Lets talk about Paul

[unobtrusive]

Paul counted all things as dung p

He was a Pharisee of Pharisees and perfect according to all the legal requirements of the law
but when GOD was pleased to reveal HIS SON in Paul, Paul understood that all things were as dung compared to the surpassing glory of knowing his LORD

Incorporate this with the truth that you wrote. Acts 24:14 "But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:"

Paul was enlightened as to the true words of God without the additional philosophies of Judaism that added multitudes of things to the original, making the law of God a tradition of men. Jesus ripped the Pharisees for such practices in Matthew 23:23.

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone."

Paul taught these principles.

 

[Rainrider]

]
Does this mean you're done making untruthful claims...

As all rather of have is the word of scholars, who also don't agree, neater have any hard evidence. Beside, I do follow what what I see as truth, and you seem to as well. SO all your crying and getting mad, and try to debase both this study and me will fail. It has also started to sever in showing the true intent of the beast with in you.

 

[Rainrider]

There are many commentators of excellent scholarship (Especially those of the 19th century. but also FF Bruce) who date John's gospel much earlier. The lack of any mention of the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD in any of John's writings is evidence that the entire NT was written before 70 AD

Not looking to debate things that can't be shown, yet there are many that also place some as later. With advancements in linguistic study, and computer analysis, Most scholars today do agree that Mark was written i or around 65 AD. Still before the destruction of the Temple. SO the use of any lack of mention of that does not show anything other than it was per, and not post. The date of 65AD is Per. So once more this only severs to show that today scholars have found a different date than was found back in the day. Nether can show solid prof of their dates, so I am willing to chance it and follow the scholars of today that do have a lot more comping, evidence than was offered in the past.

 

[miknik5]

Incorporate this with the truth that you wrote. Acts 24:14 "But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things which are written in the law and in the prophets:"

Paul was enlightened as to the true words of God without the additional philosophies of Judaism that added multitudes of things to the original, making the law of God a tradition of men. Jesus ripped the Pharisees for such practices in Matthew 23:23.

"Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone."

Paul taught these principles.

What?

Paul, because he had received THE SPIRIT, was able to, just as any believer born and led by CHRIST's SPIRIT, handle the law rightly, because of the promptings and dictates of THE APIEIT within the believer

he did not negate the law...he did not take the outward listings of the written law as some sort of detached checklist

he knew because of THE SPIRIT leading him, how to follow the spirit of the law sir
and in fact said that he upheld the law

christ magnified (and made the law HONORABLE)...all based on love and accountability to GOD and to one another

 

[loveme1]

What?

Paul, because he had received THE SPIRIT, was able to, just as any believer born and led by CHRIST's SPIRIT, handle the law rightly, because of the promptings and dictates of THE APIEIT within the believer

he did not negate the law...he did not take the outward listings of the written law as some sort of detached checklist

he knew because of THE SPIRIT leading him, how to follow the spirit of the law sir
and in fact said that he upheld the law

christ magnified (and made the law HONORABLE)...all based on love and accountability to GOD and to one another

I think that is judgement , mercy and Faith being highlighted.. it looks to me like you both are saying the same thing...

 

[Rainrider]

The so called Messianic movement has two unrelated parts:

1) Jewish believers who mostly recognize no need to observe much of the Law

2) Gentiles who tor some reason try to put the Church back under Law with little or no real understanding of the Law.

When Paul says " I am not under Law , but under Grace; he means exactly that.

Of the first group we find Friends of Israel, Chosen People, and American Board of Mission to the Jews.

They generally observe the Sabbath and the appointed times of Lev chapter 23 in Messianic congregations; while they are also active in mainstream churches on Sunday and Wednesday.

I am not being rude, nor any more condescending than others that post in contradiction to the study of this thread.
! this thread is not about being under the Law, that was something jumped on people that seem to way to stop this study before it got off the ground.
Next, As it seems that you stand only on one side of the fence, and will be unwilling to even think that you can be wrong, I see reason for you or others with your mind set to disrupt a study that has not got started as of yet. If you disagree with this study, and are so bent on derailing it before you even find out the truth of what it is, then please by all means use the door. I am willing to hold it open for you so it does not hit you on the way out.

Next, When a person places Paul in conflict with the Words of HaShem, or Yeshua, or as it turns out, in conflit with him self, It leads to the understanding that they have lost a grip on reality. s was pointed out, Paul had only the Tanakh to back his teachings, and He used that in his teachings. The Torah which is the law, is used or alluded to by Paul more than any part of the Word. SO hay stick around you may learn something new.

 

[loveme1]

Love and accountability .... certainly so...

 

[MarcR]

Not looking to debate things that can't be shown, yet there are many that also place some as later. With advancements in linguistic study, and computer analysis, Most scholars today do agree that Mark was written i or around 65 AD. Still before the destruction of the Temple. SO the use of any lack of mention of that does not show anything other than it was per, and not post. The date of 65AD is Per. So once more this only severs to show that today scholars have found a different date than was found back in the day. Nether can show solid prof of their dates, so I am willing to chance it and follow the scholars of today that do have a lot more comping, evidence than was offered in the past.

I believe that The difference between modern Scholarship and 19th century Scholarship is not better information.
Since the mid 20th century there has been a clearly discernible liberal drift in some of the best seminaries. This seems motivated by a desire to downplay all the miraculous aspects of God.

 

[Rainrider]

I agree!
There is nothing unbiblical or unchristian about confronting error.

Many times when a person wishes to try to correct a teaching that that does not back their own, and is based on the ideas of others with no solid backing on ether side, it is can be seen as bring up conflict that is backed by nothing more that this how I want it. After having faced this kind of thing many times, and had more than one thread be hijacked, and disrupted to the point that it becomes more of a street fight to keep going, I may be a bit to quick on the draw. Yet that is not with reason.

 

[graceNpeace]

As all rather of have is the word of scholars, who also don't agree, neater have any hard evidence. Beside, I do follow what what I see as truth, and you seem to as well. SO all your crying and getting mad, and try to debase both this study and me will fail. It has also started to sever in showing the true intent of the beast with in you.

So, your only response is to again resort to a fudge as well as personal slander...

 

[Rainrider]

Hi Rainrider, it is without doubt worth to make a study about Paul which helpes us in the way of follow Jesus. Because if we read his letters we find that one of his main goals was to fulfill the task which our Lord has given him. Preach and teach the Gospel.
I can not fully agree with your statement that Paul had only the OT as base for his teachings. This may be the case before he became Paul. But since he became a christian and the special task from the Lord Jesus, he also became informations directly from the Lord himself. So we dont know anything about his time in arabia ore his time in the third heaven.
So if you use only the OT as his base for informations you draw a not realistic picture from Paul.
And really I find it difficult to speak and teach about a person without knowing him realy. Whoever will do this, has to realize that it only can be a trying to do it.
I find it more fruitfull to read his letters and find out how much he loved the Lord, how much he was ready to suffer for the Gospel and the Lord. How much he loves the churches and believers. How he trust the Lord in difficult situations. How much he was against sin in the church, how much he was against false doctrine (f.e. the doctrine of the judaists) How much he fights for the truth. In this he is a role model for me!

Agreed, yet you seem to have misread that part of this post. It was not about what knew later in life, it was about his up bringing. And all that was before his revelation on the road to Damasks.

 

[miknik5]

Many times when a person wishes to try to correct a teaching that that does not back their own, and is based on the ideas of others with no solid backing on ether side, it is can be seen as bring up conflict that is backed by nothing more that this how I want it. After having faced this kind of thing many times, and had more than one thread be hijacked, and disrupted to the point that it becomes more of a street fight to keep going, I may be a bit to quick on the draw. Yet that is not with reason.

It is witkout reason because you do not see THE LORD as the end of the law for all who believe and obey HIM


Just as Paul said regarding the law

 

[Rainrider]

I agree with you.

I think Romans was written to Jews and Gentiles of the first church located in Rome, wasn't it?

The Epistle to the Romans was written to Christians residing in the city of Rome (Romans1:7 and 15. Rome was the center of the Empire and was ethnically diverse. In the first century AD it had a population of around one million people in an area less than ten square miles. Of this large population, it is estimated that there was between 40,000 and 50,000 Jews in the city. The Jewish population dates back to the second century BC as part of the Diaspora. In AD 64 there was a large fire in Rome that led Nero to eject and drive away the Jews. This also resulted in the first major persecution of the Church.

You would be right. As the gentiles would study with the Jews to learn the scripture. As we find that fact in through out the NT, it can't be disputed that they studied together. So one can safely say that all of Paul's letters went to both Jew and Gentile.

 

[miknik5]

Agreed, yet you seem to have misread that part of this post. It was not about what knew later in life, it was about his up bringing. And all that was before his revelation on the road to Damasks.

And what did Paul call all these things but "dung"

paul knew that all these were the shadows of all the realities found in CHRIST

In fact, any time a new believer wanted to go backwards, (after having received THE SPIRIT) Paul was very vocal about it

 

[Rainrider]

I believe that The difference between modern Scholarship and 19th century Scholarship is not better information.
Since the mid 20th century there has been a clearly discernible liberal drift in some of the best seminaries. This seems motivated by a desire to downplay all the miraculous aspects of God.

This may be so, however most seminaries are focused on what many call denominational doctrine and not Biblical Doctrine.

 

[Rainrider]

So, your only response is to again resort to a fudge as well as personal slander...

As you wish to see it.

 

[Rainrider]

It is witkout reason because you do not see THE LORD as the end of the law for all who believe and obey HIM


Just as Paul said regarding the law

As we have had differences in the past, I will not say more than one must study the word and follow what they find as truth.

 

[Rainrider]

Am I the only that finds it sd that this seems to be focusing on everything but the first chapter of Romans, as this study has moved on, and has nothing with the Law but rather understanding Paul as a person?
Is it any wonder that I seem to get gt upset with some that post?

 

[loveme1]

And what did Paul call all these things but "dung"

paul knew that all these were the shadows of all the realities found in CHRIST

In fact, any time a new believer wanted to go backwards, (after having received THE SPIRIT) Paul was very vocal about it

Like Paul realised that him being circumcised or from the tribe of Benjamin meant nothing.. because the things pertaining to flesh had led him to persecuting the church.. what was important was the Faith, worshiping GOD in Spirit and Truth through His Son.. Righteousness through Faith.. that is what it was all leading to.. the Faith of Abraham.. the promise from GOD had come to all that believe... Jew or gentile.. rich or poor.. GOD's Grace was for all to be saved through Faith in His Son.

So if people were being bewitched and believing those of circumcision that taught they had to keep the law of Moses to make them righteous.. Paul was zealous.. trying to say.. No, the New wine is True and Everlasting.. circumcision it profits nothing.. what counts is Faith.

 

[Rainrider]

Like Paul realised that him being circumcised or from the tribe of Benjamin meant nothing.. because the things pertaining to flesh had led him to persecuting the church.. what was important was the Faith, worshiping GOD in Spirit and Truth through His Son.. Righteousness through Faith.. that is what it was all leading to.. the Faith of Abraham.. the promise from GOD had come to all that believe... Jew or gentile.. rich or poor.. GOD's Grace was for all to be saved through Faith in His Son.

So if people were being bewitched and believing those of circumcision that taught they had to keep the law of Moses to make them righteous.. Paul was zealous.. trying to say.. No, the New wine is True and Everlasting.. circumcision it profits nothing.. what counts is Faith.

This is true, yet it always has been faith by which ma was found in right standing. Circumcision was never anything more that a sign of the covenant HaShem made with Abraham.