• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Jesus And The Law

free spirit

Well-Known Member
I think you have been reading too much into this. Just where do you come up with the idea that the Jews who did not believe in Christ were the descendants of Essau.
the twin brothers Jacob and Esau are a metaphor for two tipes of Jews namely the Spiritual Jew and the Fleshly Jew. those two tipes of believers are also found in all religions of the world. You can see the difference in their faith if you are able to distiquish the difference in the faith of, Cain and Abel, Isaac and Ishmael, Jacob and Esau, or the difference of Paul attitude before and after his conversion.


Your reference to Romans 11:26-27 Can be found almost word for word in Isaiah 59:20-21. The Christian Old Testament says "The Redeemer will come to Zion to those in Jacob who repent of their sins declared the Lord". Whereas the Tanakh reads as follows: "He shall come as redeemer to Zion To those in Jacob who turn back from sin---declares the Lord". Considerable different.

All I am saying is that Romans 11:26-27, belong to the OT and has beeing fulfilled by the redeemer who has come, and he is Christ the Lord. In other words it is an adulterations of the facts put there by the enemy of Christ.

I am not Jewish nor a believer in Jesus. However, I find it pretentious of Christians to interpret the Tanakh/Old Testament in a way that supports their beliefs in Jesus. One would think that they really don't believe and have to find supporting evidence to prove their beliefs.[/

I am a creature of the NT and I have found that the NT was adulterated by the enemy of Christ, namely the unbelieving Jews of that time.
 
Last edited:

free spirit

Well-Known Member
May I also suggest to those that attempt to interpret the bible that they obtain a copy of the "New Standard Study Bible"(Christian) and the JPS "The Jewish Study Bible". These two books will give you a better understanding of what you think you have read. It will also allow you to compare the interpretation of the Old Testament by Christians and the interpretation of the Tanakh. Substitute the Catholic Study Bible for the Standard Study Bible if you are Catholic.

Just a thought.

What has convinced you that the "Standard Study Bible" is correct.
 

free spirit

Well-Known Member
ESMITH
Your reference to Romans 11:26-27 Can be found almost word for word in Isaiah 59:20-21. The Christian Old Testament says "The Redeemer will come to Zion to those in Jacob who repent of their sins declared the Lord". Whereas the Tanakh reads as follows: "He shall come as redeemer to Zion To those in Jacob who turn back from sin---declares the Lord". Considerable different.
In Romans 11:25-28, of the "New American Standard Bible" we read, "For I do not want you brethern, to be uninformed of this mystery, lest you be wise in your own estimation, that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fulness of the Gentiles has come in; and thuse all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, "The deliverer will come from Zion, he will remove ungodliness from Jacob," "And this is my covenant with them, when I take away their sins." From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the syandpoint of God's choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers.
If that is true than the scripture that says that "God shows no partiality" is a lie.
Therefore I consider the mystery of the above scriptures a fabrication by a Jew to favour the Jewish cause.
 

esmith

Veteran Member
the twin brothers Jacob and Esau are a metaphor for two tipes of Jews namely the Spiritual Jew and the Fleshly Jew. those two tipes of believers are also found in all religions of the world. You can see the difference in their faith if you are able to distiquish the difference in the faith of, Cain and Abel, Isaac and Ishmael, Jacob and Esau, or the difference of Paul attitude before and after his conversion.
In other words, this is "your" interpretation and has no basis beyond that. Correct?



All I am saying is that Romans 11:26-27, belong to the OT and has beeing fulfilled by the redeemer who has come, and he is Christ the Lord. In other words it is an adulterations of the facts put there by the enemy of Christ.
Why do you say that Romans 11:26-27 should be in the OT and not in the NT. Isn't Romans a letter Paul wrote to the church in Rome explaining, at great lengths, his understanding of the Christian gospel, emphasizing in particular his view that salvation comes to all people- Jew and Christian equally- through faith in Jesus, apart from doing the works of the Law.


I am a creature of the NT and I have found that the NT was adulterated by the enemy of Christ, namely the unbelieling Jews of that time.
So you are saying that the proto-orthodox Christians were of the Jewish faith in Christian clothes? Well guess everyone has an opinion.
 

esmith

Veteran Member
In Romans 11:25-28,
If that is true than the scripture that says that "God shows no partiality" is a lie.
Therefore I consider the mystery of the above scriptures a fabrication by a Jew to favour the Jewish cause.
Are you saying that God only favors those that believe in the Christian faith, that the rest of humanity is "doomed". It appears that you do not particularly like those of the Jewish faith and probably others that are not of your faith. Doesn't Jesus teach that you are to love your neighbor as yourself?
 

esmith

Veteran Member
What has convinced you that the "Standard Study Bible" is correct.

I don't say it is "correct" it was pointed out to me that the Revised Standard Version, which comes in a variety of editions such as the New Oxford Annotated Bible, is the one used in most classrooms and the translation adheres closely to the Hebrew original, word for word. The New JPS version of the Tanakh is a more idiomatic rendering and frequently departs from the Hebrew text literally. Since we only have copies of copies of copies of copies ad nauseum of the NT who knows what was originally written down.
 

free spirit

Well-Known Member
In other words, this is "your" interpretation and has no basis beyond that. Correct?
All the other interpretetions are from human Correct? By his grace I received the knowlege to understant the scriptures.
There is allways two brothers one is accepted by God but the other is not, have you asked yourself why?




Why do you say that Romans 11:26-27 should be in the OT and not in the NT. Isn't Romans a letter Paul wrote to the church in Rome explaining, at great lengths, his understanding of the Christian gospel, emphasizing in particular his view that salvation comes to all people- Jew and Christian equally- through faith in Jesus, apart from doing the works of the Law.
Paul wrote a letter to the Romans but Chapter 11:26-27 should not be there because it speakes of a future event and we know or should know, that the event has taken place with the resurrection of the Lord.

Yes there is no distintion between Jews and Gentiles if they both have faith in Jesus,
But here we are speaking about unbelieving Jews.



So you are saying that the proto-orthodox Christians were of the Jewish faith in Christian clothes? Well guess everyone has an opinion.
You read the scriptures, throughout the NT you will find warnings about the false teachers as we read in 2Peter 2:1-2, But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. and many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned.
 

free spirit

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by free spirit
In Romans 11:25-28,
If that is true than the scripture that says that "God shows no partiality" is a lie.
Therefore I consider the mystery of the above scriptures a fabrication by a Jew to favour the Jewish cause.

esmith
Are you saying that God only favors those that believe in the Christian faith, that the rest of humanity is "doomed". It appears that you do not particularly like those of the Jewish faith and probably others that are not of your faith. Doesn't Jesus teach that you are to love your neighbor as yourself?


As I sayd "God shows no partiality" and it is obvious that Romans 11:25-28, shows that God favour the Jews regardeless if they believe or not; so I ask you which is correct?
The reast of humanity will be judged according to their works. God is just and mercyfull.
To speak the truth is not a sin even if they are cut to the quick.
 
Last edited:

free spirit

Well-Known Member
I don't say it is "correct" it was pointed out to me that the Revised Standard Version, which comes in a variety of editions such as the New Oxford Annotated Bible, is the one used in most classrooms and the translation adheres closely to the Hebrew original, word for word. The New JPS version of the Tanakh is a more idiomatic rendering and frequently departs from the Hebrew text literally. Since we only have copies of copies of copies of copies ad nauseum of the NT who knows what was originally written down.

I know and I have the witness in my heart that Jesus has been resurrected and the day of Pentecost His Holy Spirit was given to whomever vould receive Him, to teach them what is true. the following is an article that I included in my book "The Way God Told It"

(V) In Matthew 27:52-53 we trustfully read: “And the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after His resurrection they entered the holy city and appeared to many.”
I believe that the above two verses report something which never took place and therefore those lies are used to divert our attention from the Lord, because it is impossible for it to have occurred before or after the resurrection of the Lord, for we read in 2Timothy 2:18 about: “Men who have gone astray from the truth saying that the resurrection has already taken place, and thus they upset the faith of some.”
In Acts 2:29, Peter says, “Brethren, I may confidently say to you regarding the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.” So Peter effectively says some time after the day of Pentecost that the body of David is still in his tomb (Confirmed by Acts 2:30-36) It is reasonable for us to assume that if the body of King David did not qualify for that alleged resurrection we can be certain that it never took place.
In addition to that, the numbers of anomalies that those two verses contain are also an indication that our Lord never dictated them because:
1) The resurrection of the body will take place on the last day (Read John 11:24, 1Corinthians 15:52, and all of chapter 20 of Revelation.)
2) It should be obvious to anyone that even if those verses in Matthew were true, they are written in the wrong place and therefore are not in harmony with what was actually taking place. Jesus had just died and the alleged resurrection supposedly took place after His resurrection, so why write it there?
3) If the alleged resurrection was after the Lord’s resurrection, why is it conveniently connected with the strange natural things that were happening in relation with the Son of God’s death? (Earthquake etc.)
4) Also if those verses were true, the resurrection of our Lord with His heavenly body would become one of many and no longer one of a kind.
5) Any Christian writer would have known that Jerusalem was no longer the “Holy City” because the presence of God was no longer in the temple (read Matthew 23:38) and the city’s destruction had been foretold (read Mark 13:2).
6) We should also consider that the above verses do nothing to advance the knowledge of God but they are used extensively by the untaught to promote their own useless fantasies. Those who do not understand the Word preach best through their fleshly imagination by abandoning themselves to colourfully speculate what Jesus supposedly did while He was dead in the tomb.
2 Corinthians 10:4-5 says it all: “For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the Knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ.”
In other words, speculations are to be treated with the contempt they deserve, but the truth is supported by a variety of thought (or Scriptures) which are relevant to our every day lives and behaviour pleasing to Christ.
 

esmith

Veteran Member
I don't believe what you do, so I will terminate this offshoot of the original OP

Good luck
 

Caladan

Agnostic Pantheist
IMHO, that was a prophecy of Jesus' in the form of a parable which has been fulfilled by Christians in general. They do believe that Jesus rose from the dead; nevertheless, they just can't be persuaded to listen to Moses and the Prophets, which means the Law, in order to prevent themselves from falling in Hell. They prefer the Pauline policy of salvation by faith only.
Ben
If I understood your post and this passage correctly. I will comment that the Law was never meant for non Jews. Jesus preached in the frame of Jewish environment, and debated the Law with other Jews. in the synagogues, the Temple, and probably on the roads. in effect Jesus was doing what Jews have been doing for the past 2000 years. studying the Law and debating it.
The gentiles have inflicted two curses upon themselves. taking a Jewish man as their God, and trying to release themselves from the bound of a Law which was not part of their culture.
The vast majority of Jews, mainstream Jews, and mainstream Judaism have completely rejected Jesus. you might say it is wise. I would say it is trivial. no mainstream Jewish society will stand for a fellow Jewish man idolizing himself above the other men of his society. Jews have seen it and experienced it too often in the nations around them, including those nations which have oppressed them. the Pharaohs, the Roman Emperors, and other Mediterranean leaders.
As regards to the Law. in the last couple of centuries and perhaps more, Jews have been liberating themselves from the Law. mainstream Jewish culture lives by political interests and healthy common logic. while still firmly holding to a Jewish identity and heritage, and manifesting this identity in a way which is relevant to the time.
 

free spirit

Well-Known Member
If I understood your post and this passage correctly. I will comment that the Law was never meant for non Jews. Jesus preached in the frame of Jewish environment, and debated the Law with other Jews. in the synagogues, the Temple, and probably on the roads. in effect Jesus was doing what Jews have been doing for the past 2000 years. studying the Law and debating it.
Yes officially the Jews were given the law, but unofficially also the gentiles were given the law, because we read in Romans 2:11-15, "For there is no partiality with God. for all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law; and all who have sinned under the law will be judge by the law; for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law will be justified. For when gentiles who do not have the law do instinctively the things of the law, there not having the law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness, and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them."

The gentiles have inflicted two curses upon themselves. taking a Jewish man as their God, and trying to release themselves from the bound of a Law which was not part of their culture.
It is a blessing to take the Lord and Saviour as our God because He is all that He said and more. In regard of the law the gentiles were tricked to take the law upon themselves by the Jews who were false brethren. For we read in Galatians 2:3-5, "But not even Titus who was with me, though he was a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. But it was because of the false brethren who had sneaked in to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, in order to bring us into bondage. But we did not yeld in subjection to them for even an hour, so that the truth of the gospel might remain with you.
This thread shows that nothing has changed, because the Jews are still at it.


The vast majority of Jews, mainstream Jews, and mainstream Judaism have completely rejected Jesus. you might say it is wise. I would say it is trivial. no mainstream Jewish society will stand for a fellow Jewish man idolizing himself above the other men of his society. Jews have seen it and experienced it too often in the nations around them, including those nations which have oppressed them. the Pharaohs, the Roman Emperors, and other Mediterranean leaders.
most of the above is Half truths and fantasies. The fact is lets say that 50% of them rejected the greatest Jew that ever walked this earth, it was and still is a capital error.

As regards to the Law. in the last couple of centuries and perhaps more, Jews have been liberating themselves from the Law. mainstream Jewish culture lives by political interests and healthy common logic. while still firmly holding to a Jewish identity and heritage, and manifesting this identity in a way which is relevant to the time.
Yes you are spot on this time, they accuse Paul of replasement theology while they have done that and more in recent time.
 
Last edited:

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
If I understood your post and this passage correctly. I will comment that the Law was never meant for non Jews. Jesus preached in the frame of Jewish environment, and debated the Law with other Jews. in the synagogues, the Temple, and probably on the roads. in effect Jesus was doing what Jews have been doing for the past 2000 years. studying the Law and debating it.

I agree with you. My struggle is not to infuse Christians with our laws. They have their Noahide laws. My aim is to recover our fellow Jew (Jesus) whom Christianity has robbed us of to make of him a Greek demigod, which has served only to distort the image of Judaism in the sight of the nations.

The gentiles have inflicted two curses upon themselves. taking a Jewish man as their God, and trying to release themselves from the bound of a Law which was not part of their culture.

That's what I call Replacement Theology.

The vast majority of Jews, mainstream Jews, and mainstream Judaism have completely rejected Jesus. you might say it is wise. I would say it is trivial.

And I am with you on this one also. Absolutely trivial to reject Jesus who never had anything to do with Christianity.

no mainstream Jewish society will stand for a fellow Jewish man idolizing himself above the other men of his society. Jews have seen it and experienced it too often in the nations around them, including those nations which have oppressed them. the Pharaohs, the Roman Emperors, and other Mediterranean leaders.

The fact though is that Jesus did not idolize himself. Paul was the one who fabricated that idea about Jesus about 30 years after Jesus had been gone. And this hapened in the city of Antioch where and when Christians were called Christians for the very first time. (Acts 11:26)

As regards to the Law. in the last couple of centuries and perhaps more, Jews have been liberating themselves from the Law. mainstream Jewish culture lives by political interests and healthy common logic. while still firmly holding to a Jewish identity and heritage, and manifesting this identity in a way which is relevant to the time.

I would not say "liberating themselves from he Law" but distancing the Law from themselves by building more and more fences around the Law. So much so that the Law has been threatened with becoming rather irrelevant. I mean, traditional Judaism. But you are right with regards to progressive Judaism whose main course has been political but rich in common logic, as long as some kind of Jewish identity is relevant to the time.
 
Last edited:

Ben Masada

Well-Known Member
Repentance is not to just say sorry, and than sometime later do it again, that is what the hypocrites do. To repent it to fix permanently what made you break the law in the first place. I know for sure that without the spirit of the Lord in you, you cannot repent in the proper manner.

There is nothing permanent about man. Human beings cannot repent about something with the assurance that they will NEVER transgress again. Read about the struggle of your own champion in Romans 7:23.

It is recorded in the NT the Jews were persecuting the church of God, Paul was a persecuter of the church before he was converted.

This is too vague for a quote to confirm a reference. Besides, Paul never persecuted a single Christian in the whole of his life. He used to persecute the members of the sect of the Nazarenes who gathered in synagogues and not in churches. Read Acts 9:2.

Also I found passages of scriptures that do not belong in the NT and they favour the Jewish stance,
Christians attach a great deal of importance to the alleged future events in Romans 11:26-27, which read: “And thus all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, the Deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob. And this is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.”

"The Deliverer will com from Zion" is an adulteration of the text in the originals in Hebrew which renders, "And te Redeemer shall come TO Zion and not from Zion." This is a reference to the Almighty God Himself Who is the Redeemer of Israel. Read Isaiah 59:20. The KJV is in accord with the originals. The adulteration was made either by Paul or by a Christian editor. Or better yet, by the Church, which in the 4th Century would encourage pious forgeries into the text.

They mistakenly believe that the above scripture of forgiving sins has yet to take place. They do not realise that the above scripture belongs to the Old Testament and has been fulfilled with the crucifixion of our Lord, for His sacrifice to forgive the sins of the world was once, and for all men.

They are mistaken and so are you to claim that the crucifixion of Jesus was fulfilment of the above scripture with regards to forgivenss of sins. You speak as if Jesus was the only Jew to be crucified by the Romans. Read Josephus. Only in the First Century the Romans crucified thousands of Jews. How about the blood of the others, it didn't count?

Or do they think that Jesus has to come back and sacrifice Himself once more especially for the sins of the “Jews?”

Two points here, you must commit to your memory: First, an individual cannot be sacrificed for another; but every one shall die for his own iniquity. (Jer. 31:30) And second, Jesus will never return, because it is against two laws: Natural laws and the Scriptures. (Job 10:21) Jesus has been dead for about 2000 years.

Or do they think that the blessing of Calvary, which flows to all men, was withheld from reaching the “Jews?”

That Calvary was the place for thousands of Jews who were crucified just like Jesus was. Shed the same Jewish blood and suffered the same agonizing pains.

They also fail to understand that the removal of ungodliness as is written above is for Jacob (the believer and appreciatorof the blessing) and not for Esau (the believer in God but depreciatorof the blessing).

You have failed to understand that Isaiah is talking about Israel who justified the "many" of Judah by bearing the sins of "many." (Isa. 53:11,12. Remember that the Prophet says "many" and not "all". You say Jesus sacrificed himself for "all." That's an evidence that the sacrifice the prophet refers to is the one of Israel by he "many" of Judah.

Also Romans chapter 11 speaks about the Israel of God as the olive tree. As you may know those who did not believe were cut off from the olive tree and we who believe were grafted into the olive tree.

Now, you are promoting the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology. Jews being cut off so that Christians be grafted in. There is no such a thing. Christians must convert in order to be grafted into the tree of Judaism, which was the Faith of Jesus.

Sadly there are some Christians who mistakenly believe that the branches that were cut off from the olive tree have somehow become the tree again. But it is impossible for this to take place without first believing in Christ, because only with that acknowledgement will Jesus be able to graft them back again into the rich olive tree. The olive tree “as if you do not know” is Christ himself. For it is written: John 15:5 “I am the vine, you are the branches; he who abides in Me, and I in him, he bears much fruit; for apart from Me you can do nothing.”

You continue with the promotion of the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology, unaware that some Scholars consider it a kind of Chritian Antisemitism.

Galatians 3:16 makes it clearer still, for we read: “Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, and to seeds, as referring to many, but rather to one. And to your seed that is Christ.”

That's another adulteration and Pauline strategy to confuse his listeners. We all know that "seeds" in the plural means grains and not human generation. "Seed" in the singular yes, means the progeny of any person. I mean the descendants of a certain person, as we have in the originals in Hebrew; the descendants of Abraham. And also in the NAB translation of the Bible.(Gen. 12:7)

It is not a sin to speak the truth.

For the judges; not for you. You are not supposed to judge.

Also there is not a true Christian in the world that would claim that God's law has been abolished: but they would claim that the law has been abolished because we have been given a way to fulfil it. In other words you cannot be a true Christian and a trangressor of the law.

It is written in your own NT by the first Christian that the Law was abolished on the cross. Unless you don't consider Paul a true Christian. Read Ephesians 2:15.
 
Last edited:

smokydot

Well-Known Member
Paul never persecuted a single Christian in the whole of his life. He used to persecute the members of the sect of the Nazarenes who gathered in synagogues and not in churches. Read Acts 9:2.
A distinction without a difference. . .and misleading.

"The Way" referred to what were later called Christians. Paul was a member of the Way (Ac 24:14), the Lord's disciples were members of the Way (Ac 9:1-2),
the people of the Way were Paul's people (Ac 24:17).
"The Way" was the way to be saved (Ac 16:17), the way of truth (2 Pe 2:2), the way of the Lord (Ac 18:25), the way of God (Ac 18:26), and those of the Way were eventually called Christian, beginning at Antioch (Ac 11:26).
"The Deliverer will com from Zion" is an adulteration of the text in the originals in Hebrew which renders, "And te Redeemer shall come TO Zion and not from Zion." This is a reference to the Almighty God Himself Who is the Redeemer of Israel. Read Isaiah 59:20. The KJV is in accord with the originals. The adulteration was made either by Paul or by a Christian editor. Or better yet, by the Church, which in the 4th Century would encourage pious forgeries into the text.
They are mistaken and so are you to claim that the crucifixion of Jesus was fulfilment of the above scripture with regards to forgivenss of sins. You speak as if Jesus was the only Jew to be crucified by the Romans. Read Josephus. Only in the First Century the Romans crucified thousands of Jews. How about the blood of the others, it didn't count?
That is so lame. . .

Were they of the line of David?
Did they come to pour out their blood, and die as a ransom for the sins of many (Mt 20:28, 26:28; Jn 10:11)?
No, their blood did not count.
Two points here, you must commit to your memory: First, for an individual cannot be sacrificed for another; but every one shall die for his own iniquity. (Jer. 31:30)
Well, all those bulls and goats, lambs, pigeons and doves up at the Temple were sacrificed and died for the iniquity of the one who offered
them. Substitutionary atonement began with the God of the Jews. . .as a prefigure of the substitutionary atonement of Jesus the Christ.
And second, Jesus will never return, because it is against two laws: Natural laws and the Scriptures. (Job 10:21) Jesus has been dead for about 2000 years.
The place of no return in Job 10:21 is the grave (Job 7:9).
Jesus has already returned from the grave, on the third day after he was entombed. His enemies were unable to produce his body.
And there is no law of God or man that keeps him from returning from heaven, just as he came from heaven the first time (Jn3:13, 6:38, 42, 62).
That Calvary was the place for thousands of Jews who were crucified just like Jesus was. Shed the same Jewish blood and suffered the same agonizing pains.
You have failed to understand that Isaiah is talking about Israel who justified the "many" of Judah by bearing the sins of "many." (Isa. 53:11,12. Remember that the Prophet says "many" and not "all". You say Jesus sacrificed himself for "all."
Actually, Jesus said he came to die as a ransom for many. . .that would be only those who believe in him (Jn 3:18, 36).
That's an evidence that the sacrifice the prophet refers to is the one of Israel by he "many" of Judah.
Now, you are promoting the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology.
That is likewise the FULFILLMENT Theology of the NT letter the Hebrews.
Jews being cut off so that Christians be grafted in. There is no such a thing. Christians must convert in order to be grafted into the tree of Judaism, which was the Faith of Jesus.
You continue with the promotion of the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology, unaware that some Scholars consider it a kind of Chritian Antisemitism.
FULFILLMENT Theology is as much antisemitic as Judaism is antichristian.
Physician, heal thyself.
That's another adulteration and Pauline strategy to confuse his listeners. We all know that "seeds" in the plural means grains and not human generation. "Seed" in the singular yes, means the progeny of any person. I mean the descendants of a certain person, as we have in the originals in Hebrew; the descendants of Abraham. And also in the NAB translation of the Bible.(Gen. 12:7)
It is an adulteration in Judaism. However, in Christianity it is revelation.
 
Last edited:

free spirit

Well-Known Member
There is nothing permanent about man. Human beings cannot repent about something with the assurance that they will NEVER transgress again. Read about the struggle of your own champion in Romans 7:23.

Yes in Romans chapter 7 Paul is describing how he was as a Jew, in other words how he was as a religious person but devoid of the Holy Spirit.



This is too vague for a quote to confirm a reference. Besides, Paul never persecuted a single Christian in the whole of his life. He used to persecute the members of the sect of the Nazarenes who gathered in synagogues and not in churches. Read Acts 9:2.
HAA, HAA. how convenient.



"The Deliverer will com from Zion" is an adulteration of the text in the originals in Hebrew which renders, "And te Redeemer shall come TO Zion and not from Zion." This is a reference to the Almighty God Himself Who is the Redeemer of Israel. Read Isaiah 59:20. The KJV is in accord with the originals. The adulteration was made either by Paul or by a Christian editor. Or better yet, by the Church, which in the 4th Century would encourage pious forgeries into the text.

The true Israel were the Jews that believed and will believe togeter with the believing gentiles.



They are mistaken and so are you to claim that the crucifixion of Jesus was fulfilment of the above scripture with regards to forgivenss of sins. You speak as if Jesus was the only Jew to be crucified by the Romans. Read Josephus. Only in the First Century the Romans crucified thousands of Jews. How about the blood of the others, it didn't count?

Jesus was the only one to be crucified with the willing consent of the high priest, the others were all crimonals.



Two points here, you must commit to your memory: First, an individual cannot be sacrificed for another; but every one shall die for his own iniquity. (Jer. 31:30) And second, Jesus will never return, because it is against two laws: Natural laws and the Scriptures. (Job 10:21) Jesus has been dead for about 2000 years.

He come to fulfill the law for us, therefore He died for us, so we can be reconcile to God.



That Calvary was the place for thousands of Jews who were crucified just like Jesus was. Shed the same Jewish blood and suffered the same agonizing pains.

But one, they were all criminals.



You have failed to understand that Isaiah is talking about Israel who justified the "many" of Judah by bearing the sins of "many." (Isa. 53:11,12. Remember that the Prophet says "many" and not "all". You say Jesus sacrificed himself for "all." That's an evidence that the sacrifice the prophet refers to is the one of Israel by he "many" of Judah.
Those who reject him are many, therefore those have separate themselves from the all.



Now, you are promoting the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology. Jews being cut off so that Christians be grafted in. There is no such a thing. Christians must convert in order to be grafted into the tree of Judaism, which was the Faith of Jesus.

Judaism is a dead branch.



You continue with the promotion of the Pauline policy of Replacement Theology, unaware that some Scholars consider it a kind of Chritian Antisemitism.

If Jesus and Paul are Semitic, how can it be considered antisemitic.



That's another adulteration and Pauline strategy to confuse his listeners. We all know that "seeds" in the plural means grains and not human generation. "Seed" in the singular yes, means the progeny of any person. I mean the descendants of a certain person, as we have in the originals in Hebrew; the descendants of Abraham. And also in the NAB translation of the Bible.(Gen. 12:7)
The descendants of Abraham are those with faith, of which Jesus is the foremost.



For the judges; not for you. You are not supposed to judge.
By His grace I judge, and my judgement is correct.



It is written in your own NT by the first Christian that the Law was abolished on the cross. Unless you don't consider Paul a true Christian. Read Ephesians 2:15.[/quote
]

Yes the law was fulfilled on the cross and was replaced by his Holy character, in other words the Holy Spirit.
 
Top