If Paul's books are wrong than so are

[TheKnight]

Chill man, I was not meaning you were bitter, and even then bitter was not the best word. What I meant more clearly, was that I am willing to study Judaism, but when approaching people from that faith there is very little tolerance for the NT.
Sorry to mislead you with my comment, hope you forgive me.

I don't know how many Noahides you have met in the course of your lifetime(And may God allow you to meet many more) so I cannot blame you.

However, realize that almost all Noahides that are currently observant (not including those who are Islamic) come from a Christian background. Most of us were devout Christians for a long time. I was on the track to ministry in my church and was going to be amongst the youngest ordained ministers that our church had ever had. Most of us Noahides know the NT. We know what it teaches. Many of us lived, believed, and promoted Christianity for years with sincere devotion.

That being said, there is a pain that comes from admitting that what you thought was true is wrong. And it makes us fairly angry when we are told we are close-minded as if we don't know what we're talking about. I have little tolerance for the NT because I know the NT. I lived it for 15 years and it was the result of my intense study that led to my conclusion that it is false. Considering my position, I have no other choice but to be firmly against that which I know to be false. You ask how a person can accept the Tanakh and reject Paul. If this is a sincere question then I would ask that you go read the works of Paul and then (in an objective manner) go read the scriptures of the Tanakh.

I could post for you, here and now, verses that are irreconcilably contradictory. I realize that there are many different types of Christians and that you may be a part of a group that interprets differently. However, I (and most Noahides for that matter) realize (based on a simple reading of the two separate works) that the NT and OT are incompatible. The fact that the OT came first and that the NT bases itself off of the OT means that if they are incompatible, then the NT must yield.

Knight are you reading the above statement? This is what I mean when I say I can study Judaism, but when it comes from the other direction this is often the attitude.

It's hard to be tolerant of something that you believe is false. I'm sorry that you see us as being close-minded. But as I said above, think about our position and why we're in it.

I have no need to study Christianity, I know what it offers, I've heard the arguments, and I've been there and done that.

Besides, you didn't even answer my question about how the false nature of Paul's works infer that the Tanakh is false? Please answer that for me, because as of yet I have been unable to comprehend the logic behind your position.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Oh I think killing Jesus showed that ey?

Now that's funny.

 

[Storm]

You misread my post then.
I was saying that yes after years of study SHOULD make a person end up either believing the whole bible or not.
Different than someone (not impying you) not doing the study for themselves.

Still not true, though. It only takes a cursory study to learn that the books of the Bible were written as separate texts, and only joined by committee. One is therefore justified in evaluating them separately.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

God established judges and Rabbis, that when there is a matter of dispute, we should bring it to them.

It is contained within the word of God that we are not supposed to be alone in learning... but we are supposed to be taught.

I'm not just making this stuff up.

Sure but where did foliowng rabbis lead the people many times in the OT? Every single time God had to spank them and start over.
That is a concern for me. And lets me know to trust God. Remember he said in the OT that he would put his laws in our heart so that know one would have to teach us? Remember that?

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Whooh!!!, Talk about being unfriendly!:run:

I hoped it was taken with a little tounge and cheek.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Remember he said in the OT that he would put his laws in our heart so that know one would have to teach us? Remember that?

Hasn't happened yet.

 

[fantome profane]

I hoped it was taken with a little tounge and cheek.

In that case I agree with Poisonshady313. It’s not funny.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

However, realize that almost all Noahides that are currently observant (not including those who are Islamic) come from a Christian background. Most of us were devout Christians for a long time. I was on the track to ministry in my church and was going to be amongst the youngest ordained ministers that our church had ever had. Most of us Noahides know the NT. We know what it teaches. Many of us lived, believed, and promoted Christianity for years with sincere devotion.

You see this is not impressive, and actually support my point of view. You belonged to a church and as a result started to see the limiting view that a church has on individual spritual growth. Reason being there are thousands of Christiant denominations, and God can not be divided like that.
So it is not a stretch for me to think what you thought you knew about the NT was wrong from the get go, because it was biased from the doctrinal practices of your particular church. Understand?

 

[Poisonshady313]

You see this is not impressive, and actually support my point of view. You belonged to a church and as a result started to see the limiting view that a church has on individual spritual growth. Reason being there are thousands of Christiant denominations, and God can not be divided like that.
So it is not a stretch for me to think what you thought you knew about the NT was wrong from the get go, because it was biased from the doctrinal practices of your particular church. Understand?

You figure belonging to a church meant that he couldn't possibly have done his own studying?

 

[Just_me_Mike]

One is therefore justified in evaluating them separately.

Agreed, but that still requires the actual study part. And if you have done that, I still invite you to speak from the actual pieces in question. Is that not fair enough?

If you are comfortable telling me why from a scriptural point of view in the OT why Paul's teaching don't fit, than please do.

 

[TheKnight]

Yes after years of study, that is where one should end up, but not just from blind rhetoric.

When one begins to study with the destination that they "should" reach in mind, then the objective nature of their study is highly suspect. One should study thinking "I hope to find truth." You should not study thinking "at the end of this I should see the whole thing as true or the whole thing as false." When you do that, you consign yourself to find ways to make things fit if they do not do so naturally.

Well I am here to learn, an unwillingness you seem to express on your part by attacking me.
I am open to discuss why Paul is wrong, but I need more than just "he's wrong".
Maybe we can discuss it sometime.

Paul states that the law is "obsolete" (Heb. 8:13)
Paul states that Jesus is the "end of the law"(Romans 10:4)
Paul states that the law is a "curse for those who follow it" (Galatians 3:10)

I could go on, but these three things will suffice. The Tanakh in multiple places states that the law is forever. For simplicity I'll send you to Psalm 119:152. Jesus himself said that he did not come to abolish the law, so why would Paul say that Jesus is the end of the law?

He calls the law a curse when Deuteronomy 30 describes how observance of the law is a blessing and that non-observance is a curse. Paul says "if you are circumcised then Christ shall profit you nothing" (Galatians 5:2). How can he say that when God Himself ordered that people be circumcised.

Please, read what's there and not what you think "should" be there. You'll be much more honest if you study with objectivity.

Sure but where did foliowng rabbis lead the people many times in the OT? Every single time God had to spank them and start over.
That is a concern for me. And lets me know to trust God. Remember he said in the OT that he would put his laws in our heart so that know one would have to teach us? Remember that?

Are you going to blame the sins of people on the leadership of the Rabbis? Because if that's the case then maybe we should open a history book and look at the Christian world to see who exactly has more sin on their hands. The Church that has been the cause of the deaths of millions, or those Jews who disobeyed commandments? You want to talk about sins as a reflection of how the leadership of the Rabbis was? Then let's look at the leadership your pastors offer. I look at the history of the church and that of the Jews, and I must say that if I must choose I'd pick Rabbinic leadership over pastoral leadership any day.

 

[Wookiemonster]

Yes I did accept all of that, and in the end it did not hold up to the foundations the OT laid out for us.

I'm confused. You say these two texts don't hold up the founditation that the Tanakh laid out for us, but you think the "New Testemant" does...Wow...Just not clicking...

What accept non-tolerance is part of Judaism?

Since when has studying something (usually for years) and then comming to the conclusion that it is faulty and false non-tolerance?

Yes after years of study, that is where one should end up, but not just from blind rhetoric.

Oh the irony in this statement.

Oh I think killing Jesus showed that ey?

:foot: Do you need help forcing that foot the rest of the way down.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

In that case I agree with Poisonshady313. It’s not funny.

Poison thought it was funny.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Poison thought it was funny.

Not "ha ha" funny... but "absurd" funny.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

You figure belonging to a church meant that he couldn't possibly have done his own studying?

Very rare but possible. In fact Christian church is so F'd up, you will get kicked out of them if you have to many radical questions about what they are teaching. Go figure?

 

[TheKnight]

You see this is not impressive, and actually support my point of view. You belonged to a church and as a result started to see the limiting view that a church has on individual spritual growth. Reason being there are thousands of Christiant denominations, and God can not be divided like that.
So it is not a stretch for me to think what you thought you knew about the NT was wrong from the get go, because it was biased from the doctrinal practices of your particular church. Understand?

Oh yeah, sure. In essence you're saying I wasn't smart enough to look at what the book actually said. Instead, you think that I relied on my church's interpretations of scripture (which I never agreed with, even as a Christian) and that's why I stopped believing. Because you probably also think my church's interpretations are wrong. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that you want me to look at your church's interpretation and reconsider. I've heard that from many a Christian before too. I don't think you guys realize how often you all use the same arguments. The only common thread, it seems, between your denominations is your anti-Judaism position.

Little do you understand that it has nothing to do with interpretations, but what the books actually say. There's interpretation of verses, and there's the verse itself. I can see that the verses in Paul's works clearly contradict those in the Tanakh.

God forbid I actually read the book and reach the conclusion that it doesn't work.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

.

I can see you have not read the context of all your comments, because they speak as much.

 

[Poisonshady313]

Very rare but possible. In fact Christian church is so F'd up, you will get kicked out of them if you have to many radical questions about what they are teaching. Go figure?

Yeah... because when you study on your own, you learn things like about how Paul's teachings are unholy and irrelevant in light of the Tanach, like Knight did...

And from what I understand, the Church don't take kindly to such things.

Apparently, you don't either.

I bet you're not too fond of being compared to the Church, are you? Seeing as how your tendency to see the Jewish rejection of Christianity as hostility and intolerance is a lot like a Church kicking you out for having too many "radical" questions.

 

[Wookiemonster]

I can see you have not read the context of all your comments, because they speak as much.

What?

 

[Just_me_Mike]

In fact, I'd be willing to bet that you want me to look at your church's interpretation and reconsider.

Remember your line "get to know someone before you make assumptions" You know the one Poison gave you a high five for?

Anyway, I do not believe or support church or any organized religion. As I said God can not be divided.