Paul on Women, Sex and Dress

[Robert.Evans]

Click to expand His -

I have shown that this was NOT smooth. There was contention among many of the Christian groups and what Saul/Paul was teaching. Some of those CHRISTIANS wanted to kill him for what he was doing.

*

That does not make him wrong. Some people wanted to kill Yahshuah, and they succeeded. Do you think he was wrong as well?

 

[Robert.Evans]

Let us keep this simple.
Yahshuah kept the law as it was before he was crucified. Once he had ''fulfilled'' the law through his proper sacrifice (of Cain) then there was a new priesthood and a change in the law (Hebrews).

Thus, the Saviour, through Paul, expanded the law as it should be: maliable, alive, living, active, not just words on stone. It is Paul who expanded this.

Yahshuah's sacrifice crucified the Mosaic understanding of the law.

It was not the law that was wrong, it was man's interpretation of it that was wrong. The Saviour put that right and expanded that thinking through Paul.

Thus the words would be different when comparing Paul's writings with the gospels, as after the crucifixion it had changed.

But if you reject Paul, you reject the freedom you have in the law through the Spirit, you reject the freedom you have in Christ, and therefore you are still under the old Mosaic law. That means you are under a curse as that law led to death.

For example, Christ died ''for ALL'' which means all died and therefore all must be resurrected. Thus those dead before are alive now, and thus we see that there is a reincarnation of souls and indeed, the universe itself. That is why Paul mentions nothing about the valley-of-hinnom (Hell) but only Hades (grave) which we are brought from at some point in time.

 

[Ingledsva]

He was accepted by the council in Acts 15. What more is there to say.

There were no such thing as Christians then, only follows of the lord. Don't get mixed up with the later Church CC. To kill was to excommunicate.

If you don't accept the vision when the LORD HIMSELF spoke to him, then you will accept nothing.

He did not call other ideas evil. He mentioned about an ''unknown god''

''contemptible''?? I think that is not a good rendition.

Simplicity that is in Christ! where is the confusion? It is of your making not Paul's.

what version are you reading from? It is not good.

''I speak as a fool''.. therefore he is not boasting as such, merely pointing out he can do the things that others claim. He has not boasted in the past, and now some are looking for a bigger personality, rather than the 'simplicity' found in Christ.

An example of how he suffered to preach the word, the word that we now benefit from as it moved to the CC.

''real disciples'' That is nonsense. The lord himself accepted him. If you refuse to believe that, then you refuse the word of the lord.
I have already given evidence that they accepted him in Acts for one, written by Luke; not that it matters who writes it (as some claim) as anyone can claim anything.

Baloney, I showed without a doubt, that the others had problems with him.

We only have HIS tale of a vision on the road.

Stop saying the Lord accepted him! - All you have is his story saying so!

There is absolutely NO reason to believe him.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

That does not make him wrong. Some people wanted to kill Yahshuah, and they succeeded. Do you think he was wrong as well?

Jesus was killed by - other,

Jesus' followers didn't trust Saul/Paul, and wanted to kill him.

Big difference.

*

 

[Robert.Evans]

Baloney, I showed without a doubt, that the others had problems with him.

You showed that there were verses of interest, that is all. He is given the right hand of fellowship and he is greeted by the apostles at Yerushalaim. ''Apostle'' mean ambassador and he was certainly that.

We only have HIS tale of a vision on the road.

So what? If you ignore his are you going to ignore others?

Stop saying the Lord accepted him! - All you have is his story saying so!

''Stop saying it?'' Are you kidding? If you go against Paul you go against the saviour; it is as simple as that.

There is absolutely NO reason to believe him.

*

There are many reasons to believe him, many epistles, and many people he influenced. Paul reflected the lord. You don't seem to appreciate this at all. If you are going to pull out a huge amount of the NT, where does it stop?

 

[Robert.Evans]

Jesus was killed by - other,

Jesus' followers didn't trust Saul/Paul, and wanted to kill him.

Big difference.

*

Not a big difference at all. It is the same. Paul stood alone as the lord did. Paul expanded on the understand of the law as the lord did. Paul had Jews trying to kill him just as the lord did.

 

[Simplelogic]

Paul expanded on the understand of the law as the lord did.

Yeshua did no such thing. I agree that Paul did.

"Whatever I command you, you shall be careful to do; you shall not add to nor take away from it. …Deut 12:32

...You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may
keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you. … Deut 4:2

Do not add to His words Or He will reprove you, and you will be proved a liar. Prov 30:6

 

[Ingledsva]

You showed that there were verses of interest, that is all. He is given the right hand of fellowship and he is greeted by the apostles at Yerushalaim. ''Apostle'' mean ambassador and he was certainly that.

So what? If you ignore his are you going to ignore others?

''Stop saying it?'' Are you kidding? If you go against Paul you go against the saviour; it is as simple as that.

There are many reasons to believe him, many epistles, and many people he influenced. Paul reflected the lord. You don't seem to appreciate this at all. If you are going to pull out a huge amount of the NT, where does it stop?

Pure Bull.

You have him CLAIMING something - and nothing else.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Not a big difference at all. It is the same. Paul stood alone as the lord did. Paul expanded on the understand of the law as the lord did. Paul had Jews trying to kill him just as the lord did.

What do you not understand about the difference between outsiders to Jesus' religion wanting to kill Jesus, and converts to Jesus' religion = believers - wanting to kill Saul/Paul?

BIG DIFFERENCE - when the converts/believers want to kill Saul/Paul for what he is doing and teaching!

*

 

[Simplelogic]

What do you not understand about outsiders to Jesus' religion wanting to kill Jesus, and converts to Jesus' religion = believers - wanting to kill Saul/Paul?

BIG DIFFERENCE - when the converts/believers want to kill Saul/Paul for what he is doing and teaching!

*

Did we just become best friends? Yup!

 

[Simplelogic]

What do you not understand about the difference between outsiders to Jesus' religion wanting to kill Jesus, and converts to Jesus' religion = believers - wanting to kill Saul/Paul?

BIG DIFFERENCE - when the converts/believers want to kill Saul/Paul for what he is doing and teaching!

*

You are my favorite feminist.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Pure Bull.

You have him CLAIMING something - and nothing else.

*

You are charming aren't you.
I suppose your lack of argument shows you just haven't got one. It is God's word, which seems to annoy the heck out of you. Diddums!

 

[Robert.Evans]

What do you not understand about the difference between outsiders to Jesus' religion wanting to kill Jesus,

Before the crucifixion....

and converts to Jesus' religion = believers - wanting to kill Saul/Paul?

....after the crucifixion. What don't you understand about that?

BIG DIFFERENCE - when the converts/believers want to kill Saul/Paul for what he is doing and teaching!
*

That was Jews who reflected exactly the same that had happened to the lord; as he said himself, be happy when they persecute you for my name, for so they did to the prophets before you.
Paul preached his name and 'he' crucified. He expanded the law when there was a change in the law and priesthood (Hebrews...look it up).

Paul gave us far more knowledge than we would have had when the lord was having to keep the Mosaic law. Now we are under Christ's law, which is through the Spirit, and is alive and active. It is not written on tablets of stone. You seem to have some problem with this and also with a large part of the NT. That is strange. If you reject Paul, you are rejecting the lord also, for he mirrored him, so therefore, spoke of him through his actions.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Did we just become best friends? Yup!

Instead of falling in love, why not fall in love with the word of God that you reject. Paul was enabled by the lord himself, accepted by the apostles, and given the right hand of fellowship. He had at times people with him to witness events. Why ignore him? He expanded the law from the Mosaic law and the Essenes understanding of that. The law was not wrong, but man's interpretation of it was.

 

[Ingledsva]

You are charming aren't you.
I suppose your lack of argument shows you just haven't got one. It is God's word, which seems to annoy the heck out of you. Diddums!

I have already given the argument.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Before the crucifixion....

....after the crucifixion. What don't you understand about that?

That was Jews who reflected exactly the same that had happened to the lord; as he said himself, be happy when they persecute you for my name, for so they did to the prophets before you.
Paul preached his name and 'he' crucified. He expanded the law when there was a change in the law and priesthood (Hebrews...look it up).

Paul gave us far more knowledge than we would have had when the lord was having to keep the Mosaic law. Now we are under Christ's law, which is through the Spirit, and is alive and active. It is not written on tablets of stone. You seem to have some problem with this and also with a large part of the NT. That is strange. If you reject Paul, you are rejecting the lord also, for he mirrored him, so therefore, spoke of him through his actions.

You are bring in Red-Herrings.

I am proving through the Bible text, that JESUS' FOLLOWERS did not trust Saul/Paul, and some of them tried to KILL him.

OTHER outside groups trying to kill Jesus, - is in no way the same as JESUS' own people trying to KILL Saul/Paul because they found him FALSE.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Instead of falling in love, why not fall in love with the word of God that you reject. Paul was enabled by the lord himself, accepted by the apostles, and given the right hand of fellowship. He had at times people with him to witness events. Why ignore him? He expanded the law from the Mosaic law and the Essenes understanding of that. The law was not wrong, but man's interpretation of it was.

Saul/Paul was NOT enabled by the Lord, (He claims such,) and was not accepted by all of Jesus's people. He wormed his way in, changing the message.

As original followers of Jesus did not accept him - there is no reason why modern Christians have to accept him, and obviously some don't.

*

 

[Robert.Evans]

You are bring in Red-Herrings.

No! You are ignoring his WORD!

I am proving through the Bible text, that JESUS' FOLLOWERS did not trust Saul/Paul, and some of them tried to KILL him.

SOME did not trust him! SOME did not believe the savioiur! You are ''proving'' nothing. You are showing some text and ignoring others that plainly show that they gave him the right hand of fellowship. I have no idea why you would do such a willfully destructive act.

OTHER outside groups trying to kill Jesus, - is in no way the same as JESUS' own people trying to KILL Saul/Paul because they found him FALSE.

James and the apostles did not try to kill him!

Saul/Paul was NOT enabled by the Lord, (He claims such,)

So you ignore God's Word, the lord himself!

and was not accepted by all of Jesus's people.

So what?

He wormed his way in, changing the message.

He spoke as he understood as the Spirit enabled him. The message is the same, when you understand the law in the first place. But it evolved as the Divine does, it is not static, it is ''living and active''.

As original followers of Jesus did not accept him - there is no reason why modern Christians have to accept him, and obviously some don't.

The apostles accepted him. It is funny how you accept the writings against him but ignore those for him.
Paul WITH WITNESSES saw James and the Apostles. What don't you understand about that? You are tearing out, not mere verses, you are tearing out whole epistles!

 

[Robert.Evans]

Now I know why women were told to keep quiet in the Calling.

 

[Ingledsva]

No! You are ignoring his WORD!

SOME did not trust him! SOME did not believe the savioiur! You are ''proving'' nothing. You are showing some text and ignoring others that plainly show that they gave him the right hand of fellowship. I have no idea why you would do such a willfully destructive act.

James and the apostles did not try to kill him!


So you ignore God's Word, the lord himself!

So what?

He spoke as he understood as the Spirit enabled him. The message is the same, when you understand the law in the first place. But it evolved as the Divine does, it is not static, it is ''living and active''.


The apostles accepted him. It is funny how you accept the writings against him but ignore those for him.
Paul WITH WITNESSES saw James and the Apostles. What don't you understand about that? You are tearing out, not mere verses, you are tearing out whole epistles!

LOL! Dude! You ignore that it IS NOT THE LORD'S WORD!

He claims it, and twists, and directs what is later written and taught.

*