Faith versus Faithfulness to the Law

[JJM]

Originally Posted by WolfgangvonUSA

Thanks to Saul/Paul hardly anybody is interested in the Law anymore.
Saul/Paul's aim was to make the Law irrelevant and a mere historical curiosity. He developed the concept of salvation through faith rather than faithfulness or loyalty to the Law. He called salvation 'a free gift' (Rom 5:15-18) that can be acquired merely by believing that Yahshua died for our sins.

Rom 1:17 For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.




Gal 3:11 But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, [it is] evident: for, The just shall live by faith.

Please notice that Paul is apparently quoting the LXX of


Hab 2:4 Behold, his soul [which] is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.

The Habakkuk Commentary in the Dead Sea Scrolls both exposes Paul as The Liar and clarifies Habakkuk 2:4 to read as "As for the righteous man, by loyalty to him may one find life."

(This refers to those who obey the Law among the Israelites whom Yahweh will rescue from among those doomed to judgment, because of their suffering and their loyalty 'to the Teacher of Righteousness'.

'The Teacher of Righteous' prophetically refers to James the Just, Brother of Yahshua, who would be a Zealot for the Law, and who opposed Paul The Liar and The Wicked Priest Ananas (who would be High Priest of the Herodian Pharisees in the years following the crucifixion)

For further insights. please read the book "The Dead Sea Scrolls Deception" by Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh and "James, Brother of Jesus" by Richard Eisenman.

Wolfgang von USA

Hi I haven't read this whole thread I will but I feel the need to respond right now to this before I read on. So if this has been addressed then I'm sorry. This is not Paul's Message. He isn't saying that one merely needs to believe Christ died for him to be saved. This is the spin Luther put on his writings to back up his own beliefs. What Paul is actually saying is that Man can't earn salvation on his own. And that following of the law without understanding of it and the message of God is useless. Now he is saying that the parts of the law that don't involve morals shouldn't have to be followed. Such as circumcision, not using alloys, kosher laws, and not working on the Sabbath when it is cumbersome. The later two where even done away with by Christ Mk 7:17-23 and Mk 2:23. Notice Paul says the Just shall live by Faith not simply have it even Demons have faith. As for the dead see scrolls how do they expose Paul for a liar. They may show he was using a poor copy of Habakkuk or that the people who wrote the Dead Sea scrolls were but it doesn't make him a liar. Also the Dead Sea scrolls also show that the term Works of the law refers to the laws that don't involve morals. So Paul is saying those laws don't matter not all the laws.

[JJM]

Originally Posted by WolfgangvonUSA

What it all seems to come down to is that He seems to be saying you should love your neighbor just as long as he is a member of your own tribe.

So it would seem that He did not believe in universal brotherhood, but only a brotherhood for those who belong to the lost sheep of the House of Israel!?

What do you think? Did Jesus come to bring salvation to everybody on the planet or did He come just to help out His own flock, the nations of Israel?

I am not really sure, but I am trying to unravel this Gordian Knot. Help me if you can!!

Wolfgang

Well I think I can help on this one. The reason Jesus acts this way is because as I stated in law of 2or3 thread Jesus was sent to the Jews. So he shouldn't be ministering to the Gentiles. However when the Jews reject him he sends his disciples to all people. This is my quote from that thread



Jesus didn’t accomplish his initial mission. If you ready Matthew 21:33-46 you see that Jesus was originally supposed to cause the Jewish People to repent. Because the Householder in the parable is God. The Husbandmen are the Jews. The servants are the Prophets and obviously the son of the householder is Jesus. So Jesus came to make the Jewish people bear fruit.

So Jesus came to his own people but when he was rejected brought salvation to all.

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Wolfgang.

Apologies for the delay in responding.

Originally Posted by WolfgangvonUSA

Above all, I am a seeker of truth, and I am a seeker of truth by means of reason rather than faith.

As am I, ask anybody here.

By the way, faith appears to be a Pauline concept, whereas faithfulness (to the Law) in an anti-Pauline concept well distributed throughout the OT.

I agree there is an inordinate focus by modern Christianity on faith as opposed to law, but that is not necessarily Paul's doing.

And faith is obviously subversive to the purpose of reason. And by the way, good science and good religion are ALWAYS compatible.

I disagree, faith is not obviously subversive to the purpose of reason. In your case, and mine, we have placed our faith in reason. Science and faith are compatible where they overlap and confirm each other, but there are many questions science cannot address, as there are many questions faith cannot address.

Yahshua warned of false apostles whom we would accept in preference to Himself. When we find such a false apostle do you think He would want us to build him up or tear him down?

The current debate is to determine if Paul is indeed that false apostle, But in this process Paul cannot be a 'sacred cow'. Either he stands up to the investigation or he falls.

Does Paul ever say anything good in his letters. Certainly!! If he didn't he would never have been able to infiltrate the early Christian movement. But remember that rat poison consists more of pure wholesome grain than it does of its active poisonous ingredient that delivers the lethal blow. Therefore, be not deceived!

Yashua also advised that we gauge a prophet by the fruit of their works. Paul was a human, and as such, was subject to human shortcomings. Having said that, Paul did his level best to bring the gospel, the good news, and everything that entails to the cosmos, the nations, the gentiles, those who previously were not part or parcel of the covenant. Paul opened the door to allow in those who had not previously been allowed to share in the covenant. Without Paul's teaching, the door remains closed to all but the chosen, that is, the Jews who accept Messiah (as the Essenes, who looked forward to the coming Messiah). In short, do away with Paul, and you close the door to yourself (unless you happen by chance of birth to be a Messiah believing Jew).

I am convinced that he must be the false apostle of whom Yahshua warned. And along with all the other evidence I cannot ignore His warning to "be wary of the leaven of the Pharisees".

That is your choice. Personally, I see fruit in Paul's work that you prefer to ignore. Likewise, I see no viable fruit in your work here.

Where Paul builds up others and provides them with hope, faith and charity, I see you attempting to destroy other's faith, hope and charity for you own selfish reasons. You may be using logic, but to what purpose are you using that logic? Further, if one looks hard enough, one can find valid and logical arguments to question, tear down and destroy elements within every belief system. Which logically leads to atheism, which can also be logically challenged. Logic by itself is insufficient to address the illogic of faith. Faith ultimately is a matter of the heart, and how a person connects to and relates with the illogic of the Divine, that is, our Heavenly Father.

You prefer to focus your efforts at one level in whatever attempt you are making to establish your own faith. The end result is to discredit Christianity, so convert and become a Jew or Muslim if that seems better suited to your spiritual path. I have been speaking on a level of abstraction above where you are focused. I understand what you are saying, Paul has been granted a form of reverence he probably does not deserve. That does not make his teaching invalid, it speaks more rather to the inadequacies of the political constructs of the Church.

And ultimately, I see Paul building up people, giving them hope, faith, charity and reason. This is a good thing, as things go coming from men. Whereas tearing people down, destroying their faith, hope, charity and reason, is not a good thing, either spiritually or by men.

You sir, are not half the man Paul was, nor will you ever be. Neither will I, or anybody here in this forum, so this comment is no personal slight. It is however, cause to really consider (logically) just what your motivations are in attacking other people's faiths, let alone the person of Paul.

Disagreement is one thing, there are ways to respectfully disagree. Wholesale dismissal is not respectful disagreement. Soapbox preachers are a dime a dozen, and no one listens to them. If your intended purpose is to bring a better understanding to believers and edify and build their faith, then begin by helping the poor, the widows and orphans, and visiting those in prison. Demonstrate by example. Then you may gently guide them and others to understanding, and perhaps learn a bit yourself along the way. It would do you well to begin by learning tolerance.

Faith, as a matter of the heart, is seldom swayed by the logic of the mind. With all of the greatest logic available to try to persuade, people will still follow their hearts. My heart tells me you are mistaken, not in your logic, but in your motives.

Shalom.