would have already been accepted into the fold (albeit, there was a station they would assume if they didn't fully proselyted). The Jews at that time had a very aggresive Proselyte program...All throughout Acts...Paul goes to the Synagogues to preach....both Jews and Godfearers attended these Synagogues.

I don't know if all were as you say, but I agree that most he preached to would be as you described.

Beyond his lifetime though? How many souls has Paul gained for the Lord in the "Christian" faith as opposed to the "Jewish" faith?

But if Paul promoted falsely......what has he gained?

That's not to say he gained perfect souls without need of transformation by their Saviour, but his life's works spoke to generations beyond his lifetime. The entire world wasn't going to be won over by Judaism but it would be won over by the sacrifice of one man - the Son of God.

Klee, The Torah was given to Israel so they could be the example to the nations....The Torah was given to Israel with the intent that they (Israel) will be the light to the Gentile nations....This will be seen in the future, when during the Messianic Kingdom, Messiah will Teach Torah from Jerusalem, Israel will be the head of the millennial nations...Israel will be the example of how to live righteously to the other nations....Christ will not teach Pauline Christianity....Christ will teach Nazarene Judaism.


While Paul wasn't perfect, I think he tried to capture this message in his walk with the Lord to gain the more.

Klee, I can't find anywhere in the Gospels or the Letters where Paul uses his Roman citizenship (by claim) to futhur his gospel...In fact, there is good evidence that he bought his Roman citizenship....in an effort to meet with Ceasar.

I can see where you could have thought this is what I was saying, but I was referring to his ability to relate to a Gentile. He didn't use his Roman citizenship to further his gospel, but by claiming his Roman citizenship to escape his Jewish elders he demonstrated that he was beyond their authority. Not beyond the authority of God mind you but like a Gentile, he was relying on the grace of God to distribute his measure of faith and carry him to where God willed.

Judaism only knew God's will through the Torah but the Gentile would know God's will through the life, death and resurrection of His Son. Would you agree?

I will have to disagree with what you say on that point. James, Peter and the Jerusalem elders taught and required obedience to God's will by ....Torah observence. James, Peter and the boys met face to face with Jesus (did Paul?) after the resurrection....yet they still practiced Judaism...who got it right?

As far as the traditionalist trap....Torah Law is good, Man-made Law not so good...however, keep in mind the man made law was made with good intention.....it just got too carried away...too many man made laws spoil the original Torah Law.

Perhaps you can explain something to me because I've always wondered this myself. I think what you describe sounds very logical but I've always had a problem distinguishing Torah Law from Man-made Law; since the covernant was between God and a man to begin with.

An easy example are the Dietary Laws.....

1. Torah say's "Don't eat pork".....
2. Gentiles eat pork.....
3. Torah doesn't say "Don't eat with Gentiles"....
4. Rabbi's say "If you don't eat with Gentiles, you will not be in danger of eating Pork...man made law, or tradition.
5. Rabbi's say "If you don't enter the house of the Gentile, you will not be in danger of eating pork".......

Here is the thing with Christianity....They say the Dietary Law is past....in the example of Cornelius, Peter is told to go eat with him.....Cornelius is a "Godfearer" a Gentile man already identifying himself with the Jewish people. As a "Godfearer" and identifying himself with the Jewish people, he almost certainly is observing "Dietary Laws of the Torah". Peter is told to go to C's house and eat.....(this is Not against Torah law). Peter at first says no (because he is obeying the tradition of man-made law) he will not enter the Gentiles house.

God is telling Peter to break down that man-made traditon of not eating with Gentiles....however God maintains (expects Torah to be observed by righteous men). Cornelius, knowing Jewish dietary law, would have prepared a Kosher meal for Peter...

Enter Paul and the scene in Antioch where Peter is eating with Gentiles....A group of Jewish Christians sent by James comes to check on Paul....Peter is found eating with the Gentiles....Was it a Kosher meal? That is what the issue was....not that he was eating with Gentiles...

Paul seemed to be Torah observent in Acts, but in the Letter's he appears to be Torah Abstenent. But, in Galations, it appears when he speaks against the law, it may be construd that he is talking about the man-made law (the middle wall of partition).

I can see why you say this. I think there is always more to discern with the Holy Spirit as we grow. If we understood it all we'd probably be ready for Heaven, LOL.

No....no.....I think that PR is how a trinitarian (for example) would explain the trinity without the concept being taught in the bible...As time progressed in Chruch history, each progressive Chruch father would build upon the others view of the trinity and would add more....The way they explain how it's in it's present state is that the Spirit led these men to add to the diffention as they were led by the spirit...and more will be revealed in the future as the spirit leads someone else...

Okay, having said that (which I don't necessarily think incorrect to some degree) is it possible that men are led in the Spirit to do such things?

Yes...of course...but it must be weighed and be consistent with the OT.

For example, is it possible the Spirit led Paul to teach about grace through Jesus Christ which either got misinterpreted in translation into English, or by Paul's own flesh at the time?

Absolutely....but in Paul's case (personal history), there are things that don't add up....an example is.....Why would Paul, a proclaimed Pharisee, be working as a policeman for a Saduccean High Priest...? and, other oddities...

If this is so then, given that God knows everything, was its God's will anyway? If he knew Paul was imperfect and would try his best but not get it absolutely spot-on, why allow the Spirit to continue to inspire him?

Maybe it wasn't the Spirit......or maybe it was the wrong spirit.

God should get first billing...Jesus second (the way he would have wanted it).....

Yep, that's how Jesus taught it so that's how we should observe it.

True repentence is the key.....with or without Christ....Pesonally, I think every one is born with a knowledge of right and wrong (it may be primative knowledge). Those who have never heard of Christ will answer to God for their lives....God will know if they are repentent....are they (who never heard of Christ) saved because he was crucified, or are they saved because they were sorry for their sins......I think the latter....

The bible covers a lot of stuff but there is also stuff not covered; like is a dumb man damned because his brain is geared differently and cannot fathom logic? I guess if his brain is wired differently then in a way that makes him incapable of making a choice for his own salvation. This is why every last detail on Earth is left up to the Father to judge, as you say.

If we seek to do Torah we will be imitating Christ....what better message?

I don't necessarily disagree with that statement but it will only reach a limited audience. What of those who rebel against such examples? How many people have changed denominations but still kept Christ as their principle belief? In this way, perhaps different denominations of faith reach different kinds of people...but all the more for Christ to take into the fold and transform according to God's will. :D

Yes...but he should be comprehended....so much the better for us if we have the mind of God....or strive to understand it....he gives us the ground work for that understanding in the Torah.

I agree, He should be comprehended but although we all share the one Spirit of adoption, we all have different ways to transform according to God's will. The groundwork may be in the Torah for some; the groundwork may be in Paul's works for others - so long as we are willing to put God first in whatever we do then eventually we will comprehend him more and more. He meets us no matter what level we start from.

Klee,

You asked a very tough question in the "take this cup" paragraph....I'll need to consider it for a while...

There is plenty to consider in the bible hey. Somehow I don't think my lifetime will be long enough. :wink:

 

[wavy]

1. Both were Jew but Paul was not a true Jew. Remember when Jesus said; Render to Caesar the things which are Caesars and to God the things which are Gods'. Whether by birthright or by money, Paul claimed his citizenship to Rome and to Caesar at one point. While he will always belong to God, he claimed his Roman citizenship to escape his Jewish captors...does that sound like a true Jew to you? A true Jew would have had to face his Jewish elders and punishment for breaking the Law, as Jesus did.

Well, if he had truly done nothing wrong, why submit himself to injustice?

And being a Roman citizen does not mean he isn't a true Jew. Roman citizenship could belong to anyone. Luckily, Paul had his.

2. Jewish Traditionalists is who Jesus came to confront. Not the ordinary God-fearing Jew but those who would use the Torah to mislead people away from the true meaning of God's word. If this could happen to an ordinary God-fearing Jew, what would happen to a Gentile who wanted to come to God? Would they be treated like a second class citizen as other Jews were for a time - thus repeating history? I hope that made more sense this time.

Gotcha.

Abraham was also able to follow God's will without the Torah being made known to Moses yet, no?

Correct. But once his revelation came, more of his will was revealed.

My point being, while Torah is a good guide to follow as God's will, we need only read the bible to see that God's will went far and beyond what was outlined in the Torah. Would you agree?

Beyond what is written, yes, but not contrary to what is written. The law can't cover every aspect of life in every situation. The whole scripture can't. That is why we need the Spirit.

 

[Georges]

I disagree with Georges on this one. The Masoretes subtracted from a key passage of the bible that is found in both the LXX and the DSS (though I'm not 100% sure on the DSS).

Here is how Psalm 40:6 reads in the LXX:

Psalms 40:6
Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not; but a body hast thou prepared me: whole-burnt-offering and sacrifice for sin thou didst not require

The 10th chapter of Hebrews accurately quotes this verse.

Wavy...back at work this morning...as I had said, I am critiquing a book that a colleague is writing...He has a chapter dedicated to "Is Jesus an atonement sacrifice?"....he spends quite a bit of time on the verse you post above....with his permission, I am copying/pasting a small portion.

From Ricky Wright's chapter on "Did Jesus atone for sin?":

...Faced with this obvious contradiction between the NT epistle (Heb 10:5) and the Hebrew Bible (Psa 40:6), some Christians have resorted to another type of deception to uphold their false doctrines. Since the Hebrew Bible doesn’t use the quote above (found in the NT book of Hebrews), it is alleged that the “inspired†writer of Hebrews (whomever he or she may be) was quoting from the Septuagint, which was supposedly the Bible used by Jesus and the apostles. Since the Jews used the Hebrew Bible in their synagogues, this is extremely doubtful although later Gentile converts and Hellenistic diaspora Jews (converted by Paul) may have been using the Septuagint as their Bible.

=============================================================

Many attempts have been made to reconcile the apparent discrepancy between the passages which appear in the AV as follows:

"Sacrifice and offering Thou didst not desire; mine ears hast Thou opened" (Ps. 40:6);

"Sacrifice and offering Thou wouldest not, but a body hast Thou prepared me" (Heb. 10:5).

The psalm is obviously Messianic, and Paul is using it in a Messianic dissertation. The main difference is between the phrases "a body hast Thou prepared me" in Hebrews 10, and "mine ears hast Thou opened" in Psalm 40.

The Septuagint is the same as Hebrews 10:5, so it is the present Hebrew of Psalm 40:6 which is apparently faulty. …

Since the apostle, writing under Divine inspiration, is quoting the Septuagint (which was commonly used by the apostles and other early Christian writers), one must conclude that the Septuagint is correct in this particular instance; and this is confirmed by Paul's reference to the "body of Jesus" in the course of his argument (Heb. 10:10).

There is an alternative explanation for the disparity between the passages, suggested originally by Dr. Kennicott and explained by Adam Clarke in his commentary on the passage. When one looks at the Hebrew of Psalm 40:6 it seems possible that the expression, "mine ears hast thou digged, has arisen due to a copying error. …

When we realise the great care the Hebrew scribes took in accurate copying, it seems like a bad mistake, but a faded or damaged original may have accounted for it, and thankfully such disparities are few and far between in Scripture.

A Body Hast Thou Prepared Me? By Malcolm Edwards
(http://www.bibletopics.com/BibleStudy/46.htm)

What the article is stating is that Paul as was his custom quoted from the Septuagint, and not from the Hebrew.

Which text is accurate....?

Also, he (Ricky Wright) is looking for critiqer's to read this chapter completely along with the other chapters he has written...I know Rick personally, and he is a pretty sharp cookie...He has been working on this project for a long time...and I think so far his product is pretty good.

His completed Chapters are as follows:

Chap 1: What Bible did Jesus use?
2: What is the Old Covenant?
3: What is the New Covenant?
4: Did Jesus Atone for Sin?
5: Who were the Nazarenes?
6: Did Jesus abolish the Law?

so far.....

If anyone is interested in critiquing these (word format), contact me by pm....Currently, I've read up to Chapter 6, and it it pretty eye opening.

 

[Klee shay]

Could be...but, still for me...Paul doesn't add up. What he preached (if it the Letters are truely his) and what his actions (Acts) seem to show are very inconsistent...

Didn't the Lord's actions also seem that way to those with a hardened heart? And they crucified him. What did Jesus say to Saul on the road to Damascus: "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?" (ACTS:9:4)

While Paul's actions may well have been inconsistent (I cannot judge for myself) why persecutest Jesus in condemning Paul? Did not Saul condemn other's to death who believed contrary to what was considered society's truth of the day?

I'm not judging you as having a hardened heart; but I needed to use those words for my example.

But if Paul promoted falsely......what has he gained?

By this logic, do you believe I am also lost because I believe in the Jesus Paul promoted? Am I damned for coming to Jesus? He has gained me for the Lord and others. Though we may not have all the truth, he has gained the more for the Lord to transform into His righteousness.

That is the only truth I know about Paul's works, whether he promoted falsely or not will be revealed to all on the Last Day.

Klee, The Torah was given to Israel so they could be the example to the nations....The Torah was given to Israel with the intent that they (Israel) will be the light to the Gentile nations....

Isn't Jesus supposed to be the only light we follow though? Not Paul, not Torah, not other religious doctrines, but the light which exists inside Christ?

I will have to disagree with what you say on that point. James, Peter and the Jerusalem elders taught and required obedience to God's will by ....Torah observence. James, Peter and the boys met face to face with Jesus (did Paul?) after the resurrection....yet they still practiced Judaism...who got it right?

I have not met Jesus either and yet I still believe and follow. :wink: Is Paul so wrong for being inspired like every other Christian since the death of Jesus? Are we to ignore the Spirit and only obey men - the men who believe that Torah is God and we cannot have a relationship with Him by any other means?

God is telling Peter to break down that man-made traditon of not eating with Gentiles....however God maintains (expects Torah to be observed by righteous men). Cornelius, knowing Jewish dietary law, would have prepared a Kosher meal for Peter...

I put it to you that man-made tradition comes from the belief of man. So by taking Torah (or any other doctrine) and applying your belief to it, it hencefourth becomes man-made. If we live through the Spirit though, we hear and obey only what God inspires us to.

For example, I hear the Spirit say that I cannot judge you for your beliefs and I obey. I could create a man-made belief through Pauls' teachings however, and say I have the right to judge you according to what Paul said about truth. Can you see how you can do the same with Torah and the Apostles who met Jesus?

The contradiction is that other's who believe in what Paul said are misguided, and yet others who believe what Peter and the other Apostles said (over Paul) was inspired of God and therefore truth. Jesus said himself that he is not good, but His Father in heaven is only good. Therefore anything of God is good until man puts his ownership upon it and says this is my truth.

If you or I function from that then we are both misguided.

I cannot speak on behalf of Paul or the Apostles; but I do see where they pointed to - the Lord. In this they were righteous men. :D

 

[Klee shay]

Well, if he had truly done nothing wrong, why submit himself to injustice?

I hope I have interpreted your statement correctly, but didn't Paul escape death by stoning and fleeing his captors when the prison walls which held him fell down, as well as escape death by sea and viper?

In these times he didn't submit himself to injustice, rather he faced it as God inspired him to.

And being a Roman citizen does not mean he isn't a true Jew. Roman citizenship could belong to anyone. Luckily, Paul had his.

What other Roman Jew appealed to Caesar to override Jewish Tradition?

Abraham was also able to follow God's will without the Torah being made known to Moses yet, no?

Correct. But once his revelation came, more of his will was revealed.

So why suddenly stop at the Torah and Moses? If you can accept that Abraham was able to follow Gods' will without the Torah, why do you find it so hard to believe that anyone can follow God's will today without the Torah?

Notice how I didn't say Torah is wrong...I said why is it impossible (if it was okay for Abraham) to follow God's will without necesarily following the Torah as a doctrine? I put it to you that a person who walks in God's grace cannot defy God's will for long. Even Jonah found his way back to God's will the hard way. :wink:

Beyond what is written, yes, but not contrary to what is written. The law can't cover every aspect of life in every situation. The whole scripture can't. That is why we need the Spirit.

I can see why you have reached this conclusion and I don't necessarily see it as flawed. Just as I do not believe that Peter was flawed in the way he chose to minister the Gospel either. But can I ask where exactly you believe Paul was contrary to what was written in the Law? It probably goes without saying but so that we come from the same understanding, can you give me an example. Thanks. :D