Faith versus Faithfulness to the Law

[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

 

[Ben57]

The law code of the Jews was fullfilled by the life and death of Jesus. He perfectly kept the Law when on earrh, something no one else could ever do.

At the time of the "Last Supper" Jesus instigated a new Law for his followers, one of love. The 10 words or 10 commandments as given to Moses was rapt up in this new command of love. John 13:34,35 "34 I am giving YOU a new commandment, that YOU love one another; just as I have loved YOU, that YOU also love one another. 35 By this all will know that YOU are my disciples, if YOU have love among yourselves." Jesus was the mediator of this law just as Moses was the mediator of the old law. Jesus was the sacrifice the sealed the law just as the laws given to Moses were sealed with a sacrifice

Under the old law it was against the law to murder, steal, etc with fear of punishment such as stoning. Under the new law the Christians were not to obey the law because of the consequences but because they LOVED their God and thier fellow man and to commit such things was not an act of love.

That is why Jesus went further that the law code. He said that it was wrong to commit adultery as per the old law and went further to say it was wrong to look at someone not your marriage mate with lust. So our love for our mate we would naturaly say "hey you can't look at that you already have a mate" (well for some it may not be natural but that was the attitude christians had to learn to have - the law of love) Jesus appealed to our hearts to motivate us not our minds. The arbituary laws affct our minds. .... if i can get away with it I will (our selfish minds talking)... the law of love (motive from the heart) says I do not even want to try to do wrong even if I could get aay with it.

The law as given to Moses was abolished as a law but all the principles would still be there and covered under the law of love. God wants us humans to worship and obey him because we love him not because of fear of punishment.

The life of Paul and of the christians back then was one of outstanding faithfullness to the law of the Christ. That is why Paul was willing to undergo so much persecution and suffering.

 

[bananabrain]

The law code of the Jews was fullfilled by the life and death of Jesus.

<pantomime>oh no it wasn't.</pantomime>

>He perfectly kept the Law when on earth, something no one else could ever do.

actually, he didn't. the NT itself claims that he violated Shabbat on many occasions - and unless he had children, he certainly didn't fulfil the commandment of being fruitful and multiplying. and, in any case, nobody else has ever claimed to be perfect. the "instigation of the law of love" is itself an abrogation of the need to observe the Law. you can't have it both ways, either he kept it or he changed it. i think you're saying what you feel, rather than what the text itself allows. either way, no bona fide jewish prophet *ever* claimed to be giving a "new" commandment.

Under the old law it was against the law to murder, steal, etc with fear of punishment such as stoning. Under the new law the Christians were not to obey the law because of the consequences but because they LOVED their God and their fellow man and to commit such things was not an act of love.

judaism also says that it is better to obey out of love than out of fear. this notion is not a difference that distinguishes judaism and christianity. in fact, nearly all the examples you give are already covered by normal rabbinic interpretation of jewish law.

The law as given to Moses was abolished as a law but all the principles would still be there and covered under the law of love.

excuse me, but even if jesus was the jewish messiah (which, as far as we are concerned, he wasn't) he still wouldn't have authority to abrogate, let alone abolish, the rest of jewish law. this is simply your opinion. in fact, jewish law says that a putative "prophet" who says the Torah is no longer valid deserves the death penalty.

Thanks to Saul/Paul hardly anybody is interested in the Law anymore.

12 million jews would disagree with you. although maybe that's "hardly".

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Ben57]

Hello Bananbrain


Your rebutle is based on you being a Jew.I do not know if you noticed but this forum is based on a Christuan point of view, so yes my respons was from a christian point of view not a jewish one.

[QUOTE
actually, he didn't. the NT itself claims that he violated Shabbat on many occasions - [/QUOTE]
Actually Jesus never violated the Mosaoc law of the Sabboth, he did violate the Jewish man made tradition that went beyond the law of Moses, otherwise they would have had grounds to put him to death.

and unless he had children, he certainly didn't fulfil the commandment of being fruitful and multiplying.

I might be mistaken but i di not recall any law given to the Jews to be fruitfull. That was given to Adam and the decendents of Noah but I have never seen where it was Given as a stipulation to the Jews.

and, in any case, nobody else has ever claimed to be perfect.

Jesus never clamed to be perfect the fact that he was the son of God having God as his lifgiver made him perfect and he had to be perfect to be able to be a ransom for the life that Adam lost. As a Jew I doubt that you will not accept that any way. My point was made for those that beleive the Greek writtings of the Bible known as the New Testament.

the "instigation of the law of love" is itself an abrogation of the need to observe the Law. you can't have it both ways, either he kept it or he changed it.

Jesus kept the law when alive but his death is what brought in the new law code

i think you're saying what you feel, rather than what the text itself allows. either way, no bona fide jewish prophet *ever* claimed to be giving a "new" commandment.

I understand you resoning here because Jews do not recognise Jesus as a bonafide prophet

judaism also says that it is better to obey out of love than out of fear. this notion is not a difference that distinguishes judaism and christianity. in fact, nearly all the examples you give are already covered by normal rabbinic interpretation of jewish law.

I agree but the law code that the Jews were under at the time of Christ was adultirated from the cade given to Moses. The modern Jews proberbly have a different view now but the Jews of the Bible times did not.

excuse me, but even if jesus was the jewish messiah (which, as far as we are concerned, he wasn't) he still wouldn't have authority to abrogate, let alone abolish, the rest of jewish law. this is simply your opinion. in fact, jewish law says that a putative "prophet" who says the Torah is no longer valid deserves the death penalty.

I understand your reasoning here. Remember please that this is a christian forum not a Jewish forum. Your odservations are as valid as any one elses but you must keep with in the paramiters of the discution, Christian monotheism. If I came to a Jewish forum I would have to adjust they way I thought because my audience would be of a diferent belief system. Remember those that make the claim to be christian, beleive Jesus was the fortold Jewish messiah, and as such and as the son of God would have the authority to change the law code.

I honestly do understand where you are coming from but I am talking to those that beleive Jesus to be the Messiah

 

[bananabrain]

I do not know if you noticed but this forum is based on a Christian point of view, so yes my response was from a christian point of view not a jewish one.

er, yes, i can read, thank'ee. i'm sorry if i have misunderstood, but i understood that the point of the CR site was to promote interfaith dialogue and the discussion of comparative religion - therefore it would be hard to have a discussion that was only from one point of view that was also one which allowed interfaith discussions. as far as i am aware, the point of there being a christian or jewish subforum is to allow us to group *subjects*, not points of view. thus, a discussion on an issue arising from the NT should be in the christian section, on the OT/Torah in the jewish section and so on. that way, someone can pose a question of relevance to christians and be sure of the christian members of the site being able to find it and chip in - i don't read everything on the site every day, so if someone wants to ask something relevant they tend to put it in the jewish forum. however, this should not preclude other people chipping in with their own opinions.

Remember please that this is a christian forum not a Jewish forum. Your observations are as valid as any one else's but you must keep with in the parameters of the discussion, Christian monotheism. If I came to a Jewish forum I would have to adjust they way I thought because my audience would be of a diferent belief system.

but the point is surely that this discussion i feel is in part propagating a view of judaism, jewish law and jewish practice; consequently i feel entitled to air my view on this subject, even though it's a dissenting one. as for 'adjusting the way i think', i don't think censoring myself would help. as far as i am concerned, if christians are going around criticising a caricature of judaism, jewish law and jews that is not something i think i should be silent on. i should be able to present the same view of judaism here that i would anywhere, otherwise that would be intellectually dishonest. i need hardly add that saying one thing in "private" and another, less intolerant thing in "public" is hardly conducive to increasing knowledge and tolerance.

I might be mistaken but i do not recall any law given to the Jews to be fruitful. That was given to Adam and the decendents of Noah but I have never seen where it was Given as a stipulation to the Jews.

you're right - it's not given specifically to us, but it also applies to us, for we too are included in that grouping. it is included in all official lists of the 613 commandments (which you can see at http://www.jewfaq.org/613.htm if you're interested) - but the salient point here is that at the point that commandment was given, woman hadn't been separated from man, so the commandment is taken to be obligatory only upon males. (this, incidentally, is why male contraceptives aren't allowed, but female ones are)

Jesus never clamed to be perfect the fact that he was the son of God having God as his lifegiver made him perfect and he had to be perfect to be able to be a ransom for the life that Adam lost.

but don't we all have G!D as Lifegiver? this is a theological argument, not one based in observance of the commandments. again, the ransom thing is not something we agree with (at least, not in this form) - and in any case, we atone for adam's sin with the commandment of taking the lulav during the feast of sukkot (tabernacles).

Jesus kept the law when alive but his death is what brought in the new law code

again, you're assuming that he kept jewish law (although there are several NT passages where he gets into strife for publicly desecrating the Sabbath) - the point is although he may have brought in this new law code (despite having apparently said that he did not come to change a letter of the law!) that doesn't make the old law obsolete. that's my point. in christian terms this is covered by "dual covenant" theology. it is (at least to us) ridiculous to suggest that G!D designed the Torah (and therefore judaism) to have an expiry date.

I agree but the law code that the Jews were under at the time of Christ was adulterated from the code given to Moses. The modern Jews probably have a different view now but the Jews of the Bible times did not.

you're right we have a different view. we've got an entire oral tradition preserved from that time period and it shows remarkable lack of "adulteration" 3000 years later considering we can still trace everything back to the mosaic code. to be honest, this assertion kind of ignores everything about judaism other than what is said about *some* jews at the time of jesus. with all due respect, i'm not trying to be a hardarse or pick a fight, but i think you ought to learn a bit about judaism before saying things like this. i'm happy to help.

b'shalom

bananabrain

 

[Virtual_Cliff]

IM very HO Bananabrain is being a little hard on Ben. Ben is after all only stating the standard Christian doctrine. It could hardly be called his "opinion". All the same, I think there is a lot of ignorance about Judaism endemic in the Christian Church. We would all benefit from a bit of study of Jewish writers. The trouble is, the Bible is not culturally native to us. We just picked it up a while ago and tried to make some sense out of it. We might have had the sense to ask the people who had been using it for a couple of thousand years.

As for the Law, this is a topic I've been thinking about recently. St Paul, whether you like him or not, described the Law as a nursemaid, that once you had grown up, as it were, you no longer needed to consciously think about. But I now think that this is a continuous process. Sometimes decisions aren't easy. Would you lie to protect someones life? Or do you draw the line at lying? Do you stick to a loveless marriage and compound the misery, or break your vow and end the pain? Breaking rules is a decisive factor is solving some problems, but the bigger the rule you break, the more responsibility you take on and the more severe the consequences of getting it wrong.

 

[Ben57]

Greetings bananabrain, and peace be with you

I understand that the Jewish way of thinking is a matter of interst to Christians, because Jesus was a Jew and did keep the Jewish Law as it was in the Orginal Torah and not the oral traditions of his time. That was partly his dispute with the religous leaders of that time. They had gone away from the Law code given By YHWY to Moses and had oversteped the comands imposing oral traditions that ensaved the people unnecesarily. Exept for the Samaritan woman Jesus only preached to Jews. It wasnt till some time after when Peter baptised a Roman Centurian that the "christian" beleif system started to spead away from the Jews. So Yes I cxan understand why you feel this part of the topic is encroaching on Jewish Law and Tradition. You also have to realise that Christians beleive that Jesus freed us from the law code of Moses and replacerd it with the law code of love. So just as you say I am giving an opinion I say you are also giving an opinion based on your strong beleif that Jesus did not obolkish the Law code of Moses and you are entitled to have your say, but you must exorect us that beleive in Jesus as the Messiah not to agree with with you just as I not expect to talk about Jesus on a Jewish forum and not expect those good people to respond harshly to me. Our view points are miles a part.

Just to let you know, my God is the God of Abraham Isacc and Jacob, YHWH, and not Jesus.

but the point is surely that this discussion i feel is in part propagating a view of judaism, jewish law and jewish practice; consequently i feel entitled to air my view on this subject, even though it's a dissenting one. as for 'adjusting the way i think', i don't think censoring myself would help. as far as i am concerned, if christians are going around criticising a caricature of judaism, jewish law and jews that is not something i think i should be silent on. i should be able to present the same view of judaism here that i would anywhere, otherwise that would be intellectually dishonest. i need hardly add that saying one thing in "private" and another, less intolerant thing in "public" is hardly conducive to increasing knowledge and tolerance..

I applaude you for wanting to defend your faith.. All of us that have a faith should want to defend it. I do not think that i have been attacjing the Jewish way of life it is as valid as any other way of life. However Chritians generally belive that Jesus went beyond the Jewish tradition.

The 10 words or 10 Commandments as Christians call them are just as valid to day as when they were given, exept now foe a Chritian they are all covered in one word "LOVE". And it should be love for God and neighbour that motivates us to keeo them not fear of being caught.

but don't we all have G!D as Lifegiver? this is a theological argument, not one based in observance of the commandments. again, the ransom thing is not something we agree with (at least, not in this form) - and in any case, we atone for adam's sin with the commandment of taking the lulav during the feast of sukkot (tabernacles).

Yes we do all ow our Lives to YHWH becaus he is the one that gave us life in the first place. In the passage that I wrote earlier I meant that YHWH was the "father" (the progenitor) of Jesus in a literal sense and as such was the direct lifegiver of Jesus.

again, you're assuming that he kept jewish law (although there are several NT passages where he gets into strife for publicly desecrating the Sabbath) - the point is although he may have brought in this new law code (despite having apparently said that he did not come to change a letter of the law!) that doesn't make the old law obsolete. that's my point. in christian terms this is covered by "dual covenant" theology. it is (at least to us) ridiculous to suggest that G!D designed the Torah (and therefore judaism) to have an expiry date...

Jesus did not violate the Law of Moses (the Torah) in regard the sabboth but the oral traditons of the religous leaders of that time regarding the sabboth and other observances. No I do not beleive that Jesus changed the law, but he fullfilled the law. It die with him at his death. Christains (at least me) beleive that God abndonde the Jews as a nation because of their oral traditions and apostate tendencies and did not return to the worship of YHWH as stipulated by the ToraH.

you're right we have a different view. we've got an entire oral tradition preserved from that time period and it shows remarkable lack of "adulteration" 3000 years later considering we can still trace everything back to the mosaic code. to be honest, this assertion kind of ignores everything about judaism other than what is said about *some* jews at the time of jesus. with all due respect, i'm not trying to be a hardarse or pick a fight, but i think you ought to learn a bit about judaism before saying things like this. i'm happy to help...

I have not studied the modern Jewish law but I have studieed the law of Moses and the way the Jews tried to keep it (and for the most part of thier history faileed, that is why YHWY punished them by such nations as the Babyloinans and Romans) Acording to what I refer to as the Hebrew texts (other scall the Old Testament) I know what YHWH expected of his people and the trouble thwy got into fro breaking his laws and why Jesus said that YHWH had abandoned them. Personally (and this is going to upets some christians here as well) God will hold thse that claim to be christan but not keeping his commands in the same light as he did the nation of Israel. So all christians (including myself) have to keep wxamining our actions etc. Salvation is not based on faith alone. Our faith must be seen by our way of life. (But that is another story)

 

[dauer]

Perhaps I am mistaken, but these verses suggest Jesus supports the oral torah:

Matthew 23:1-3(KJV) – (1) Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples,  (2) Saying The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat:  (3) All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not. [See also Mk 10:17-19, Lk 16:16-17, Jn 14:21.]

Still, going by the laws you are willing to say were valid:

Exodus 20:12 - Honor your father and your mother; in order that your days may be prolonged upon the land which the L-rd, your G-d, gives you.  [See also Deut 5:16.]

Leviticus 19:3 – Every man shall revere his mother and his father, and keep My Sabbaths; I am the L-rd, your G-d.

Exodus 21:17 – And one who curses his father and his mother, shall surely be put to death.

And yet:

Matthew 12:46-50(KJV) – (46) While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him.  (47) Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee.  (48) But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren?  (49) And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!  (50) For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother. [See also Lk 2:42-50; Jn 2:3-4.]

That's not too bad. He may be disrespecting his parents but at least he's got some sort of nice message, even if he violated the law in order to give it. But...

Matthew 10:34-37(KJV) – (34) Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.  (35) For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.  (36) And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.  (37) He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. [See also Lk 14:26.]

And what other biblical laws did he violate?

Exodus 22:20 - You shall not mistreat a stranger, nor shall you oppress him; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.

Deuteronomy 10:19 - And you shall love the stranger; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.

But,

Matthew 15:22-27(KJV) – (22) And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.  (23) But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.  (24) But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.  (25) Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me.  (26) But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs.  (27) And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table. [See also Mt 6:7,32, 18:17.]

Even more to the point,

Leviticus 19:17-18 – (17) You shall not hate your brother in your heart; you shall surely reprove your friend, and you shall not bear sin on his account.  (18) You shall not take revenge on, nor bear any grudge against the people of your nation, and you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am the L-rd.

And Jesus agrees with this as he clearly states

Matthew 22:37-40(KJV) – (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.  (39) And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.  (40) On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

But he's not too good at sticking with it because

Matthew 23:13-33(KJV) – (13) But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!…  (16) Woe unto you, ye blind guides, …  (17) Ye fools and blind: … (33) Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, …

So I don't know how you can say Jesus was sinless based on the texts themselves.

Also, if he did violate the oral torah, does the torah say anything about that?

Deuteronomy 17:8-13 - (8) If a matter eludes you in judgment, between blood and blood, between judgment and judgment, or between lesion and lesion, [or any other case where there are] words of dispute in your cities, then you shall rise and go up to the place the L-rd, your G-d, chooses. (9) And you shall come to the Levitical Priests and to the judge who will be in those days, and you shall inquire, and they will tell you the words of judgment. (10) And you shall do according to the word they tell you, from the place the L-rd will choose, and you shall observe to do according to all they instruct you. (11) According to the law they instruct you and according to the judgment they say to you, you shall do; you shall not divert from the word they tell you, either right or left. (12) And the man who acts intentionally, not obeying the Priest who stands there to serve the L-rd, your G-d, or to the judge, that man shall die, and you shall abolish evil from Israel. (13) And all the people shall listen and fear, and they shall no longer act wantonly.

Dauer

 

[WolfgangvonUSA]

Matthew 15:22-27(KJV) – (22) And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. (23) But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. (24) But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (25) Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. (26) But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs. (27) And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table. [See also Mt 6:7,32, 18:17.]

Even more to the point,

Leviticus 19:17-18 – (17) You shall not hate your brother in your heart; you shall surely reprove your friend, and you shall not bear sin on his account. (18) You shall not take revenge on, nor bear any grudge against the people of your nation, and you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am the L-rd.

And Jesus agrees with this as he clearly states

Matthew 22:37-40(KJV) – (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. (39) And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. (40) On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

But he's not too good at sticking with it because

Matthew 23:13-33(KJV) – (13) But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!… (16) Woe unto you, ye blind guides, … (17) Ye fools and blind: … (33) Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, …


Dauer

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

 

[dauer]

Well, I'm not Christian, so I don't think Jesus came to bring salvation to anybody, but I think it reflects one of the approaches to "love your neighbor" that existed at that time. However, based on what he said about the Pharisees, he didn't practice what he preached anyway, which goes back to my original point that he did break biblical law.

There is an understanding of the term stranger and neighbor, where stranger refers to a resident alien and neighbor refers to a fellow Hebrew. There is a command, however, to love the stranger, and Jesus violates that by the way he treats this woman. I've heard the Essenes acted in a similar fashion, but seriously don't take my word for it because I'm not sure where I read it.

 

[juantoo3]

Kindest Regards, Wolfgang!

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!!

Just curious, considering that in my view your posts seem an attempt to knock down traditional Christian teaching, what exactly is it that you stand for? What do you believe is the message of the New Testament, and the Bible as a whole? You are quite plain what it is you don't believe (that is, you believe Paul's work is not valid). What is it you do believe, and what is the end result of that belief?

Seems to me there is a verse that says to be a separate people, who said it and where escape me at this moment. I see many people use this verse to hold themselves above and beyond everyone else, all of those who do not think exactly as they do. Such thinking is contrary to the teaching of Jesus (Yashua). I see the meaning of the verse as being steadfast and resolute while interacting with those around you who happen to believe differently. And a portion of that is to realize that you may not have all of the answers you believe you have at any given time in your life, that is, there is always something new to learn. A closed mind cannot learn. Or, as a philosopher whose name escapes me just now said, "The greatest obstacle to learning is the illusion of knowledge." Or, as a Bible scholar I am fond of, Dr. A. Murray, says, "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

The solution to the Gordian knot before you, is in your heart. You can choose to leave it a tangled mess, or solve the puzzle. It is evident you have the teaching in your mind, the trick is to apply what you have already learned. Anyone can destroy, knock down, attack or criticize. Gravity is on their side. It takes a truly strong, visionary and resolute person to build, to create, to uplift and encourage. Despite his flaws, Paul was such a person. So was Jesus.

So, what edifys and builds faith? What encourages those who have lost their courage? What reassures those who have lost hope? What consoles those in grief? Knocking down, or building up?

Shalom.

 

[dauer]

Piggybacking on Juan's post,

I wasn't trying to help you solve a theological problem. I saw the fallacy in bold that Jesus broke no biblical law and I sought to correct it. If I were Christian, I would see two ways to approach such a dilema. If he's God on earth, he can do nothing wrong, and anything that happened can be explained somehow, and if cannot be, it's divine mystery. If he's just a wise teacher, it's okay for him to be wrong because he's human and can be wrong. Either way, there is an answer. Also note that I would handle my own texts in the same way. I feel it's important to understand as best can be understood the history behind the myths and legends that became understood as history.

Dauer

 

[WolfgangvonUSA]

Kindest Regards, Wolfgang!

Just curious, considering that in my view your posts seem an attempt to knock down traditional Christian teaching, what exactly is it that you stand for? What do you believe is the message of the New Testament, and the Bible as a whole? You are quite plain what it is you don't believe (that is, you believe Paul's work is not valid). What is it you do believe, and what is the end result of that belief?

Seems to me there is a verse that says to be a separate people, who said it and where escape me at this moment. I see many people use this verse to hold themselves above and beyond everyone else, all of those who do not think exactly as they do. Such thinking is contrary to the teaching of Jesus (Yashua). I see the meaning of the verse as being steadfast and resolute while interacting with those around you who happen to believe differently. And a portion of that is to realize that you may not have all of the answers you believe you have at any given time in your life, that is, there is always something new to learn. A closed mind cannot learn. Or, as a philosopher whose name escapes me just now said, "The greatest obstacle to learning is the illusion of knowledge." Or, as a Bible scholar I am fond of, Dr. A. Murray, says, "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."

The solution to the Gordian knot before you, is in your heart. You can choose to leave it a tangled mess, or solve the puzzle. It is evident you have the teaching in your mind, the trick is to apply what you have already learned. Anyone can destroy, knock down, attack or criticize. Gravity is on their side. It takes a truly strong, visionary and resolute person to build, to create, to uplift and encourage. Despite his flaws, Paul was such a person. So was Jesus.

So, what edifys and builds faith? What encourages those who have lost their courage? What reassures those who have lost hope? What consoles those in grief? Knocking down, or building up?

Shalom.

Reciprocal regards to you Juan23 !!
I had meant to reply to your other letter first, but I am compelled to reply at once to some of your current statements.

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

Faith is very dangerous as many have served tyrants on the basis of faith. And faith is obviously subversive to the purpose of reason. And by the way, good science and good religion are ALWAYS compatible.

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!

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".

More later!

Wolfgang

 

[WolfgangvonUSA]

Faithfulness rather than faith in the OT

The False apostle Paul is always talking about faith and grace.

Romans 9:30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.

Romans 9:31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
(Note - By the way, Israel did not do a very good job following His Law, and this is why Yah divorced them and then dispersed them among the Gentiles.)

Romans 9:32 Wherefore? Because [they sought it] not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
​

But what does Yahweh really want from us? And why did He bless Abraham?
Because of his faith? No, because of his obedience!!

Gen 22:18 And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;
because thou hast obeyed My Voice.

Gen 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed;

Gen 26:5 Because that Abraham obeyed my voice, and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.
​

Again, look at how the Pharisee, Paul, dares to contradict the Word Of Yah, Himself

Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
​

Yahweh wants us to faithful to His Law. If you love Him, obey His Laws and keep His commandments!

Please notice that the word 'faith' only appears just twice in the entire Old Testament, and there is not a single mention of the word 'faith' in the Gospel of John. Yet Paul mentions this word hundreds of times.
Also notice that when James mentions the word 'faith', it is for the purpose of refuting Paul's contention that faith is more important than obedience to the Law.



Num 12:7 My servant Moses [is] not so, who [is] faithful in all mine house.

Deu 7:9 Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he [is] God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;

Deu 32:20 And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end [shall be]: for they [are] a very froward generation, children in whom [is] no faith.

1Sa 2:35 And I will raise me up a faithful priest, [that] shall do according to [that] which [is] in mine heart and in my mind: and I will build him a sure house; and he shall walk before mine anointed for ever.

1Sa 22:14 Then Ahimelech answered the king, and said, And who [is so] faithful among all thy servants as David, which is the king's son-in-law, and goeth at thy bidding, and is honourable in thine house?

1Sa 26:23 The LORD render to every man his righteousness and his faithfulness: for the LORD delivered thee into [my] hand to day, but I would not stretch forth mine hand against the LORD'S anointed.

2Sa 20:19 I [am one of them that are] peaceable [and] faithful in Israel: thou seekest to destroy a city and a mother in Israel: why wilt thou swallow up the inheritance of the LORD?

2Ki 12:15 Moreover they reckoned not with the men, into whose hand they delivered the money to be bestowed on workmen: for they dealt faithfully.

2Ki 22:7 Howbeit there was no reckoning made with them of the money that was delivered into their hand, because they dealt faithfully.

2Ch 19:9 And he charged them, saying, Thus shall ye do in the fear of the LORD, faithfully, and with a perfect heart.

2Ch 31:12 And brought in the offerings and the tithes and the dedicated [things] faithfully: over which Cononiah the Levite [was] ruler, and Shimei his brother [was] the next.

2Ch 34:12 And the men did the work faithfully: and the overseers of them [were] Jahath and Obadiah, the Levites, of the sons of Merari; and Zechariah and Meshullam, of the sons of the Kohathites, to set [it] forward; and [other of] the Levites, all that could skill of instruments of musick.

Neh 7:2 That I gave my brother Hanani, and Hananiah the ruler of the palace, charge over Jerusalem: for he [was] a faithful man, and feared God above many.

Neh 9:8 And foundest his heart faithful before thee, and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, and the Perizzites, and the Jebusites, and the Girgashites, to give [it, I say], to his seed, and hast performed thy words; for thou [art] righteous:

Neh 13:13 And I made treasurers over the treasuries, Shelemiah the priest, and Zadok the scribe, and of the Levites, Pedaiah: and next to them [was] Hanan the son of Zaccur, the son of Mattaniah: for they were counted faithful, and their office [was] to distribute unto their brethren.

Psa 5:9 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.

Psa 12:1 [[To the chief Musician upon Sheminith, A Psalm of David.]] Help, LORD; for the godly man ceaseth; for the faithful fail from among the children of men.

Psa 31:23 O love the LORD, all ye his saints: [for] the LORD preserveth the faithful, and plentifully rewardeth the proud doer.

Psa 36:5 Thy mercy, O LORD, [is] in the heavens; [and] thy faithfulness [reacheth] unto the clouds.

Psa 40:10 I have not hid thy righteousness within my heart; I have declared thy faithfulness and thy salvation: I have not concealed thy lovingkindness and thy truth from the great congregation.

Psa 88:11 Shall thy lovingkindness be declared in the grave? [or] thy faithfulness in destruction?

Psa 89:1 [[Maschil of Ethan the Ezrahite.]] I will sing of the mercies of the LORD for ever: with my mouth will I make known thy faithfulness to all generations.

Psa 89:2 For I have said, Mercy shall be built up for ever: thy faithfulness shalt thou establish in the very heavens.

Psa 89:5 And the heavens shall praise thy wonders, O LORD: thy faithfulness also in the congregation of the saints.

etc., etc

 

[Virtual_Cliff]

Wolfgang,

If you truly believe that Paul was a deceiver, then it is your duty to follow the Mosaic Law and forget the whole Faith doctrine. You should certainly not follow a path you believe to be wrong. You will then live a life of humility towards God, and generosity to your fellow man or woman. Those of us who hold Paul to be an apostle will follow the path of faith, and will live lives of humility towards God and generosity to our fellow man or woman. In short, it makes little odds how we prattle, it's how we live our lives and love our maker that counts with God.

God bless you.

 

[lunamoth]

Wolfgang,

If you truly believe that Paul was a deceiver, then it is your duty to follow the Mosaic Law and forget the whole Faith doctrine. You should certainly not follow a path you believe to be wrong. You will then live a life of humility towards God, and generosity to your fellow man or woman. Those of us who hold Paul to be an apostle will follow the path of faith, and will live lives of humility towards God and generosity to our fellow man or woman. In short, it makes little odds how we prattle, it's how we live our lives and love our maker that counts with God.

God bless you.

Well said, VCliff

cheers,
lunamoth

 

[WolfgangvonUSA]

QUOTE=Virtual_Cliff]Wolfgang,

If you truly believe that Paul was a deceiver, then it is your duty to follow the Mosaic Law and forget the whole Faith doctrine. You should certainly not follow a path you believe to be wrong. You will then live a life of humility towards God, and generosity to your fellow man or woman. Those of us who hold Paul to be an apostle will follow the path of faith, and will live lives of humility towards God and generosity to our fellow man or woman. In short, it makes little odds how we prattle, it's how we live our lives and love our maker that counts with God.

God bless you.[/QUOTE]
This is undoubtedly well intentioned but it is essentially saying that it matters not what god one worships as long as one lives a life of humility towards that God and displays generosity to one's fellow man or woman.

The only problem is that Yahweh will have no other gods before Him, nor will he leave idolaters unpunished no matter how well they treat their fellow man.

If Paul really is a false apostle and false prophet (or worse), then those who follow his Pharisaic doctrine will share the same fate as the Heoridans and their Idumean kin as so eloquently described by Obadiah.

Hallelu YAH !!

Wolfgang

 

[iBrian]

The only problem is that Yahweh will have no other gods before Him, nor will he leave idolaters unpunished no matter how well they treat their fellow man.

That sort of implies that we exist in a polytheisic universe, with different gods battling it out for the possesion of humanity like some kind of Bronze Age game of war.

I may be up for correction here, but my impression of the Old Testament proscriptions against Baal and the gang, were because of practices of infanticide and human sacrifice apparently being associated with them.

So how people were treated was an issue.

 

[WolfgangvonUSA]

That sort of implies that we exist in a polytheisic universe, with different gods battling it out for the possesion of humanity like some kind of Bronze Age game of war.

I may be up for correction here, but my impression of the Old Testament proscriptions against Baal and the gang, were because of practices of infanticide and human sacrifice apparently being associated with them.

So how people were treated was an issue.

Indeed!
Among the Ten Commandments is the order not to have any god but Yahweh for He is a jealous God. For that reason alone Baal and his gang are excluded from human worship.

 

[dauer]

The commandment not to worship other gods may actually come from when the Northern Kingdom was integrating with Judah. In the northern kingdom every place had a different shrine to its own particular Yahweh, which is the same as the worshippers of Baal did. But when they mixed there was a need to integrate them into worship centralized on Jerusalem. So instead of many Yahwehs, there was now only the one of Jerusalem, and none before Him. It's not that each of these different ones was an independent entity. It's like in very catholic areas where there are many churches to Our Lady of suchandsuch.

This, of course, is just one of the going theories.

Dauer