If Paul's books are wrong than so are

[catholic evangelist]

Napolean told the bischop of france "I'll bring your church to it's knees" to which the bischop replied, "how can you? We can't even do it from within."

 

[Just_me_Mike]

I have trust. I have the Jews. The Jews are my miracle. They exist, they have carried Torah faithfully as God's people. Though many of them have fallen, there has always been that holy remnant which stayed true to the will of God. For this reason, I believe in the Torah that they profess. I know there is a God and I believe that the Jews have sufficient enough proof in their mere existence to warrant appropriate belief in the Torah.

Your use of trust is no different than faith. You say you have the Jews, but what you have even with Judaism is a mixture of establishments. As you are a Noahide, you have split again from other forms of Judaism.
Point being you act on faith that what you are doing is right.
Trust is Faith, which is differen than knowing because of empiracle evidence.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Someone who knows nothing about Judaism said:


Someone who gets it said:


...Because, after all, the Law was a gift from G-d, to give us a good and happy life. Not a burden or curse as some see it, but a path of life.

'... it's ways are ways of pleasantness and all it's paths are peace...'

That it would have been from the beginning, but instead we have centuries of failure of the part of the Jews to follow the law in a way that wold please God, and to my understanding they still can't do it. No one can.

 

[Wookiemonster]

Your use of trust is no different than faith. You say you have the Jews, but what you have even with Judaism is a mixture of establishments. As you are a Noahide, you have split again from other forms of Judaism.
Point being you act on faith that what you are doing is right.
Trust is Faith, which is differen than knowing because of empiracle evidence.

Not to speak out of turn or for him, but I'm pretty sure Knight is a Hassidic Jew not a Noahide. There is a difference.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Not to speak out of turn or for him, but I'm pretty sure Knight is a Hassidic Jew not a Noahide. There is a difference.

You are wrong, but it doesn't make my point any different.

 

[Wookiemonster]

You are wrong, but it doesn't make my point any different.

The Noahide movenment is NOT a split from Judaism. It is a way for Gentiles (Non Jews) to be righteious before G-d without converting to Judaism.

There for your point that he split again with Judaism is in FACT wrong.

And you are right...I just checked his intro...He is a Noahide, I thought he was Hassidic because of the information listed next to his avatar.

 

[blackout]

Personally, I dislike him because he usurped Christ's authority to promote his own agenda.

Storm has such a knack for stating the heart of a thing succinctly.

And I go "duh". Why didn't I say it that way before.

I completely agree.

 

[Storm]

Storm has such a knack for stating the heart of a thing succinctly.

Thank you! I try.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Storm has such a knack for stating the heart of a thing succinctly.

And I go "duh". Why didn't I say it that way before.

I completely agree.

What was his agenda?

 

[Just_me_Mike]

The Noahide movenment is NOT a split from Judaism. It is a way for Gentiles (Non Jews) to be righteious before G-d without converting to Judaism.

There for your point that he split again with Judaism is in FACT wrong.

And you are right...I just checked his intro...He is a Noahide, I thought he was Hassidic because of the information listed next to his avatar.

So are you going on record to say that what ALL Jews believe and practice are the same as Noahide, except the Noahide is a non-Jew (before convert)

If I am not mistaken there are many divisions amond jews about what laws to follow and how many. It is not as cut and dry as you say. It is very much like the different denominations to Christianity.

My point being to follow one of these variations is to do it by FAITH. Because only ONE of them are right.

 

[blackout]

What was his agenda?

Strip out Paul, and read/see it for yourself.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Strip out Paul, and read/see it for yourself.

So you don't have an answer?

 

[TheKnight]

Your use of trust is no different than faith. You say you have the Jews, but what you have even with Judaism is a mixture of establishments. As you are a Noahide, you have split again from other forms of Judaism.
Point being you act on faith that what you are doing is right.
Trust is Faith, which is differen than knowing because of empiracle evidence.

Faith is, in essence, believing without seeing.

Trust is believing in something because it's worked before. For instance, you go rock climbing and you use your equipment which stops you from falling to your death. When you go rock climbing again and use your equipment, you do so out of trust because it's worked before.

Similarly, Judaism does not teach that we should believe without seeing, but that we should "taste and see that the Lord is good". That we develop a trust. That trust only comes from practicing the law.

Not to speak out of turn or for him, but I'm pretty sure Knight is a Hassidic Jew not a Noahide. There is a difference.

Nope. I'm a Noahide. I'll probably end up changing the info next to my avatar because it is quite misleading.

If I am not mistaken there are many divisions amond jews about what laws to follow and how many. It is not as cut and dry as you say. It is very much like the different denominations to Christianity.

I'm not sure which divisions you mean. You have those who identify as Orthodox (Orthodox Jews believe that the law that was given to Moses is still applicable today). Then you have Conservative and Reform, groups which believe that God gave the law to Moses, but that it isn't applicable today. And then you have Reconstructionist Jews who believe that the law is good, but that there is no need for a God.

Those aren't divisions because each group agrees that the law is good and 3 out of 4 of them agree that the law came from God. The only "division" is the level of observance required. Either way, it's not nearly as divided as Christianity which has thousands of different groups with almost entirly different theologies.

Noahides are not a split, but are a part of Orthodox Judaism.

 

[blackout]

So you don't have an answer?

You'll need to do the exercise for yourSelf honey.

The Christ is your author(I)ty. Not me.

 

[Storm]

OK, first off, I make no claims to Biblical scholarship. I haven't even read the whole thing. I intend to study it in the future, and perhaps that will change my opinions. Perhaps not. But, anyway, my thoughts on Paul.

As I said in the beginning of the thread, he exploited Christ's authority to promote his own agenda.

The most blatant and ludicrous example is his assertion in Corinthians that men should have short hair, women long, and that nature revealed this to be so. Well, no. Nature doesn't. Males frequently have glorious plumage while females are relatively plain, especially among birds. Paul's laughable claim was really just promotion of Roman fashion. That's the most blatant example, now for the most egregious.

Jesus was, by the standards of his day, a radical feminist. He treated us as equals, and even had female disciples, Mary Magdalene being the most famous. Paul, otoh, said we should sit down and shut up. We should never have opinions not approved by our husbands, much less be so uppity as to (gasp!) attempt to educate a male.

 

[blackout]

OK, first off, I make no claims to Biblical scholarship. I haven't even read the whole thing. I intend to study it in the future, and perhaps that will change my opinions. Perhaps not. But, anyway, my thoughts on Paul.

As I said in the beginning of the thread, he exploited Christ's authority to promote his own agenda.

The most blatant and ludicrous example is his assertion in Corinthians that men should have short hair, women long, and that nature revealed this to be so. Well, no. Nature doesn't. Males frequently have glorious plumage while females are relatively plain, especially among birds. Paul's laughable claim was really just promotion of Roman fashion. That's the most blatant example, now for the most egregious.

Jesus was, by the standards of his day, a radical feminist. He treated us as equals, and even had female disciples, Mary Magdalene being the most famous. Paul, otoh, said we should sit down and shut up. We should never have opinions not approved by our husbands, much less be so uppity as to (gasp!) attempt to educate a male.

Jesus spoke in the Word/style of Mystic.

Paul spoke in the words/style of an Authoritarian fool.

Just compare the two.
It's plain a day.

 

[Wookiemonster]

So are you going on record to say that what ALL Jews believe and practice are the same as Noahide, except the Noahide is a non-Jew (before convert)

If I am not mistaken there are many divisions amond jews about what laws to follow and how many. It is not as cut and dry as you say. It is very much like the different denominations to Christianity.

My point being to follow one of these variations is to do it by FAITH. Because only ONE of them are right.

My point is that Noahides are not a split from Judaism beucase they were never a part of Judaism, ie required to keep the 613 commandments. In the sense that they were once part of Judaism and then split becuase of a difference in interpitation.

Also I never said that it was cut and dry...I said it was not a split, becusae they were never part of the Jewish people.

 

[Riverwolf]

Even though this may not sem like it to you, this is a passive approach to understanding God. My God demands actually abandoning any notion we have of Him, then begging for understanding of Him. At that point if He chooses to enlighten us, we then begin out journey.
Unlike your approach we can begin anytime. That is what I mean by you have a passive approach, an approach that anyone can start at any time.

Nope.

The path cannot be started without a Teacher to guide you. All the Upanishads stress this. (Your Teacher is Christ himself, I presume.)

I have read the Upanishads and Bhagavad-Gita, but I cannot stay on my choses Path (Knowledge) regularly because of my various addictions and routines, which are very hard to break.

The Gita teaches four Paths, and Judaism follows one of these Paths: Selfless Service. Seems like you follow the same Path, but with different Scripture to guide you.

 

[Just_me_Mike]

Nope.

The path cannot be started without a Teacher to guide you. All the Upanishads stress this. (Your Teacher is Christ himself, I presume.)

I have read the Upanishads and Bhagavad-Gita, but I cannot stay on my choses Path (Knowledge) regularly because of my various addictions and routines, which are very hard to break.

The Gita teaches four Paths, and Judaism follows one of these Paths: Selfless Service. Seems like you follow the same Path, but with different Scripture to guide you.

I don't think you understand what I am saying, which is probably because I am not explaining it well enough.
I'll try again. To truly find God, God has to find you first. All other paths are purely imanginative attempts.

Why do I say this? Because, God's perfectness requires Him to be responsible for finding Him. And until He intervenes in our lives we will never find him, no matter the path we are on.

 

[Riverwolf]

My point being to follow one of these variations is to do it by FAITH. Because only ONE of them are right.

"...there is a traditional Indian tale about a man who spent much of his life documenting the various deities worshiped along the countryside. From village to village he journeyed, house to house, inquiring about the gods who were worshiped at those places, by those particular people.
"Eventually, as the story goes, the weary traveler chronicled 330 million deities, writing the names of each in his miltivolume tome, though, at the time, he had not counted them. When he finally returned home, exhausted and in his 93rd year, he was asked to tally how many gods were in his book. He spent 7 years, it is said, counting the gods, and at the end of the book he wrote the grand total: One."
-Steven J. Rosen, Essential Hinduism